Title 10 DCMR — PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

# Title 10 DCMR — PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

## **10-A** COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

### **10-A1** INTRODUCTION

##### **10-A DCMR § 100** PLANNING AN INCLUSIVE CITY {#sec-10-a100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A100}

100.1 The nation’s capital, a global center of knowledge and power, is the central city of one of America’s largest and most prosperous metropolitan areas. It is also home – a District of great neighborhoods, a vibrant downtown, historic buildings, diverse shopping, renowned institutions, and magnificent parks and natural areas.

100.2 Washington, DC bears the imprints of many past plans, each a reflection of the goals and visions of its era. The influence of these plans can be seen everywhere—they affect the way residents live and work, the way residents travel, and the design of the District’s communities. Planning is part of the District’s heritage. It has shaped Washington, DC’s identity for more than two centuries and has made it the District it is today.

100.3 Washington, DC is changing. At this moment, more housing is planned and under

construction in the District than was built during the entire decade of the 2000s. Federal properties—some larger in land area than all of Georgetown or Anacostia—are being studied for new uses. These changes generate excitement and tension at the same time. Issues of race, class, and equity rise to the surface as the District grows. The effort to be a more inclusive city never stops—to make economic opportunities equitable and available to all residents, and to enhance the most valuable things about the District’s communities. The effort to make Washington, DC more resilient in response to changing conditions that bring new stressors and new opportunities alike is also ceaseless.

100.4 As one thinks about the future, other issues arise. How will people get around Washington, DC in 20 years? Where will children go to school? Will police and fire services be adequate? Will the rivers be clean? Will the air be healthy? How to address housing affordability and ensure that current and longtime residents have a place in the future of the District? How to ensure the Washington, DC continues to produce jobs and that District residents have the supports they need to take these jobs and find pathways to success? How will the best parts of neighborhoods be preserved and the challenging parts be improved? How will federal and local interests be balanced?

100.5 This Comprehensive Plan addresses these important questions and establishes a framework to achieve the District’s goals.

Planning in the District Then and Now

100.6 Washington, DC is widely known for being steeped in American history. This reputation extends to city planning too, starting with the very origin of the District in 1791.

100.7 More than two centuries ago, George Washington commissioned Pierre L’Enfant to plan a new national capital on the banks of the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. L’Enfant and surveyor Benjamin Banneker designed the District’s unique diagonal and grid system and sited some of America’s most important landmarks, including the U.S. Capitol and the White House. In 1893, the Olmsted Highway Plan further reinforced the District’s grand avenues and connections to nature.

100.8 Subsequently, the U.S. Congress asked the McMillan Commission to transform Washington, DC into a world-class capital city. The commission responded with a grand plan to beautify the District with the National Mall, many neighborhood parks, and an expanded Rock Creek Park.

100.9 Today, the L’Enfant and McMillan plans are regarded as major milestones in Washington, DC’s history. The plans of the mid to late 20th century are less celebrated but are no less important. In 1924, federal legislation created the National Capital Park and Planning Commission. Its initial focus was on District parks and playgrounds, but its focus soon expanded to include land use, transportation, and public facilities. The Commission produced a Comprehensive Plan in 1950, another in 1961, and yet another in 1967. These plans proposed radical changes to the District’s landscape, including freeways and urban renewal. The mid-century Comprehensive Plans were largely driven by federal interest and a desire to retain the beauty and functionality of Washington, DC as a capital city.

100.10 In 1973, the federal Home Rule Act designated the Mayor of the District of Columbia as the District’s principal planner. The Comprehensive Plan was divided into District Elements to be prepared by the District’s Office of Planning, and Federal Elements to be prepared by the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC). The first Comprehensive Plan of the post-Home Rule era, containing both District and Federal Elements, was completed in 1984.

100.11 Between 1984 and 2005, the District Elements were amended four times. A 1985 amendment added the Land Use Element and Maps. The 1989 and 1994 amendments added Ward Plans to the document, roughly tripling its size. The 1998 amendments included a variety of map and text changes to reflect then current conditions. In 2004, the District completed a vision for Washington, DC called a Vision for Growing an Inclusive City. This document established a new philosophy about planning in Washington, DC, which has been carried forward into the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan’s overarching purpose is to improve the quality of life for current and future District residents.

100.12 Since 2006, when the District’s modern Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the Office of Planning (OP) has undertaken additional planning efforts that have focused on distinct areas within Washington, DC, producing a total of 29 Small Area Plans (SAPs), as well as other place-based planning documents. In addition, District agencies have produced many strategic and long-range plans on topics such as transportation, parks, housing, sustainability, and culture. These plans have not only deepened and refined the general guidance of the Comprehensive Plan but have also applied systems thinking to tackle issues and opportunities across traditional silos.

100.13 The Comprehensive Plan includes detailed maps and policies for the physical development of Washington, DC. It also addresses social and economic issues that affect and are linked to the development of the District and its residents. The Comprehensive Plan allows the community to predict and understand the course of future public actions and shape private sector investment and actions too. It allows the District to ensure that its resources are used wisely and efficiently, and that public investment is focused on the areas where it is needed most.

100.14 The Comprehensive Plan provides guidance on the choices necessary to make Washington, DC better. No single person or organization is in a position to make these decisions alone. Many residents, governmental agencies, businesses, institutions, and leaders have helped shape this plan. Their continued commitment will be needed to carry it out in the coming years.

100.15 Collectively, federal, regional, and local planning plays an important role in the character, development and growth, and livability of Washington, DC. A vibrant District should both accommodate the needs of our national government and enhance the lives of the District’s residents, workers, and visitors. It should embody an urban form and character that builds upon a rich history, reflects the diversity of its people, and embodies the enduring values of the American Republic. Furthermore, it should create a development trajectory in which residents leverage the unique assets and identity of the nation’s capital through their day-to-day lives.

100.16 The Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital is comprised of two parts: the Federal Elements and the District Elements. The Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan are developed by the NCPC and the District Elements by the District’s OP. Combined, these elements guide development in the District to balance federal and local interests with a collective responsibility for the natural, cultural, economic, and social environments. Many of the elements have local regional, and national significance; together they advance Washington, DC’s great design and planning heritage.

100.17 The NCPC and OP work together to enhance Washington, DC as a great national capital and plan for its equitable development through inspiring civic architecture, rich landscapes, distinct neighborhoods, vibrant public spaces, environmental stewardship, and thoughtful land-use management.

**History**
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 100*

##### **10-A DCMR § 101** THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN’S LEGAL BASIS, ROLE AND CONTENT {#sec-10-a101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A101}

##### **10-A DCMR § 102** LEGISLATIVE FOUNDATION {#sec-10-a102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A102}

102.1 The District Charter vests the mayor with the authority to initiate, develop, and submit a Comprehensive Plan to the DC Council, as well as the power to propose amendments following the Comprehensive Plan’s adoption (87 Stat. 792, Pub. L. 93-198, title IV, § 423 (DC Official Code § 1-204.23). The DC Council adopts the Comprehensive Plan, subject to the approval of the mayor and review by the NCPC and Congress.

102.2 From 1985 to 2005, a Comprehensive Plan drafted in the early 1980s governed land use decisions in the District. By the early 2000s, it was becoming clear that the Comprehensive Plan was out of date. The future—as envisioned by the plan— was already history.

102.3 In 2004, the mayor and DC Council agreed to move ahead with a major revision of the Comprehensive Plan, rather than starting another round of piecemeal amendments. It was time for an in-depth analysis of existing conditions and trends, and a fresh look at the District’s future. In 2011, the District adopted a minor amendment to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, consisting primarily of technical corrections and a limited number of policy updates. In 2016, the OP launched a second amendment to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. While not a full update of the Comprehensive Plan, the changes are substantive and constitute a major revision.

102.4 Since the 2006 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the District has experienced significant population and revenue growth. While the 2006 Comprehensive Plan anticipated growth, such growth occurred at a much faster pace than expected. The second amendment process also addresses new challenges that have arisen since the adoption of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. Having a visionary and current Comprehensive Plan is critical to the District’s long-term success.

102.5 Section 1-301.62 of the DC Code states that: “(t)he purposes of the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital are to:

Define the requirements and aspirations of District residents, and accordingly influence social, economic, and physical development;

Guide executive and legislative decisions on matters affecting the District and its citizens;

Promote economic growth and jobs for District residents;

Guide private and public development in order to achieve District and

community goals;

Maintain and enhance the natural and architectural assets of the District; and

Assist in the conservation, stabilization, and improvement of each neighborhood and community in the District.”

102.6 The District Charter broadly defines the plan’s scope. Section 1-204.23 states that the Comprehensive Plan may include land use elements, urban renewal and redevelopment elements, a multi-year program of municipal public works for the District, and physical, social, economic, transportation, and population elements.

102.7 The DC Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984 (DC Law 5-76, § 7 (as amended); DC Official Code (§ 1-306.02) also specifies that the Land Use Element include a generalized land use map or a series of maps representing the land use policies set forth in the Land Use Element.

##### **10-A DCMR § 103** THE FAMILY OF PLANS {#sec-10-a103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A103}

103.1 The Comprehensive Plan can be thought of as the centerpiece of a Family of Plans that guide public policy in the District (See Figure 1.1). In the past, there was a lack of clarity about the relationship between the Comprehensive Plan and the many other plans prepared by District agencies. This has reduced the Comprehensive Plan’s effectiveness and even resulted in internal inconsistencies between agency plans.

103.2 Under District Code, the Comprehensive Plan is the one plan that guides the District’s development . Thus, it carries special importance in that it provides overall direction and shapes all other physical plans that the District government adopts. In fact, all plans relating to the District’s physical development should take their leads from the Comprehensive Plan, building on common goals and shared assumptions about the future. For example, the growth projections contained in the Comprehensive Plan should be incorporated by reference into other plans that rely on such forecasts.

103.3 As the guide for all District planning, the Comprehensive Plan establishes the priorities and key actions that other plans address in greater detail. The broad direction it provides may be implemented through agency strategic plans, operational plans, long-range plans on specific topics (such as parks or housing), and focused plans for small areas of Washington, DC.

103.4 Figure 1.1: The Family of Plans

103.5 The Comprehensive Plan is not intended to be a substitute for more detailed plans, nor dictate precisely what other plans must cover. Rather, it is the one document that bridges all topics and is crosscutting in its focus. It alone is the Comprehensive Plan that looks at the big picture of how change will be managed in the years ahead

103.6 Where appropriate, this Comprehensive Plan includes cross-references and text boxes to highlight other documents in the Family of Plans. Some examples include the federally mandated State Transportation Plan (known as moveDC), the Historic Preservation Plan, the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Sustainable DC, and the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS).

##### **10-A DCMR § 104** THE THREE TIERS OF PLANNING {#sec-10-a104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A104}

104.1 Before 2006, the District used a three-tiered system of city planning comprised of:

Citywide policies

Ward-level policies

Small area policies

104.2 Since 2006, the Comprehensive Plan has been the repository for the District-wide and Large Planning Area policies. The small area policies, meanwhile, have appeared in separately bound Small Area Plans for particular neighborhoods and business districts.

104.3 The 2006 Comprehensive Plan retains three geographic tiers but incorporates a number of changes to improve the Comprehensive Plan’s effectiveness and readability. One of the most significant changes is the replacement of Ward Plans with Area Elements. While Ward Plans were an effective way to express local priorities within the Comprehensive Plan, the boundaries changed dramatically in 1990 and 2000 due to population shifts. Redistricting occurred after the 2010 Census and will occur again after the 2020 Census and subsequent censuses. Moreover, the District’s wards are drawn to ensure an equal number of residents reside in each Council district rather than to provide a coherent rationale for planning Washington, DC. Thus, places like Downtown Washington, DC (divided by a ward boundary) and the Anacostia River (divided by four ward boundaries) have been covered in multiple places in past Comprehensive Plans. This has resulted in redundancy and fragmented policies for many areas in the District. The relationship between the Comprehensive Plan and the three tiers is described below.

104.4 The Comprehensive Plan includes 13 Citywide Elements, shown in Figure 1.2, each addressing a topic that is District-wide in scope, followed by an Implementation Element:

Framework (setting the Comprehensive Plan’s guiding principles and vision)

Land Use

Transportation

Housing

Economic Development

Parks, Recreation, and Open Space

Educational Facilities

Environmental Protection

Infrastructure

Urban Design

Historic Preservation

Community Services and Facilities

Arts and Culture

Implementation

104.5 The Comprehensive Plan includes 10 Area Elements, shown on Figure 1.2. Taken together, these ten areas encompass the entire District:

Capitol Hill

Central Washington

Far Northeast and Southeast

Far Southeast and Southwest

Lower Anacostia Waterfront and Near Southwest

Mid-City

Near Northwest

Rock Creek East

Rock Creek West

Upper Northeast

104.6 Although the Citywide and Area Elements appear in separate sections of this document, they carry the same legal authority. The Area Elements focus on issues that are unique to particular parts of the District. Many of their policies are place-based, referencing specific neighborhoods, corridors, business districts, and local landmarks. However, the policies are still general in nature and do not prescribe specific uses or design details. Nor do the Area Elements repeat policies that already appear in the Citywide Elements. They are intended to provide a sense of local priorities and to recognize the different dynamics at work in each part of Washington, DC.

104.7 Figure 1.2: Comprehensive Plan Organization

104.8 Small Area Plans supplement the Comprehensive Plan by providing detailed direction for areas ranging in size from a few city blocks to entire neighborhoods or corridors. In the past, Small Area Plans have been prepared for places in Washington, DC where District action was necessary to manage growth, promote revitalization, or achieve other long-range planning goals. Examples include Southwest, Mid-City East, and Walter Reed.

104.9 In the future, additional plans focused on distinct geographies will be developed. The Implementation Element of this Comprehensive Plan outlines where and under what conditions such plans should be undertaken. Existing Small Area Plans are cross-referenced in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements and should be consulted for further detail about the areas they cover. In addition to Small Area Plans, OP and sister agencies will use other neighborhood planning and design tools to provide analysis of, and direction for, the built environment. These focused tools address specific conditions, such as the quality of the public realm, access to locally serving amenities and opportunities, and access to opportunities for economic and community development. For example, in recent years, OP has produced Vision Frameworks, Design Guidelines, Technical Studies, Placemaking Interventions, and Retail Toolkits to respond to the tailored needs of communities. OP anticipates additional neighborhood planning and design tools will be created for future planning work.

##### **10-A DCMR § 105** MOVING FROM PLAN TO ACTION {#sec-10-a105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A105}

105.1 This Comprehensive Plan also includes a chapter on plan implementation. The Implementation Element describes how the Comprehensive Plan’s recommended actions are to be carried out, and by which government agencies. Time frames for implementation are also provided so that the plan’s implementation steps can be measured and monitored. The addition of this element plays an important part in assuring accountability. OP published Comprehensive Plan Progress Reports in 2010 and 2013, which contained thorough assessments of how well the District had implemented the plan’s major policy themes and actions.

105.2 The Implementation Element alone is no guarantee that the policies of this Comprehensive Plan will be followed or that its actions will be carried out. It is the job of the District administration to abide by the Comprehensive Plan and coordinate with other government agencies to ensure that future actions respect its policies. The most important tools for doing this are zoning and coordination of capital improvement programming with the policies and actions set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The use of these tools to carry out the Comprehensive Plan is described in the Implementation Element.

##### **10-A DCMR § 106** COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TECHNICAL DATA {#sec-10-a106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A106}

106.1 Developing policies for the District’s future requires an extensive and detailed baseline of information about existing conditions and planning issues. Thus, a series of technical datasets was assembled to supplement the Comprehensive Plan and to inform all of the District’s planning efforts. The District’s State Data Center is housed within the OP and is the official liaison with the U.S. Census Bureau. The State Data Center handles the dissemination and targeted analysis of Census data and periodically produces reports. It also produces the required projections for population, households, and jobs in the District, and coordinates with the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments to finalize and publish forecasts each year. The Framework Element should be consulted for further details.

##### **10-A DCMR § 107** HOW THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED {#sec-10-a107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A107}

107.1 The 2006 Comprehensive Plan was the outcome of a five-year revision process, from 2002 to 2006, and two subsequent amendments: a minor amendment in 2011, and a major revision that began in 2016.

107.2 In 2002, the Mayor and DC Council deferred the regularly scheduled amendment of the District Elements and instead asked OP to conduct a Comprehensive Plan assessment. A 29-member citizens task force was convened to advise the District as it evaluated changes that would improve the Comprehensive Plan’s effectiveness, organization, and format. The Comprehensive Plan Assessment Report, issued in February 2003, recommended a major Comprehensive Plan revision and fundamental changes to the document’s structure. The report also suggested that the first step in the revision process should be to develop a broad vision for the District’s future.

107.3 A Vision for Growing an Inclusive City was developed in response. The Vision included an appraisal of the District’s major planning issues and an articulation of goals for addressing these issues in the future. Its content was shaped by position papers on topics ranging from education to housing, workshops with department heads and civic leaders, and input from more than 3,000 District residents at the Mayor’s Citizens Summit in November 2003. The Vision was endorsed by DC Council in June 2004.

107.4 Work on the Comprehensive Plan revision began in Fall 2004. With the Vision’s directive to “grow an inclusive city,” the revision was designed to be an inclusive process. The goal of this process was not merely to involve the public in creating the Comprehensive Plan—it was to build a constituency for the Comprehensive Plan that could advocate for more effective implementation in the future. Thus, education and outreach about the Comprehensive Plan became as important as public input.

107.5 The 2006 Comprehensive Plan was the first to be prepared during the digital era and, as such, a host of new tools were used to convey it to the community. The project website, www.inclusivecity.org, was used to publicize meetings, display information, provide drafts for comment, and receive feedback through bulletin boards and e-mail. The website received more than 1.3 million hits over the course of the project. Television and radio were also used, drawing residents to town meetings, workshops, and public hearings.

107.6 The 2006 Comprehensive Plan’s content was also shaped by a Plan Revision Task Force. The 28-member task force represented diverse interests and geographic areas, and advised OP on the Comprehensive Plan’s content as well as its maps and place-specific recommendations. Similarly, an interagency working group representing more than 20 District and federal agencies was convened throughout the process to provide policy feedback and technical assistance. Small group discussions, attended by stakeholders and others with a particular interest in plan topics, were convened on specific issues such as higher education and environmental quality.

107.7 Large community workshops were also essential to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. Three rounds of workshops were held, each comprised of four to eight interactive meetings or gatherings. In all, the workshops drew more than 1,500 participants, with virtually every neighborhood of the District taking part. The workshops were supplemented by dozens of meetings with Advisor Neighborhood Commissions, citizen and civic associations, interest groups, and individuals.

107.8 While public involvement was the driver behind the Comprehensive Plan’s content, its policies and actions have also been shaped by many other sources. Foremost among these is the prior Comprehensive Plan; many of its policies have been edited and carried forward. Similarly, recent plans and planning efforts, including the newly updated Federal Elements, also guide the Comprehensive Plan’s content. Finally, an enormous amount of data collection and analysis underpins the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations. This data was largely absent from the prior Comprehensive Plan, which led to findings and recommendations that were not always supported by fact.

107.9 The 2006 Comprehensive Plan was presented to the DC Council in the summer of 2006, with DC Council public hearings held in the fall. Revisions to the draft Comprehensive Plan were made based on DC Council comments and public testimony, and the document was adopted in December 2006.

107.10 In 2009, OP launched the planning process for the first amendment to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan and held several community meetings to converse with stakeholders. Using an open call to the public, OP received approximately 250 proposed amendments.

107.11 Following a period of evaluation and drafting, OP introduced legislation to the DC Council, detailing recommended amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Public hearings were held in the fall of 2010. Based on public testimony and the DC Council feedback, OP revised the recommended amendments, and an amended plan was adopted in April 2011.

107.12 In 2016, OP began the second amendment to the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. At the outset, OP determined that the Comprehensive Plan’s Core Themes and Guiding Principles, which are outlined in the Framework Element, would remain intact—maintaining the fundamental structure of the document. During the spring of 2016, OP assessed the Comprehensive Plan, met with other District agencies, and began to consult with community stakeholders. In the summer and fall of 2016, OP administered a major advertising campaign, branded as [PLAN]DC, to generate awareness and interest in the Comprehensive Plan update process. The campaign reached over 12 million people through Metrorail and Metrobus ad circulation and more than two million people through newspaper readership. A project website, plandc.dc.gov, was used to publicize meetings and share related information and materials. Since 2017, the [PLAN]DC website has received more than 46,000 page views and 13,000 PDF downloads. In the fall of 2016, OP held seven town hall meetings throughout the District, as well as several Advisory Neighborhood Commission workshops, to educate participants and provide forums for dialogue about community priorities.

107.13 From March to June 2017, OP held a 90-day open call to receive proposed amendments from the public, an approach designed to give all stakeholders a chance to suggest specific changes or contributions to the Comprehensive Plan. During that time, OP held 26 technical assistance sessions in locations around the District to help residents draft amendments in the appropriate format and navigate online and paper application forms. As a result of the community engagement and open call process, the District received approximately 2,816 submissions for proposed text amendments and approximately 248 submissions for proposed map amendments.

107.14 In January 2018, OP introduced legislation to amend the Framework Element of the Comprehensive Plan in advance of the other District Elements, to allow debate and establish a common foundation for other plan changes. In January 2019, legislation to amend the Framework Element was reintroduced.

107.15 During the second amendment process, OP took care to correct out-of-date information and ensure that text throughout the Comprehensive Plan is current and relevant. As part of this effort, complete and obsolete actions were documented as such and synchronized with the table in the Implementation Element. Descriptions of community engagement results from 2004 through 2006 were removed from the Area Elements and placed in appendices as a historical record. The Implementation Element was also modified to reflect current planning practices, and the guidance for future amendments was updated.

107.16 In 2019, OP shared its recommended amendments to the remaining District Elements with the public and led another round of community engagement to highlight important changes to the Comprehensive Plan and articulate key themes and goals.

107.17 In Spring 2019, OP conducted a DC Values campaign, with a survey and in-person outreach efforts. The DC values identified in the campaign were derived from the public amendments OP received throughout the open call process. OP analyzed all of the public input received since the Comprehensive Plan amendment process began in 2016: open call amendment proposals, community meeting notes, and agency feedback. OP distilled the responses into eight crosscutting, high-level values: accessibility, diversity, equity, livability, opportunity, prosperity, resilience, and safety. A report was published on the results of the engagement.

107.18 The eight DC Values can be considered overarching concepts that are aligned with and support the Core Themes and Guiding Principles that are outlined in the Framework Element. The results of the DC Values campaign helped reflect resident aspirations for the District’s growth and how this amendment process can align policies for long-term growth in a manner that builds towards a vibrant and inclusive Washington, DC. The results of this campaign are provided in the introduction to establish the context in which the District is evolving and to capture shared values for the future.

107.19 OP developed a two-pronged outreach approach that sought public feedback on these values through an online survey and on-the-ground outreach. The survey link was distributed through Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners and community networks, and OP staff developed a mobile outreach activity for neighborhood events, meetings, and festivals.

107.20 OP reached nearly 3,100 District stakeholders across all eight wards. The online survey asked residents and stakeholders which values resonated most with them and which values should be the highest priorities for amending the Comprehensive Plan. The online survey received 2,494 responses and, overall, each of the values resonated with respondents. Of the eight values, livability (57 percent of respondents), safety (51 percent of respondents), and equity (46 percent of respondents) received the highest number of votes. prosperity (21 percent) received the lowest number of votes.

107.21 Respondents who chose livability frequently touched on affordability, development impacts, and public amenities. When choosing equity, respondents shared concerns about rising costs and inequitable access to opportunity, not just for housing, but for businesses, employment, and other necessities. A desire for racial equity seemed to be a driving reason for selecting equity as a priority, as well. When safety was prioritized, respondents discussed pedestrian and bike safety and violent crime prevention as their most prevalent reasons for so prioritizing.

107.22 For District residents who participated in the survey, not only were livability, equity and safety considered the most important values, they were also considered to be foundations for the rest of the values and critical for retaining growth in the District.

107.23 Figure 1.3. Values Relationship to Core Themes.

##### **10-A DCMR § 108** THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE AND CORONAVIRUS {#sec-10-a108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A108}

108.1 While the draft update of the Comprehensive Plan was available for public review, a new and aggressively contagious Coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, China, infecting thousands of people across the globe and causing Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). In response, Mayor Bowser issued orders to close nonessential businesses and, along with the governors of Maryland and Virginia, issued a stay at home order. The number of cases and deaths caused by COVID- 19 and the economic and social impacts of the resulting crisis are still unknown, but even when related data become available, it will take months and possibly years to fully comprehend and respond to the impacts of this public health emergency.

108.2 The 2020 public health emergency and resulting economic crisis arising from the Coronavirus and resultant COVID-19 disease have altered and will continue to change many aspects of Washington, DC and its residents’ lives. This experience also highlights the importance of a relevant and updated Comprehensive Plan. A long-term, high-level plan is always important, but especially during uncertain times and emergencies. The Comprehensive Plan serves as a critical anchor to help the District move toward its goals based on its underlying values, which remain unchanged during unexpected and traumatic events. The policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan can unify and align communities as well as address unprecedented circumstances and their ongoing effects.

##### **10-A DCMR § 109** HOW TO USE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN {#sec-10-a109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A109}

109.1 This document has been designed for use by elected officials, District government agencies and staff, residents, businesses and developers, and others with an interest in the future of Washington, DC. The fact that so many different users will consult the Comprehensive Plan shapes the way information is presented. Although it is a legal document, the Comprehensive Plan was written with readability in mind. Key issues are described with data to make the purpose of policies more apparent. Graphics, maps, photos, and charts are used to illustrate major points and improve the legibility of the text. Text boxes are used to present background information. The Comprehensive Plan is organized to eliminate the duplication of policies and actions that made the previous Comprehensive Plan difficult to use. Cross-references are used to direct the reader to other relevant and related policies and actions within the document.

109.2 This Comprehensive Plan was written to be an effective resource for those who seek general information on how Washington, DC may change over the next 20 years, as well as those who want or need to understand how the District plans to respond to particular issues and problems. As the District’s primary planning document, the Comprehensive Plan is of particular interest to elected officials (who must adopt it and fund its implementation), as well as agency heads, whose work it guides.

109.3 The Comprehensive Plan’s Generalized Policy Map and Future Land Use Map are incorporated as part of the document and provide the basic foundation for land use decision-making and zoning. Both maps are described in detail in the Framework Element. These maps appear as poster-sized foldouts. They are supplemented by numerous smaller maps that appear throughout the text.

109.4 At the heart of the Comprehensive Plan are a series of goal, policy, and action statements:

Goals describe ideal future conditions for a particular topic, such as housing or transportation. Following the Framework Element, each of the Citywide Elements begins with a single goal statement.

Policies provide guidance to the District as it makes decisions relating to each goal. This document contains hundreds of policies, each preceded by a title that indicates the subject being addressed.

Actions identify the specific steps to be taken by the District to implement the policies. These are prioritized and assigned to District agencies in the Implementation Element.

109.5 The policies and actions of the Comprehensive Plan are principally intended to guide the decisions of District government. As these policies and actions are carried out, continuous and ongoing consultation with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, residents, community organizations, businesses, institutions, and property owners is essential.

##### **10-A DCMR § 110** HOW DOES THIS PLAN AFFECT ME? {#sec-10-a110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A110}

110.1 The Comprehensive Plan is relevant to most people’s daily lives and interests since it directs how and where change and development will occur. As the Comprehensive Plan is successfully implemented, it will have many far-reaching effects on everyone who lives or works in the District. It will affect where development occurs; where green space, recreation facilities, and parks are improved; and how neighborhoods are conserved and enhanced as desirable places to live. The Comprehensive Plan affects everyone, not just public employees, developers and property owners.

Text Boxes

Growing inclusively means that individuals and families are not confined to particular economic and geographic boundaries and are able to make important choices: where they live, how and where they earn a living, how they get around the District, and where their children go to school. Growing inclusively also means that every resident can make these choices—regardless of whether their families have lived here for generations or they moved here last week, and

regardless of their race, income, or age.

The Comprehensive Plan is not intended to be a substitute for more detailed plans nor dictate precisely what other plans must cover. Rather it is the one document that bridges all topics and is crosscutting in its focus. It is the Comprehensive Plan, alone, that looks at the big picture of how change will be managed now and in the years ahead.

The Comprehensive Plan includes 10 Area Elements, which together encompass the entire District. Area Elements focus on issues unique to that part of Washington, DC.

Many of the Area Element policies are place-based, referencing specific neighborhoods, corridors, business districts, and local landmarks. However, the policies are still general in nature and do not prescribe specific uses or design details.

The Implementation Element identifies priority actions—the actions that should be completed in the near term. This element plays an important part in assuring accountability.

This Comprehensive Plan was written to be an effective resource for those who seek general information on how Washington, DC may change over the next 20 years, as well as those who want or need to understand how the District plans to respond to particular issues and problems.

As the Comprehensive Plan is successfully implemented, it will have many far-reaching effects on everyone who lives or works in the District. It will affect where development occurs; where green space, recreation facilities, and parks are improved; and how neighborhoods are conserved and enhanced as desirable places to live.

### **10-A2** FRAMEWORK ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 200** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A200}

200.1 Framework Element

The Framework Element of the Comprehensive Plan serves four purposes.

200.2 First, it provides the context for the rest of the Plan by describing the forces driving change in the city. These forces include demographic shifts, economic change, technological change, fiscal challenges, tensions between federal and local interests, and more. Such "driving forces" define the major issues facing Washington and touch every aspect of life in the city.

200.3 Second, the Framework Element includes a description of the District's growth forecasts and projections. The forecasts are expressed in narrative format and are also summarized in tables and charts. They show how and where the District expects to add households, people, and jobs between 2005 and 2025, and adds an extended forecast through 2045.

200.4 Third, the Framework Element ties the Comprehensive Plan to the "Vision for

Growing an Inclusive City." It lays out 40 principles to be followed as the District

moves from "Vision to Reality." These principles, largely drawn from the Vision and from the previous Comprehensive Plan, express cross-cutting goals for the District's future that guide the Plan's policies and actions.

200.5 Finally, the Framework Element describes the Comprehensive Plan, Generalized

Policy Map, and the Future Land Use Map, describes how the Comprehensive Plan guides development decisions, and describes the role of capital investments in addressing current and future challenges regarding infrastructure and facilities. The Generalized Policy Map "tells the story" of how the District is expected to change during the first quarter of the century. It highlights the places where much of the city's future growth and change is expected to occur and sets the stage for the Elements that follow. The Future Land Use Map shows the general character and distribution of recommended and planned uses across the city. Both maps carry the same legal weight as the text of the Comprehensive Plan.

200.6 Unlike the other Citywide Elements, the Framework Element does not contain policies and actions. Its intent is to provide the foundation for the rest of the Comprehensive Plan.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 200*

##### **10-A DCMR § 201** THE FORCES DRIVING CHANGE {#sec-10-a201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A201}

201.1 The sections below describe the forces driving change in the District of Columbia and outline the implications of these forces for the District's future. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to address these implications for the District to become a more inclusive city. Achieving a more inclusive city calls for public and private collaborations, among District agencies, between District and federal agencies, with the private and non-profit sectors, and with our residents, as well as our regional partners.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 201*

##### **10-A DCMR § 202** THE DISTRICT AND THE REGION {#sec-10-a202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A202}

202.1 Since 2006, the District has re-established its position at the center of an economically dynamic metropolitan area. Rapid growth in population and jobs has made the District one of the fastest growing large cities in the United States, following prior decades of population and job loss. Now the District is regaining its share of the region's vitality.

202.2 Between 2006 and 2016, the Washington metropolitan area grew by over 19 percent, increasing from 5.2 million to 6.1 million residents. More than 260,000 jobs were added during this period, an increase of almost nine percent. Greater Washington is the fastest growing large metropolitan area in the country outside of the South and West. It is the sixth largest metropolitan area in the nation. Metropolitan Washington now sprawls across 4,500 square miles of the Middle Atlantic States.

202.3 The District has captured a greater share of regional growth than expected. In 1950, the District had 46 percent of the region's population and 83 percent of its jobs. By 2000, it had just 12 percent of the region's population and 25 percent of its jobs. In 2006, the perceived difficulties of in fill development and other factors led to even the most ambitious projections showing the District with a diminishing share of the region's population and jobs in the future.

202.4 Instead, our position as the nation's capital, our historic and unique neighborhoods, our cultural offerings, and the benefits of density, such as transportation and urban amenities, placed a premium on Washington and distinguished it from the surrounding suburbs, reflecting renewed interest in living and working in the city. With this renewed interest, the District can maintain a growing share of the region's population and jobs.

202.5 There are signs the region will better balance growth between jobs and households in the future. In 2006, Montgomery, Prince George's, and Fairfax Counties planned to add 620,000 jobs during the next 25 years but only 273,000 households, with similar imbalances in other regional jurisdictions. If this regional jobs-housing imbalance had continued, more workers would have sought housing outside the region, creating more congestion and sprawl, while also raising housing costs in the region's core as people sought to reduce their commuting times by moving closer to their jobs. However, regional projections now indicate a shift toward more housing within the inner suburbs that should moderate the jobs-housing imbalance, described below in the Cooperative Forecasting section.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 202*

##### **10-A DCMR § 203** DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES {#sec-10-a203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A203}

203.1 The District is an attractive place to live and work, as evidenced by recent population growth. Since 2006, the District grew by over 123,000 (21.6 percent) to an estimated population of 693,972 in 2017. This growth sharply contrasts with the loss of population that marked the decades from 1950 to 2000, when Washington went from a peak of 802,000 residents to 572,000. The current trend, if sustained, puts the District on track to bypass the 1950s peak within two decades. The main drivers of this increase are natural increase (births minus deaths), and international and domestic migration.

203.2 Nine to ten percent of the population moves into, or out of, the city each year. The District has successfully sought to attract and retain both domestic and international residents. Domestic migration has shifted from negative to positive, with 2,000 people added annually since 2009. The city has also added an average of 3,000 net new international residents each year since 2006.

203.3 The largest component (77 percent) of in-migration from 2006 to 2017 consisted of young adults who tended to be white and college educated. These new residents shifted the demographic makeup in many neighborhoods in several ways. They held higher-wage jobs than many existing residents, and their incomes grew faster. These new residents also stayed in the District and started families. In 2006, married couples made up only 22 percent of households; since then, married couples represent almost half of the District's 31 ,000 new households. While fertility rates are down, including for single and teen mothers, the increase in married couples has resulted in a mini-baby boom, with the number of average births per year increasing from 7, 700 in the early 2000s to over 9,500 in 2017.

203.4 Since 2006, recent migration patterns indicate the city has lost existing residents in certain types of households, including parents with children and blacks, although the overall population of Washington, DC is growing. Prince George's and Montgomery Counties in Maryland are, in order, the two largest destinations for those leaving the city.

203.5 Previous population decline, and now growth, has affected different parts of the city in different ways. Figure 2.1 illustrates changes in population by neighborhood cluster from 1980-2000 and 2000-2015. Between 1980-2000, the vast majority of population decline occurred east of 16th Street - areas east of the Anacostia River lost 44,000 residents - while many areas west of Rock Creek Park actually gained residents. As middle-income households moved away, poorer residents stayed behind, leaving the District with the largest concentration of poverty in the region and a sharper divide between rich and poor. This also resulted in a greater concentration of people with special needs, and places of disinvestment, with concomitant challenges in many communities.

203.6 Much of the population growth between 2000 and 20 1 7 concentrated in central Washington neighborhoods, particularly those hit hard by the 1968 riots. The riots and their aftermath resulted in vacant and underutilized land in what subsequently became a desirable, central location. Accelerating demand to live in these neighborhoods has resulted in increased housing costs that threaten the ability of existing lower income households to remain.

203.7 Figure 2.1: Population Change by Neighborhood Cluster, 1980-2000 and 2000-2017

203.8 Figure 2.2 illustrates changes to population in the District by race, over time. Unlike the experience of other major cities, the loss of population in Washington was not solely attributable to "white flight." In fact, between 1980 and 2000, black residents registered the largest decrease among the city's racial groups, dropping in population by almost 100,000, and this trend continued through 2010, with an additional decline of 38,000 to 310,379. While some black residents left the District for family ties and increased opportunities, the rising costs of living, especially housing costs, became a significant factor. Since 2010, the black population has stabilized and started to grow again, and now represents 46 percent of the total population. Compared to the rest of the District, the current black population is both younger (under 18) and older (over 64). Challenges persist, with black households, including single female household heads, on average earning 68 percent less than white households. While forecasted to increase numerically, the city's black population will remain below 50 percent of total population through 2025. 203.8

203.9 There have been steady increases in Hispanic and Asian populations in recent decades. Growth of Hispanic residents started in the 1980's with foreign migration primarily from countries like El Salvador. This has subsequently shifted to migration primarily from Mexico and Puerto Rico, along with net natural increases from residents. 203.9

203.10 Figure 2.2 Population of D.C. by Race: 1890-2010

203.11 While population loss after 1950 was significant, the decline in the number of households was much less dramatic. The number of households in the District declined by just 2 percent between 1980 and 2000, standing at 248,000 in 2000. Thus, population loss in the late 1900s was less a function of housing being abandoned and more a result of larger households being replaced by smaller households. In fact, the average household in Washington contained 2.16 persons in 2000, down from 2.72 in 1970. Middle-class families left the city in large numbers during this period and the number of school-aged children dropped dramatically. 203 .11

203.12 The 2006 Plan accurately predicted household size falling through 2010, and then stabilizing. According to the US Census, the percentage of older residents is expected to increase as "baby-boomers" retire, and the percentage of foreign-born residents, particularly those of Hispanic origin, is expected to rise. The District is expected to continue to be a magnet for the region's young professionals and empty nesters. Its ability to attract and retain young households and families with children rests largely on improving the quality of public education and addressing basic issues like crime, provision of services, inventory of, family-sized housing stock, and housing affordability. 203.12

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 203*

##### **10-A DCMR § 204** ECONOMIC CHANGES {#sec-10-a204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A204}

204.1 On the surface, Washington's economic picture is the envy of most cities. There are more jobs than residents, and nearly three times more jobs than households. Job growth, important for the city's economic vitality, has continued throughout this century, with 83,000 new jobs added since 2005 for a total of798,000 jobs in 2015. Job growth in the professional services, education, and hospitality sectors has outpaced federal employment growth, helping diversify the city's economy beyond the federal government. Wages in the region are among the highest in the nation.

204.2 Job growth has led to declining unemployment. After peaking above ten percent in 2011 , unemployment dropped to 6.1 percent in 2016. The diversity of job growth has reduced unemployment across race, education levels, and geography. Yet the city's unemployment rate is relatively high, hovering between six and nine percent consistently almost double the rate for the region. Unemployment rates in areas such as Far Southeast/Southwest are still four to five times higher than the regional rate, and disproportionately affect black residents. Yet many District residents do not have the skills to fill the white-collar jobs that drive the city's economy, and because the District is one of the region's major job centers and requires some "importing" of workers from the suburbs, more than 70 percent of the jobs in the District are filled by workers who live in Maryland and Virginia. This is essential to the District's economy: even if every DC resident in the labor force were employed in the city, we would still need almost 400,000 additional workers to fill the city 's jobs.

204.3 This imbalance results in a number of problems. The most often cited problem is the District's inability to tax the incomes of the nearly 500,000 non-residents who commute to the city each day. This daily migration is also accompanied by traffic congestion, air quality problems, and millions of hours of lost productivity.

204.4 Perhaps the more profound problem is the regional income divide. As Figures 2.3 through 2.5 indicate, the District today is a city divided by income, education, and employment. The maps depict this regional pattern within the District, as well as the change the District has experienced since 2006. And, change must be carefully considered: while the neighborhoods of Central Washington have seen a recent decrease in the percentage ofthose without a college degree or living in poverty, this is attributed to the strong increase in a resident workforce with college degrees, not necessarily improvements for existing residents, so the regional divide persists. "Vision for Growing an Inclusive City" concluded that bridging the income divide was the single biggest challenge facing the District as it plans for its future, and now, with nearly 17 percent of residents living in poverty and the cost of living rising, that challenge remains.

204.5 Figure 2.3: Unemployment in 2017

204.6 Figure 2.4: Persons 25+ Without College Degrees in 2017

204.7 Figure 2.5: Poverty Rate in 2017

204.8 Demographic tables throughout the Comprehensive Plan, including Figures 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5, use the most accurate, up-to-date Census and other data available. At the city-wide level, this may mean data from a single year of the American Community Survey (ACS) and the Annual Estimate of Population. Getting to a neighborhood level requires five years of ACS data. Unless otherwise stated, this data is labeled with the last year the data was collected but represents an average for the whole collection period. Readers should take this into consideration given the rapid rates of change for some neighborhoods. For the decennial census, students residing in the District on April 1, 2010 (census day) are counted as residents of the District rather than residents of their home state. Consequently, data on poverty, age, and other variables reflects student populations in census tracts containing (or adjacent to) universities. The District has accounted for these anomalies within the Comprehensive Plan, and should tailor its anti-poverty, economic development, and similar programs accordingly.

204.9 While attracting residents earning higher-wage jobs reflects a strong economy, it is important to consider the resulting growth in income disparities. At the national and metropolitan levels, income from lower-wage jobs has decreased in real terms, while income for workers with higher wages has grown, as shown in Figure 2.6. In the District, the story is somewhat different: wage growth at the lower end improved but importantly has not kept pace with growth for higher wage workers. Growing income disparity is even greater when considering geographic, racial/ethnic, and gender dimensions.

204.10 Figure 2.6 Earned Income Growth for Wage and Salary Workers by Percentile: 2000-2014

204.11 From a regional perspective, the District's employment outlook is positive. Because Washington is the seat of the federal government, it has been insulated from the economic cycles that have affected other regions of the country. The city never had a large industrial base, so it was spared the large-scale job losses experienced in cities like Baltimore and Philadelphia during the 1970s and 1980s. The District was not dependent on technology jobs, so it was spared the downturns affecting places like San Jose and Austin during the early 2000s. Even the downsizing of the federal government in the 1990s was accompanied by a rise in procurement spending that kept the Washington economy strong. The 2013 federal budget sequestration provides a recent example of the District's economic strength and diversity. Despite the sudden loss of 7,000 federal jobs, the city 's population and total jobs continued to grow.

204.12 A factor in the city's economic growth is its taxes. During the 1980s and 1990s, the District's reputation in the region was high-taxing: the highest tax rates for sales, business franchise, and real property. Since the Control Board era, the District for the most part has resisted raising tax rates, lowered many of these rates, and from a tax perspective, become more economically competitive in the region.

204.13 Washington's economy is diversifying, which helps during slow federal growth; however, a period of significant and sustained decline in federal employment and procurement would challenge the city's ability to recover. Further diversifying the District's economy will make the city more resilient to this and other economic

shocks. A key advantage to the federal presence is its highly educated and skilled workforce, which the private and non-profit sectors can tap as a mutual asset for growth.

204.14 But it is hard to consider an economy truly resilient when it does not close the "skills gap" that exists between the needs of local employers and the abilities of many District residents. Future job growth is expected to be concentrated in the services sector, including the business, legal, engineering, management, educational, and social service fields. The Economic Development Element of this Plan emphasizes the importance of closing the skills gap by improving education and job training so that more District residents can fill jobs in these and all other professions and adapt to changing conditions.

204.15 Since 2006, the increased demand and competition for housing from a growing number of higher-wage households was greater than anticipated and has made the District one of the most expensive cities to live in the country. Between 2011 and 2016, the cost of purchasing a home rose 50 percent, while renting costs rose 18 percent. Increasing rental housing costs make it difficult for lower or even moderate income residents to live in the city. The absolute number of low-cost rental units (less than $800/month) declined by half between 2003 and 2013, while the number of higher cost units increased. Units with rents of $1 000 or less made up 59 percent of the total rental stock in 2002; in 2013 those units comprised only 34 percent of the total stock. The District now has a large percentage of high- and low-income households, with relatively few in the middle-income range - the "missing middle." Housing costs, along with income inequality, are perhaps the central challenges to maintain and grow an inclusive city.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 204*

##### **10-A DCMR § 205** LAND USE CHANGES {#sec-10-a205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A205}

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

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 205*

##### **10-A DCMR § 206** HOUSING COST CHANGES {#sec-10-a206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A206}

206.1 The rising cost of housing is one of the most pressing and critical issues facing the District and the region. To achieve our goal of an inclusive city, we must meet the challenge of providing housing for a variety of household types, including families, the elderly, and the homeless; housing for owners and renters; housing for existing and new residents; workforce housing; and housing affordable at all income levels. Tied in with housing cost issues are deeper concerns about displacement, the impacts of gentrification, and long-term competitiveness.

206.2 In the District, market rate housing costs have steadily climbed as demand has increased with population growth. Since the economic recovery began in 2010 through 2017, the median sales price of single-family homes and condominiums have increased 7.3 and 2.8 percent per year, respectively. Average rents have increased 3.8 percent per year. Cost increases are driven by several factors, including: the strong and growing economy; migration into the city; increasing length of residency; growth of high paying jobs; increasing educational attainment levels among newer residents (which correlates to income); and an increase in higher-income families having and raising children in the District. These factors have produced particularly strong demand for housing near Metro stations and for family housing with three or more bedrooms.

206.3 In general, increased demand has prompted rising rents for older housing units, conversions of rental units to ownership units, and demolition of older buildings for redevelopment. The result has been a reduced supply of less expensive housing and a lower availability of lower cost market rate, or "naturally occurring" affordable housing. The District's public housing stock is in a state of serious disrepair, and addressing these needs is further hampered by diminished federal funding. In addition, workforce housing to serve the needs of the District's teachers, nurses, police and fire personnel, and other essential workers must also be considered.

206.4 For many lower income households, increasing housing costs have become difficult to afford, in part because their income growth has not kept pace with increased costs. Most lower income residents are financially burdened by housing costs, which can lead to displacement from their neighborhood, or even the District. In addition, housing insecurity has negative impacts on household health, school performance, job access, and other indicators of wellbeing. Residents of color are a majority of lower income households in the District and, therefore, face a disproportionate share of the problems caused by housing insecurity and displacement.

206.5 Between 2006 and 2017, the supply of rental housing units expanded dramatically, while the supply of affordable units declined. Most of the new units were higher-cost, studio, one-, and two-bedroom apartments affordable to households earning at and above median income. During this period, due to new construction and rising rents of existing supply, the total supply of rental units affordable only to those households earning more than 60 percent of the Median Family Income (MFI) increased by almost 44,765. In contrast, the total supply of rental units affordable to households earning less than 50 percent of the MFI declined by approximately 22,000 units, from 72,000 units in 2006 to 50,000 in 2017. At the same time, there was a modest gain of 2,500 units affordable to households with incomes between 50 percent and 60 percent of the MFI. Almost 7,000 of the District's roughly 8,000 public housing units are currently in critical condition or worse, which may lead to a reduction in affordable housing stock for lower-income households.

206.6 Rising housing costs and decreasing availability of affordable housing are causing more households to be severely burdened, which means their housing costs consume more than 50 percent of household income. In 2017, more than 42,800 households were severely burdened by rental housing costs, while another 32,600 rental households were burdened by housing costs consuming 30 to 50 percent of their income. These households must reduce expenditures on other necessities, such as food and health care. Further, households that are severely burdened by housing costs must often choose between a home that is in a desirable location- close to their community, jobs and/or services - and a home that is more affordable.

206.7 By comparison, the number of households burdened by ownership costs significantly decreased between 2006 and 2017. This decline is attributable to several factors, including older, lower-income households selling their homes to the growing number of younger households starting families, as well as high rates of foreclosure during the financial crisis that started in 2008. Lower- and middle-income households wishing to buy a home now have fewer options. This phenomenon may reinforce racial patterns of settlement in the District and/or create additional market pressure on the housing prices in eastern neighborhoods.

206.8 Increasing costs and a decreasing supply of naturally occurring affordable housing are affecting the types of households that are staying in the District. Figure 2.9 illustrates the change in households by income in the District between 2006 and 2017. The number of extremely low-income households increased by less than 500 households even as more of these households became severely burdened by rental housing costs. There was a notable decline in low- and moderate-income households as many residents sold or lost their homes, resulting in a decrease of more than 15,600 households in this income range. Finally, Figure 2.9 shows that the number of higher income households increased by almost 37,600. This data highlights the importance of preserving and developing housing affordable to low- and extremely low-income households.

206.9 Figure 2.9 Net Change in the Number of District Households by MFI: 2006-2017

206.10 These patterns of household change have affected the District's neighborhoods in varied ways. For example, the greatest decline in the number of lower income households was in Capitol Hill and Upper Northeast, whereas the greatest increase in higher income households was in Central Washington. Affordable housing is unevenly distributed across the District. The Rock Creek West area has fewer than 500 subsidized affordable units, while areas east of the Anacostia River provide over 25,000. While the need for affordable housing, particularly deeply affordable housing for low- and extremely low-income households, affects the city, discrete challenges vary at the neighborhood level.

206.11 The District has taken enormous strides toward strengthening its affordable housing infrastructure. The city has some of the strongest tenant protection provisions in the country; the highest level, per capita, for affordable housing investment; the lowest residential real property tax rate in the region; and provides additional discounts for seniors and renters. It has innovative programs such as tax abatements to stimulate the development of workforce housing. From 2015 to 2018, the District of Columbia has successfully delivered, through subsidy or inclusionary zoning, 5352 new or preserved affordable housing units. The District is also committed to addressing temporary or permanent displacement of residents with programs and policies tailored to community needs. For example, the principles for the District's New Communities Initiative include one-to-one replacement of existing affordable housing, Build First, mixed-income housing, and opportunities for residents to return and/or stay in the community. Still, more systemic work is needed to address the impacts of rapid population growth in the District and across a region that is broadly lacking sufficient affordable housing.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 206*

##### **10-A DCMR § 207** MOBILITY AND ACCESS CHANGES {#sec-10-a207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A207}

207.1 The Washington region faces significant transportation challenges. While road congestion remains a top issue for many in the region, District residents, commuters, and visitors also experience issues with transit capacity and reliability, as buses, railcars, and station platforms are crowded at peak use. The safety and reliability of the region's transportation system- from Metrorail to pedestrian and cyclist networks - are continuing concerns. Funding to maintain the existing transportation system, let alone expand the system to meet increased demand, is severely constrained.

207.2 Regionally, areas close to transit have become highly desirable as households and employers attempt to reduce travel time and costs. Between 2015 and 2030, approximately 78 percent of all development in the District will be within a half mile of a Metro station. Regional and District efforts support directing growth toward transit-rich locations, taking advantage of existing infrastructure and maximizing transportation efficiencies. Looking forward, increased investment in bus and rail transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and other modes of travel, will be needed to sustain population and economic growth and ensure a resilient, robust network increasing accessibility for all.

207.3 The District already has one of the most extensive transit systems in the country and ranks second only to New York in the percentage of residents using transit to go to work. The Metrorail and bus systems complement the city's radial roadway system and maximize the movement of people across the city. While Metro remains one of the safest and cost-effective means of travel in the region, years of deferred maintenance have led to problems with safety and reliability requiring sustained investment and new regional approaches to funding. In addition, parts of the Metrorail system are approaching capacity. Many of those who need transit the most, including low-income households and those with special needs, do not have equitable access to transportation options. Transit often does not connect District residents to jobs in the suburbs, and it may be expensive or difficult to access.

207.4 At the same time, the District's multi-modal transportation network has diversified and seen significant improvement, such as protected bicycle lanes, wider sidewalks, signalized crosswalks, the DC Circulator system, the streetcar, and prioritized bus corridors. A good example is the Capital Bikeshare system. Since its creation in 2010, the bikeshare system has grown to almost 450 stations and 3,700 bikes across the District and the region. The District also supported infrastructure changes and other strategies to make pedestrian and bicycle environments safer and more accessible. For example, District residents commuting to work by biking or walking increased by 70 percent to over 66,400 commuters from 2006 to 2017. Car-sharing, ride-hailing, and other new approaches provide additional travel options but also present challenges.

207.5 The District's Sustainable DC goals have set targets to reduce the share of commuter trips made by car to 25 percent by 2032, while increasing transit mode share to 50 percent and walking and cycling to 25 percent. To further these goals, additional investments will have to be made in high capacity transit improvements, an expanded network of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and rethinking of road and curb space. Access to the multimodal transportation network must be equitable across the District.

207.6 Technological innovations will continue to disrupt how we get around and receive goods and services. Increasingly, people have the technology and services to work from multiple locations, changing commute patterns and workspaces. Private sector firms offering transportation services such as car-sharing, ride-hailing, or scooters have proliferated in the District. Delivery firms are exploring new ways to deliver goods, including sidewalk drones. While new technology platforms can increase convenience for some, research suggests a correlation between ride-hailing and reduced public transit use, increased vehicle miles travelled, and increase traffic injuries and fatalities. Serious questions remain about the impact of widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles. These changes result from a demand for alternative transportation modalities to improve mobility, and public policy and regulation are necessary to ensure their implementation is safe, inclusive, accessible, and sustainable.

207.7 While multi-modality and new technologies are important, most important is linking land-use decisions to transportation capacity. Our existing infrastructure primarily accommodates privately owned vehicles, often making it difficult or unsafe to use public transit or bicycles, or to walk. Moving forward, our infrastructure must be upgraded and built to provide a multimodal transportation network that is safe and equitably accessed across the District.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 207*

##### **10-A DCMR § 208** ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES {#sec-10-a208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A208}

208.1 The District of Columbia was sited to take advantage of the unique environment and landscape at the confluence of the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. Urbanization over the last 200 years has compromised almost every aspect of this environment, leaving our rivers and streams polluted, air quality that struggles to meet federal standards, and a city where heavy tree cover remains inadequate. On a global level, issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, climate change, sea-level rise, and deforestation may have even more far-reaching impacts on the way we live and work in the future. There is a greater potential for increased rainfall and flooding from more damaging storms in the District. Extreme heat conditions are more likely, exacerbated by the city 's urban heat-island effect, that disproportionately affect vulnerable residents.

208.2 This Plan incorporates and builds upon the 2018 Sustainable DC 2.0 plan and 2016 Climate Ready DC plan. Sustainable DC makes a conscious effort to promote natural resource conservation and environmental sustainability. It incorporates measurable goals such as reducing citywide energy consumption by 50 percent, sending zero solid waste to landfills, reducing total waste generation by 15 percent, and making the Anacostia River fishable and swimmable by 2025. These goals can only be achieved through fundamental changes in the way we live and the way we build. Green building and "low impact development" must be the norm rather than the exception. The concept of sustainability is an important theme for the Comprehensive Plan, including the renewal of brownfield sites, storm water runoff mitigation, increased use of distributed energy resources like residential solar, and a renewed commitment to environmental justice in all neighborhoods of the city. Doing so requires a racially equitable approach that ensures the District's ecosystems are inclusive and interconnected, and strives to evenly distribute opportunities, benefits, and safeguards throughout the city. More specifically, this means ensuring that communities of color are not saturated with landfills, hazardous waste sites, and other industrial facilities. Climate Ready DC identifies the impacts a changing climate will have upon the District; the risks to infrastructure, public facilities, and neighborhoods; and the actions to take now and in the future to prepare.

208.3 The challenge and opportunity going forward is to identify and implement new technologies, designs, and urban development that accommodate population and economic growth, better protect natural resources, minimize future environmental degradation, reduce greenhouse gases, and prepare the city for a changing climate.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 208*

##### **10-A DCMR § 209** TECHNOLOGY CHANGES {#sec-10-a209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A209}

209.1 Technology is rapidly changing how we live, work, and travel and it will continue to shape the District in unexpected ways. Since the 1980s, telecommuting has changed travel patterns, on-line purchases have changed retailing, and e-mail has changed the way business and government operate. For instance, working from home is one of the fastest growing ways employees "commute" to work. Mobile computing, self-driving cars, new construction methods, green technology and other advances will have new and unexpected impacts on our lifestyles, how the city makes development decisions, and the shape of future growth.

209.2 It is hard to fathom how advancements yet to be made will affect us in the future. The only thing that is certain is that technology will change our lives, with potentially profound spatial impacts. Such change may have more of an impact on Washington than it might on other cities, given the city 's role as a global and intellectual capital. The city is already a center of the information economy and has demonstrated a strong pull for innovators from around the country and the world. In Washington, economic activity is becoming less reliant on a place-based office, with implications for the social spaces where people meet. In addition, the potential decline in demand for high-value office space has fiscal implications for commercial real estate.

209.3 The District should also ensure its plan for preserving and improving its neighborhoods is evidence-based and data-driven. The District should take advantage of any technologies it possesses that inform public policy. Risk terrain modeling, for example, is a predictive tool that explores the relationship between public safety and certain environmental features, including parks, transportation infrastructure, vacant or blighted properties, and businesses. The model allows the District to identify environmental features that impact public safety, coordinate a targeted response to address those features, and evaluate the success of that response.

209.4 One aspect of technological change is its potential to deepen economic divides in the city. In 2004, the National Poverty Center reported that 85 percent of the nation's white children had access to a home computer, compared to just 40 percent of black and Latino children. Recent Census data suggests the District has made significant progress in this area, but gaps remain as effectively 100 percent of white children and 89 percent of black children have access to a computer. Access to technology will be an important part of improving the well-being of District residents in the future. This will place a premium on education and training, and an emphasis on providing residents with the skills to use technology and access information.

209.5 Finally, rapid advances in technology present new opportunities for how the District identifies problems and tests solutions. The ability to collect and analyze large amounts of data from a variety of sources goes well beyond traditional Census data. Many aspects of urban life are now tracked by public or private entities. From bikeshare station usage to the deployment of health inspectors based on environmental conditions, a new era of "smart cities" is rising. With it comes an opportunity to monitor, predict, and respond quickly to new problems, but it also presents new challenges to information security and maintaining the privacy of our citizenry. A key challenge is to adapt technology to our historic urban city rather than force the city to adapt to technology.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 209*

##### **10-A DCMR § 210** SECURITY CHANGES {#sec-10-a210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A210}

210.1 Security is not a new concern or challenge in the District of Columbia. As a capital city, we are used to a heightened level of risk and the visibility of extra security personnel. The city 's public spaces, such as the National Mall, routinely attract large crowds for events and First Amendment gatherings that require support. As an urban center, we also face daily concerns about personal safety and crime. But security concerns have taken on a new meaning since 9/ 11. The attacks on Washington and New York changed the psyche of our city and ushered in an uncertainty about the future that still persists.

210.2 Since 9/11, we have sought to balance beauty, access, and openness with the need to protect our landmarks, government buildings, officials, workers, residents, and visitors from danger. The federal government has strived to discourage acts of terrorism through the design and management of public spaces and buildings, including the closing of some District streets and retrofitting of major landmarks. Security issues have been cited in decisions to shift the federal workforce to more remote locations. They also have resulted in design standards for federally leased space that will reverberate through the regional office market for many years to come.

210.3 Washington's security issues are ongoing and evolving. Indeed, cyber-attacks affecting critical infrastructure and services have emerged as a new threat. As more of the population moves close to our waterways, there are particular security concerns, including access for first responders in areas where public infrastructure is still being improved. The need to balance our desire for safety, accessibility, and aesthetics, while maintaining an open, democratic, and resilient society is one of the important challenges that this plan seeks to address by introducing approaches to prepare for, and recover from, events regardless of cause.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 210*

##### **10-A DCMR § 211** FISCAL CHANGES {#sec-10-a211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A211}

211.1 When the District received limited Home Rule in 1973, it incurred a variety of cost burdens, including the responsibility for providing many services that are typically provided by states. Revenue restrictions also were imposed, including the inability to impose a "commuter tax" on income earned in the city by non-residents. Moreover, a large amount of land in the city is owned by the federal government and therefore not subject to property tax. Indeed, 61 percent of all property in the District is nontaxable, and more than two-thirds of the income earned in the District cannot be locally taxed. These burdens and restrictions are estimated to cost the District well over $1 billion per year.

211.2 A well-publicized target of adding 100,000 residents to the city's population, set in 2003 as a way to boost the number of taxpaying residents, has been largely successful. Economic and population growth has dramatically expanded our tax revenues, and fiscal discipline has improved the District's credit rating and funded a $1.3 billion reserve. Growth and an expanded tax base have enabled the District to direct additional resources toward vulnerable populations in need of affordable housing, workforce development, and human services. The District has also worked to increase the income of current residents, which can in turn lift families out of poverty, generate tax revenues, and reduce social-service costs. A key component of improving the city's fiscal health as well as the economic prosperity of its residents, is to increase the number of employed residents and thus the economic and tax base of the city.

211.3 Fortunately, economic growth in the city has helped improve the District's fiscal standing. In the 1990s, the District was on the brink of bankruptcy. The situation has improved markedly, as a result of actions taken by the Government of the District of Columbia. Despite the optimistic forecasts of the Comprehensive Plan, there is no guarantee that this good fortune will last. Prudent action and fiscal responsibility are needed to avoid problems should future downturns take place.

211.4 The District's fiscal situation will continue to influence land-use and economic development choices. It is currently driving the redevelopment of large former federal sites with tax-generating uses, creation of new retail centers that reduce the " leakage" of sales-tax dollars to the suburbs, and mixed-use development downtown and elsewhere. Such efforts mitigate fiscal challenges, but do not eliminate them. The most effective strategies will combine revenue-raising strategies like population and job growth with strategies investing in people - like breaking the cycle of poverty in District neighborhoods.

211.5 A key consideration is that the city has benefitted from increasing revenues as a result of growth, while not experiencing increasing costs to the same degree. Between 2006 and 2016, the city had the ability to grow into its under-utilized infrastructure, such as schools, transit and electrical networks, that had largely been developed and paid for prior to the 1980s. The same cannot necessarily be counted on going forward. Already, significant reinvestment was required to resolve long-deferred maintenance and create high-value assets such as DC Public Schools and DC Public Libraries. These investments have left the District with a relatively high debt-per-capita level. Moving forward, the District must creatively address infrastructure financing to maintain and build capacity for anticipated future growth.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 211*

##### **10-A DCMR § 212** GLOBAL CITY, LOCAL CITY {#sec-10-a212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A212}

212.1 One of the most obvious forces influencing planning in the District is the city's dual role as a world capital and a residential community. There is the Washington of lore, the city of inaugural parades, museums, and monuments - the place that school textbooks describe as "belonging to all of America." And there is the city most of us know, comprised of neighborhoods, shopping districts, schools, comer stores, churches, and parks. Even the Comprehensive Plan itself is divided into District and Federal Elements, suggesting that federal interests may not always align with the goals of the city's residents and businesses.

212.2 The tension between Washington's global and local roles plays out in a number of ways. Foremost, our citizenry seeks an equal voice in the federal system through statehood, supported by 86 percent of the District's voters in 2016. Conflicts around fiscal issues and security have already been noted. Issues such as embassy siting, plans for federal lands, funding for Metrorail, and Congressional oversight on local land-use and public-facility decisions have been the focus of much debate and discussion in the past. The District itself seems partitioned at times, with the federal government functioning as a "city within the city."

212.3 Yet in spite of these conflicts, the "federal presence" remains Washington's most prominent and visible asset. It provides tens of thousands of jobs for District residents, attracts millions of visitors to the city, and sustains cultural institutions that would not otherwise be possible. This influx of workers and visitors contributes to a doubling of the District's daytime population. It makes Washington an international and multi-cultural center, second only to New York on the eastern seaboard. The federal presence requires that our plans take a broader perspective than the metropolitan region and approach these tensions between global and local functions with a sense of shared stewardship that benefits all.

212.4 The District's role in the world economy has become increasingly important during the past 60 years. In the early 2000s, the Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate ranked Washington as the top city in the world for foreign investment for three consecutive years. Foreign investment still plays an important role in many of the District's revitalization projects. In addition, the Washington region is one of the leading gateways for immigration into the United States. We are home to such institutions as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Our emergence as a global center has implications for our communication systems, our transportation and infrastructure needs, our cultural life, and our real estate and development markets.

212.5 These changes create vast potential for increased prosperity. But they also create the threat of disruption and a changing identity for many parts of the city. City plans must clearly articulate the values to be preserved and the people and places to be protected as we contemplate where we as a city hope to be in 25 years and beyond.

212.6 The city's visibility is an opportunity to exhibit global leadership. The District has already established its leadership in resilience, sustainability, and inclusion through partnerships and participation in initiatives such as the Paris Climate Agreement and the Compact of Mayors, and as the first global city to achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum status.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 212*

##### **10-A DCMR § 213** PLANNING FOR RESILIENCE AND EQUITY {#sec-10-a213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A213}

213.1 The second Plan amendment cycle incorporates resilience and equity as new crosscutting themes through which to plan for the District's future, referencing the 2019 Resilient DC plan and other related documents.

213.2 Resilience in the District is defined as the capacity to thrive amidst challenging conditions by preparing and planning to absorb, recover, and more successfully adapt to adverse events. Resilience planning recognizes the volatility of the forces driving change. Ideally, we want to capitalize on positive impacts, and diminish negative impacts of the forces driving change.

213.3 Considering shocks and stresses helps one to understand the District's vulnerabilities. Shocks are sudden, acute disasters like storms, flooding, cyber-attacks, or economic crises, such as the 2008 Great Recession. Stresses are "slow-burning disasters" that weaken the city every day and are magnified by shocks: these include poverty, trauma, housing insecurity, and stressed transportation systems.

213.4 The District's resilience goals focus on inclusive growth that benefits all residents, preparing for the impacts of climate change, and embracing advances in technology while minimizing the negative impacts of change. Ensuring that every neighborhood is safe and our residents are healthy is one way to have a more resilient city. Being more resilient strengthens our collective capacity to thrive in the face of shocks and stresses. Building resilience is about addressing everyday stresses, which not only makes our city more inclusive, but enables the District to recover more quickly from catastrophic events. Incorporating resilience into the Comprehensive Plan is critical to achieve our goals.

213.5 As an example, the stress of poverty, combined with substantial population growth, has created a housing affordability crisis that must be addressed. The need for more housing, and more affordable housing, has become an important policy goal that, if addressed and achieved, will help the city be more resilient.

213.6 The District seeks to create and support an equitable and inclusive city. Like resilience, equity is both an outcome and a process. Equity exists where all people share equal rights, access, choice, opportunities, and outcomes, regardless of characteristics such as race, class, or gender. Equity is achieved by targeted actions and investments to meet residents where they are, to create equitable opportunities. Equity is not the same as equality.

213.7 Equitable development is a participatory approach for meeting the needs of underserved communities through policies, programs and/or practices that reduce and ultimately eliminate disparities while fostering places that are healthy and vibrant. Equitable development holistically considers land-use, transportation, housing, environmental, and cultural conditions, and creates access to education, services, health care, technology, workforce development, and employment opportunities. As the District grows and changes, it must do so in a way that encourages choice, not displacement, and builds the capacity of vulnerable, marginalized, and low-income communities to fully and substantively participate in decision-making processes and share in the benefits of the growth, while not unduly bearing its negative impacts.

213.8 The District must also commit to normalizing conversations about race and operationalizing strategies for advancing racial equity. Racial equity is defined as the moment when "race can no longer be used to predict life outcomes and outcomes for all groups are improved."

213.9 As an outcome, the District achieves racial equity when race no longer determines one's socioeconomic outcomes; when everyone has what they need to thrive, no matter where they live or their socioeconomic status; and when racial divides no longer exist between people of color and their white counterparts. As a process, we apply a racial equity lens when those most impacted by structural racism are meaningfully involved in the creation and implementation of the institutional policies and practices that impact their lives, particularly people of color. Applying this lens also reflects the targeted support to communities of color through policies and programs that are aimed at centering - focusing on their needs and barriers to participate and make informed decisions - and eliminating racial divides, all while taking into account historical trauma and racism.

213.10 The District's policies and investments should reflect a commitment to eliminating racial inequities. Addressing issues of equity in transportation, housing, employment, income, asset building, geographical change, and socioeconomic outcomes through a racial equity lens will allow the District to address systemic and underlying drivers of racial inequities.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 213*

##### **10-A DCMR § 214** LOOKING FORWARD: GROWTH FORECASTS {#sec-10-a214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A214}

214.1 The forces driving change described in the previous sections suggest a different future for the District of Columbia than was imagined when the 1984 Comprehensive Plan was drafted. The 1984 Plan sought to prepare the city and neighborhoods for a period of long-term population and economic decline. Even the Ward Plans prepared during the early 1990s focused on preventing neighborhood decline and unwanted intrusions. In 2006, the new Comprehensive Plan responded to a different outlook: it anticipated growth. Since then, the District has experienced rapid growth, even as the nation recovered from a major recession. Today, the continued strength of the Washington economy, coupled with transportation and environmental limits to regional expansion, suggest that the city will continue to grow and capture a larger share of the region's growth in the future than it has in the past. This assumption is bolstered by an unprecedented amount of development in the "pipeline" and joint federal/District proposals for federal land transfers.

214.2 Unlike revenue forecasts that often have conservative growth estimates to ensure fiscal responsibility, more optimistic growth assumptions are appropriate in the context of the Comprehensive Plan to ensure adequate provision for future infrastructure, housing, and other development needs. At the same time, a wide array of risk factors is considered that could affect future growth.

214.3 The growth forecasts used in this Comprehensive Plan are driven by three factors: land supply, demand, and regional growth projections. Unless otherwise noted, values were prepared in 2015-16 by the Office of Planning. Each of these is described below.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 214*

##### **10-A DCMR § 215** LAND SUPPLY {#sec-10-a215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A215}

215.1 Land supply in the District of Columbia includes "pipeline" sites, vacant infill sites, underutilized sites, large sites, and other sites. These categories are mutually exclusive, meaning there is no double counting between them.

215.2 Pipeline sites are sites where specific development projects are already planned or under construction. Such sites comprise over I ,300 acres in the District. They represent 60,000 housing units and about 42 million square feet of non-residential space. The degree of certainty that these projects will be built by 2030 is relatively high.

215.3 In 2013, the District undertook a comprehensive analysis of land-use capacity as part of its joint study of the Height of Buildings Act with the National Capital Planning Commission. The analysis looked at the unused potential capacity from the development of privately owned vacant and underutilized sites. Vacant infill sites comprise about 505 acres in the District and are not associated with any particular project or proposal. They are generally less than ten acres and include a mix of privately-owned properties and publicly owned sites. Some 426 acres of this land are residentially zoned, including about 121 acres of multi-family zoned land, and 306 acres of land zoned for single family and rowhouses. About 53 vacant acres are commercially zoned and 23 vacant acres are industrially zoned. While vacant lots occur in all parts of the city, about 30 percent of the city's vacant land is located east of the Anacostia River.

215.4 Underutilized sites comprise about 849 acres. For the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, these are defined as privately owned properties zoned for either multi-family residential, commercial, or industrial uses where the property improvements represent less than 30 percent of the potential built capacity under the Comprehensive Plan's land-use designations and zoning. An example is a one-story storefront on a property where four or more stories are permitted. This does not necessarily mean these uses should be displaced - it simply means the private market will create pressure to replace them over time. The underutilized sites tend to be clustered along mixed-use corridor streets such as Wisconsin, Connecticut, Georgia, Martin Luther King Jr, Nannie Helen Burroughs, and New York Avenues, and Benning Road.

215.5 Large sites in the District include about a dozen properties or clusters of adjoining properties, with the potential for reuse during the next 20 years. They range in size from 25 acres to over 300 acres. They include sites that already contain extensive development, like DC Village and Reservation 13, and sites that are largely vacant, such as Poplar Point and the McMillan Reservoir Sand Filtration site. These sites hold many possibilities for the future, from large mixed-use communities to new parks and open spaces, public facilities, and infrastructure. In total, the large sites represent about 1,500 acres. Some have already been master-planned for new uses; the future of other sites has yet to be determined. Some are federally owned, and some are owned by the District. The Office of Planning estimates that federally owned sites will account for less than 10 percent of the District's job and household growth through 2025.

215.6 There are many other sites in the District where development could occur. Despite an overall decrease in the number of vacant buildings, some of these buildings can be renovated and others are likely to be demolished and replaced. There are also freeways and railyards where development could occur in the air rights above the existing uses. There are at least four aging housing projects that have been identified as possible "new communities."

215.7 Table 2.1 summarizes vacant and underutilized commercial land within the District and provides an estimate of potential additional development that these lands could accommodate based on existing zoning.

215.8 Table 2.1 : Potential Additional Development on Vacant and Underutilized Lands Citywide

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 215*

##### **10-A DCMR § 216** THE COOPERATIVE FORECASTS {#sec-10-a216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A216}

216.1 The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) coordinates socio-economic projections for the Washington region. These projections include households, population, and jobs and are expressed in five-year intervals, currently to 2045. Projections are made for the region as a whole and for each of its 23 jurisdictions. They take into account national economic trends, local demographics, and the local plans and policies of the region's cities and counties. As part of this effort, the District develops a jurisdiction-level forecast and works with MWCOG to reconcile and balance the forecast with other jurisdictions.

216.2 At the regional level, the projections have been relatively accurate since the forecasting program began in 1975. Actual growth during the last 40 years has tracked closely with what the forecasts predicted.

216.3 In 2016, the MWCOG board approved projections showing the region would add 1.4 million jobs between 2015 and 2045. The projections further show an addition of 640,000 households and 1.5 million residents during this time period. About 29 percent of this growth is expected to occur in "outer" suburbs such as Loudoun, Frederick, and Prince William Counties, a significant decrease from the 43 percent share that was forecasted in 2005. The " inner" suburbs of Fairfax, Montgomery, and Prince George's Counties are expected to maintain their share of growth at about 41 percent. The most significant change between the 2006 and 2015 MWCOG forecast is the share of growth in the central jurisdictions of the District, Arlington County, and Alexandria, which has doubled from 15 to 30 percent. The shift in growth from the outer suburbs to the region's core is healthy land use.

216.4 Figure 2.10 indicates the location of regional activity centers in the Washington Metropolitan Area. Updated centers were identified cooperatively by jurisdictions in the MWCOG area in 2012. They are intended to provide an organizing framework for directing regional job and housing growth, as articulated in Region Forward, MWCOG's planning compact. This compact sets goals to guide growth toward the centers, including 75 percent of commercial construction and 50 percent of new households. As Figure 2.1 0 indicates, some of the clusters are more than 40 miles from the District and are larger in land area than all of Central Washington. Since 2006, progress has been made toward these goals. MWCOG estimates that 76 percent of job growth and 65 percent of household growth will occur in the centers. This suggests that urban sprawl and related congestion can be minimized. Expanded coordination in land use and transportation planning among the region's cities and counties will be essential to keep the region sustainable.

216.5 Figure 2.10: Regional Activity Clusters

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 216*

##### **10-A DCMR § 217** PROJECTED GROWTH, 2015-2045 {#sec-10-a217 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A217}

217.1 The District's growth projections are based on a combination of the regional forecasts, approved and planned development, and land supply estimates. These projections anticipate a greater pace of growth and increased household size than was used in 2006. While many factors may influence these projections, particularly in the out-years, they are intended to ensure that the District, through the Comprehensive Plan, is adequately preparing today for future growth. Table 2.2 provides a summary.

217.2 Table 2.2: Population, Household and Job Forecasts, 2015-2045

217.3 Because the Census is only taken every I 0 years, estimates of population and household growth begin with the 20 I 0 Census as the base, then adjust this using the Census's Annual Estimates of Population and the American Community Survey. Since 2005, these sources have closely matched the District's own population forecasts.

217.4 The Comprehensive Plan's household and population forecasts use a supply-side method, which relies on the construction of new square footage of non-residential space and residential units. This newly built space reflects the capacity to absorb net new job and household demand. The Plan's forecasts begin by tracking the number of housing units in larger new developments as they progress from conceptual plan to completion. Occupancy rates and average household size by building type are applied to each development to estimate the increase in households and the population increase from migration. Net natural increase (births minus deaths) is then added to the population numbers to reflect growth from within the District. Using this method, recent growth is reviewed and five-year growth forecasts through 2030 are provided, as noted in Table 2.2 and described below.

217.5 Between 2010 and 2015, the District added approximately 30,000 households and the population increased by 70,000. This matched changes in the housing supply from new construction, subdivision of larger units into a greater number of smaller units, and decreases in vacancy to historic lows.

217.6 The 2015-2020 growth increment consists of actual projects that are now under construction plus a portion of planned projects expected to start construction and reach completion by 2020. The largest share of these projects are rental buildings that will increase the percentage of rental households as a share of the District's overall households. Rental buildings are the largest share of these projects, and that will increase rental households as a share of the District's overall households. This growth will result in a net gain of about 22,000 households and is expected to increase the city's population to almost 730,000 by the 2020 census. This assumes that household size will start to increase from 2.11 to 2.13.

217.7 Growth forecasts for 2020-2025 are based on specific projects that have received a pre-development approval and portions of projects· still in more conceptual stages. About 22,000 households are expected to be added during this period, bringing the city's population to 787,00 by 2025.

217.8 From 2025 to 2030, the remaining projects that today are in the early conceptual stages of pre-development are expected to deliver and be occupied. During this interval the forecast expects the city to grow by over 21 ,000 households and 55,000 residents for a total of over 362,000 households and 842,000 residents.

217.9 From 2020 to 2035, a significant portion of the District's growth is expected to occur on the large sites described earlier in this Element, contributing 14,000 households and 23,000 people. These large sites have significant capacity, but also significant planning and infrastructure needs. Growth from these sites is spread across several time intervals due to site complexity and where they are in the development process. Beyond the large sites, growth is expected to continue on the remaining smaller vacant and underutilized sites, until the District's population approaches 990,000 and 412,000 households by 2045.

217.10 A forecast of age growth in the population growth, from 2006 to 2025, is now included. Figure 2.11 shows several trends in how the city's population is anticipated to change by age. First, the large influx of younger, 20-30-year-o1d individuals who arrived between 2006 and 2016 will age, and as they start families an increase in children is anticipated. In addition, the number of older residents will increase. This age forecast has important implications for how the District will respond to:

Increasing demand for pre-school, daycare, and public schools as well as playgrounds and parks from a growing population of children;

Rising housing costs as recent residents enter their prime income-earning years; and

Rising demand for senior services as the baby boom generation retires and grows older.

217.11 Figure 2.11 Forecast of DC Residents by Age: 2015-2025

217.12 In 2006 the biggest unknown in the forecasts was how the types of households and household size would change. If the District were to lose families and attract only small one- and two-person households, the 2006 plan recognized that the city could add 57,000 households with no gain in population. By incorporating the age forecast with the long-term population forecast in Table 2.2, household size is anticipated to increase from 2.11 to 2.27 from 2015 to 2045. However, this increase will occur only if the District retains its families, keeping both young professionals in the city as they form families, as well as single- or elder-parent led households, and provides a healthy environment for all families in its neighborhoods. Indeed, from 1990 to 2000, the number of families with children in the District declined by 11 ,000, with an attendant drop in citywide household size.

217.13 Related factors affecting population forecasts are housing costs, immigration, the cost of day care, and K-12 school quality. Higher housing costs have already caused families to "double up" in some parts of the city or leave the city for less expensive housing. It may result in adult children returning home or living at home longer. Immigration also may drive increases in household size, as it has in New York, San Francisco, and other gateway cities. Improvement in the District's public schools and the shift toward universal pre-school has made the city a more attractive place for families with young children.

217.14 Unlike the 2006 household and population forecasts, which suggested that the District of Columbia would capture ten percent of the region's growth during 2005-2025, the Plan now expects the District to gain an increasing share of the region's population. By 2045, the District will represent as much as 14 percent of the region's population.

217.15 Employment Growth.

217.16 Employment forecasts track new capacity in proposed development and estimate the number of jobs each project could contain. The 2010 baseline estimates build on monthly data reported from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Info USA, the District Department of Employment Services, and other sources, with adjustments for self-employment and military personnel. The forecasts from 2015 to 2030 are largely based on actual projects under construction in the city, as well as office, retail, hotel, industrial, and institutional development that is currently planned and in conceptual stages. These estimates are then compared to forecasts made by the District Department of Employment Services and other sources.

217.17 Beyond 2030, the projections presume a continuation of 2010-2020 trends, but at a slowing rate. Continued growth in the professional, health, and education sectors is expected, as is growth in the eating- and drinking-establishment sector, as the District's population increases. Between 2010 and 2045, the District is expected to add 300,000 new jobs, bringing the citywide total to over a million jobs.

217.18 The employment forecasts suggest that the District of Columbia will capture 22 percent of the region's job growth during 2010-2045. By 2045, the District will have essentially retained its share of the region's jobs, as it drops slightly from 25 to 24 percent, a significantly higher share than forecast in 2005.

217.19 Translating the Forecasts into Demand for Land

217.20 How much land does it take to accommodate 145,000 housing units and 300,000 jobs? The answer depends on the density of new development. Other factors, such as the size of housing units, the types of jobs being created, and the amount of land set aside for parking and open space also weigh in. The accompanying diagram shows three scenarios.

217.21 The first illustrates the land that would be required for single family homes (at six units per acre) and one-story campus-style office buildings. About 33,000 acres would be necessary. The second scenario shows land requirements for housing built at row-house densities (25 units per acre), with the jobs housed in five-story office buildings. About 7,000 acres would be required. The third scenario shows land requirements for housing built at apartment densities of about 125 units per acre, with the jobs housed in ten-story office buildings. Land consumption drops to under 2,000 acres.

217.22 Of course, the diagram simplifies the actual dynamics of how land is used and developed. It also leaves out land that must be set aside for parks, public facilities, and infrastructure. The District expects some combination of high-, medium-, and low-density development during the next 30 years. However, high land costs and the scarcity of land in the city make denser development more likely and even appropriate.

217.23 Growth by Planning Area

217.24 Tables 2.3 and 2.4 show where household and job growth is expected to take place within the city through 2045. The estimates reflect the location of planned development projects, vacant and underutilized sites, and Comprehensive Plan land-use designations and policies.

217.25 Table 2.3: Projected Distribution of Household Growth by Planning Area

217.26 Table 2.4: Projected Distribution of Job Growth by Planning Area

217.27 The tables indicate that about 28 percent of the city's future household growth will occur in Central Washington and along the Lower Anacostia Waterfront. This reflects current and expected development in and around Downtown, the North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMA) area, the Southwest Waterfront, the Near Southeast, and on large sites such as Poplar Point. Other areas east of the Anacostia River represent about 18 percent of the projected total. The Mid-City and Near Northwest areas also represent a combined total of 14.2 percent, with most of the gain expected east of 14th Street N.W., especially around Howard University, Columbia Heights, and Shaw. The biggest shift since the 2006 forecast is that the Upper Northeast area is now expected to accommodate 19.7 percent of the District's household growth. This is a result of major land use changes around Union Market, McMillan Reservoir, Rhode Island A venue Metro station, and the large number of vacant and underutilized properties in the Upper Northeast area. Additional data and guidance for each of these areas is provided in the Area Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

217.28 Employment growth will continue to be concentrated in Central Washington and along the Anacostia River. These two areas were expected to absorb three-quarters of the city's job growth by 2025, principally in places like the South Capitol Street Corridor, the Southeast Federal Center, and the New York Avenue Metro Station area. The updated forecast suggests that job growth will be slightly more distributed. Central Washington and the Anacostia River Waterfront areas are now expected to absorb 57 percent of job growth. Upper Northeast, especially along the New York Avenue corridor, is now expected to absorb about ten percent of the city's job growth. Another 14 percent is expected east of the Anacostia River on sites such as St. Elizabeths and the Minnesota A venue Metro Station Area. The remaining six planning areas represent less than 20 percent of the city's job growth, most associated with institutional uses and infill office and retail development along corridor streets.

217.29 As time unfolds, departures from the District's forecasts are likely. Future amendments to the Comprehensive Plan may be considered in response to changing trends, new projections, and shifting expectations for the future.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 217*

##### **10-A DCMR § 218** FROM VISION TO REALITY: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a218 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A218}

218.1 The earlier sections of this Element provided the context for the Comprehensive Plan. This section establishes 40 underlying principles for the future that reflect this context. Most of these principles are based on "A Vision for Growing an Inclusive City," the policy framework for the Comprehensive Plan Revision endorsed by the Council of the District of Columbia in 2004. However, statements from the previous Comprehensive Plan and other documents that set the frame for more detailed planning in the District also are incorporated. Policies in each Element of the Comprehensive Plan elaborate on the city 's commitment to following these principles.

218.2 The principles are grouped into five sections:

Managing Growth and Change

Creating Successful Neighborhoods

Increasing Access to Education and Employment

Connecting the City

Building Green and Healthy Communities.

218.3 The principles acknowledge that the benefits and opportunities of living in the District are not available to everyone equally and that divisions in the city -physical, social and economic- must be overcome to move from vision to reality. To grow equitably and achieve racial equity, equity-centered approaches that address the needs of underserved communities are necessary.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 218*

##### **10-A DCMR § 219** MANAGING GROWTH AND CHANGE: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a219 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A219}

219.1 (1) The District seeks to create and support an equitable and inclusive city. Growth must be managed equitably to support all District residents, including vulnerable communities and District protected classes. We must recognize that managing growth and change includes addressing the historic, structural, and systemic racial inequities and disenfranchisement of many District residents. And, we must recognize the importance of longtime businesses, as well as educational and cultural institutions. An equitable and inclusive city includes access to housing that is healthy, safe, and affordable for a range of household types, sizes, and incomes in all neighborhoods. A citywide problem requires citywide solutions — ones that overcome the legacy of segregation, avoid concentrating poverty, and afford the opportunity to stay in one's home and not be displaced.

219.2 (2) Change in the District of Columbia is both inevitable and desirable. The key is to manage change in ways that protect the positive aspects of life in the city, such as local cultural heritage, and reduce negatives such as poverty, crime, food deserts, displacement, and homelessness.

219.3 (3) A city must be diverse to thrive, and the District cannot sustain itself by only attracting small, affluent households. To retain residents and attract a diverse population, the city should provide services that support families. A priority must be placed on sustaining and promoting safe neighborhoods offering health care, quality education, transportation, childcare, parks, libraries, arts and cultural facilities, and housing for families.

219.4 (4) Diversity also means maintaining and enhancing the District's mix of housing types. Housing should be developed for households of different sizes, including growing families as well as singles and couples, and for all income levels.

219.5 (5) The District needs both residential and non-residential growth to survive. Nonresidential growth benefits residents by creating jobs and opportunities for less affluent households to increase their income.

219.6 (6) A large component of current and forecasted growth in the next decade is expected to occur on large sites that are currently isolated from the rest of the city. Rather than letting these sites develop as gated or self-contained communities, they should be integrated into the city's urban fabric through the continuation of street patterns, open-space corridors and compatible development patterns where they meet existing neighborhoods. Since the District is landlocked, its large sites must be viewed as extraordinarily valuable assets. Not all should be used right away - some should be "banked" for the future.

219.7 (7) Redevelopment and infill opportunities along corridors and near transit stations will be an important component of reinvigorating and enhancing our neighborhoods. Development on such sites must be designed to respect the integrity of stable neighborhoods and the broader community context, and encourage housing and amenities for low-income households, who rely more on transit. Adequate infrastructure capacity should be ensured as growth occurs.

219.8 (8) Growth in the District benefits not only District residents, but the region as well. By accommodating a larger number of jobs and residents, we can create the critical mass needed to support new services, sustain public transit, and improve regional environmental quality.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 219*

##### **10-A DCMR § 220** CREATING SUCCESSFUL NEIGHBORHOODS: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a220 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A220}

220.1 (9) The District prioritizes equitable participation that enfranchises everyone and builds people's long-term capacity to organize to improve their lives and neighborhoods. Residents and communities should have meaningful opportunities to participate in all stages of planning, policy, public investment, and development decision-making. The District has a special responsibility to identify, engage, and build capacity for greater participation among traditionally underrepresented communities, and will make additional, targeted efforts to improve services for these communities and promote their ability to participate on an equal basis with other communities.

220.2 (10) To participate effectively and represent community interests in public processes, the District should support and build the capacity of civic organizations, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, residents, businesses and other stakeholders. We should encourage collaborative, community-led processes that bring together diverse perspectives. These processes should be clear, open and transparent. Notification procedures should be timely, provide appropriate information, and allow adequate, but not unnecessarily prolonged, time to respond.

220.3 (11) The residential character of neighborhoods must be protected, maintained and improved. Many District neighborhoods possess social, economic, historic, and physical qualities that make them unique and desirable places in which to live. As the District continues to grow, more residents, and those of varied socio-economic backgrounds, should be accommodated, including the production and preservation of affordable housing, while using zoning, design, and other means to retain the qualities that physically characterize these neighborhoods and make them attractive. Zoning and other means should be used to attract neighborhood serving retail that, in turn, enhances the surrounding residential neighborhood.

220.4 (12) Many neighborhoods include commercial and institutional uses that contribute to their character. Neighborhood businesses, retail districts, schools, parks, recreational facilities, houses of worship and other public facilities all make our communities more livable. These uses provide strong centers that reinforce neighborhood identity and provide destinations and services for residents. They too must be protected and stabilized.

220.5 (13) The recent population boom has triggered a crisis of affordability in the city, creating a hardship for many District residents and changing the character of neighborhoods. The preservation of existing affordable housing and the production of new affordable housing, especially for low-income and workforce households, are essential to avoid a deepening of racial and economic divides in the city, and must occur city-wide to achieve fair housing objectives. Affordable renter-and owner-occupied housing production and preservation is central to the idea of growing more inclusively, as is the utilization of tools such as public housing, community land trusts, and limited equity cooperatives that help keep the costs of land affordable, particularly in areas with low homeownership rates and those at risk of cost increases due to housing speculation.

220.6 (14) The District of Columbia contains many buildings and sites that contribute to its identity. Protecting historic resources through preservation laws and other programs is essential to retain the heritage that defines and distinguishes the city. Special efforts should be made to conserve row houses as the defining element of many District neighborhoods, and to restore neighborhood "main streets" through sensitive renovation and updating. The District's music, art, narratives, institutions, and other cultural assets are also integral to create a community's identity and sense of place. Efforts should also be made to support, enhance, and protect these cultural assets.

220.7 (15) Each neighborhood is an integral part of a diverse larger community that contributes to the District's identity. Growing an inclusive city means that all neighborhoods should share in the overall social responsibilities of the community, including accommodating the overall growth in new residents, housing the homeless, feeding the hungry, and accommodating the disabled.

220.8 (16) Enhanced public safety is one of the District's highest priorities and is vital to the health of our neighborhoods. The District must continue to improve safety and security, and ensure timely and high-quality emergency police, fi re, and medical assistance. This will maintain established neighborhoods, enable the most vulnerable residents to sustain their communities, and decrease exposure to collective trauma. Moreover, the District must engage in appropriate planning and capital investments to reduce the likelihood and severity of future emergencies.

220.9 (17) Confidence in government begins at the neighborhood level. It is built block-by-block, based on day-to-day relationships and experiences. Meaningful participation and responsive neighborhood services are essential to sustain successful neighborhoods.

220.10 (18) Public input in decisions about land use and development is an essential part of creating successful neighborhoods, from development of the Comprehensive Plan to every facet of its implementation.

220.11 Policies and actions to support neighborhoods cut across many Comprehensive Plan topics and appear throughout this document. Wherever they may appear, these policies are underpinned by the common goal of conserving functioning, stable neighborhoods and improving those that need redirection or enhancement.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 220*

##### **10-A DCMR § 221** INCREASING ACCESS TO EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a221 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A221}

221.1 (19) Increasing access to jobs and education by District residents is fundamental to improving the lives and economic well-being of District residents. Quality education equips students with the skills and tools to succeed.

221.2 (20) An economically strong and viable District of Columbia is essential to the economic health and well-being of the region. Thus, a broad spectrum of private and public growth (with an appropriate level of supporting infrastructure) should be encouraged. The District's economic development strategies must capitalize on the city's location at the center of the region's transportation and communication systems.

221.3 (21) Increasing access to education is linked to broader social goals such as increasing access to employment, strengthening families, creating a better future for the city's youth, and reducing chronic and concentrated poverty. Therefore, physical plans for the city must be accompanied by plans and programs to improve our educational system, improve literacy and job training, ensure access to high-quality public primary and secondary education in all neighborhoods, and link residents to quality jobs.

221.4 (22) The overarching goals of the Comprehensive Plan cannot be achieved without sustained investment in public school and library facilities. The physical condition of these facilities must be of good quality before the vision of a more inclusive city can be truly achieved.

221.5 (23) Colleges and universities make the District an intellectual capital as well as a political capital. They are an essential part of the District's plans to grow its "knowledge based" economy, improve access to learning, and broaden economic prosperity for all District residents. Sustaining our colleges and universities is important, as is protecting the integrity of the communities of which they are a part. Encouraging access to higher education for all residents is vitally important, as is locating higher education facilities in neighborhoods currently underserved by such facilities.

221.6 (24) Land-development policies should be focused to create job opportunities for District residents. This means that sufficient land should be planned and zoned for new job centers in areas with high unemployment and under-employment. A mix of employment opportunities to meet the needs of residents with varied job skills should be provided.

221.7 (25) Providing more efficient, convenient, and affordable transportation for residents to access jobs in the District and in the surrounding region is critical to achieve the goal of increasing District residents' access to employment.

221.8 (26) Downtown should be strengthened as the region's major employment center, as its cultural center, as a center for government, tourism and international business, and as an exciting urban mixed-use neighborhood. Policies should strive to increase the number of jobs for District residents, enhance retail opportunities, increase the number of residential units, promote access to Downtown from across the District and the region, and ensure Downtown's prominence as the heart of the city.

221.9 (27) Despite the recent economic resurgence in the city, the District has yet to reach its full economic potential. Expanding the economy means increasing shopping and services for many District neighborhoods, particularly east of the Anacostia River, bringing tourists beyond the National Mall and into the city's business districts, and creating more opportunities for local entrepreneurs and small businesses. The District's economic development expenditures should help support local businesses and provide economic benefits to the community.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 221*

##### **10-A DCMR § 222** CONNECTING THE CITY: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a222 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A222}

222.1 (28) Increased mobility can no longer be achieved simply by building more roads. The priority must be on investment in other forms of transportation, particularly transit. Mobility can be enhanced further by improving the connections between different transportation modes, improving safety and security of users of all transportation modes, and increasing system efficiency.

222.2 (29) Transportation facilities, including streets, bridges, transit, sidewalks, and paths, provide access to land and they provide mobility for residents and others. Investments in the transportation network must be equitably distributed, prioritize safety, access and sustainable transportation, and balance the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, autos and delivery vehicles, as well as the needs of residents and others to move around and through the city.

222.3 (30) Washington's wide avenues are a lasting legacy of the 1791 L'Enfant Plan and are still one of the city's most distinctive features. The "great streets" of the city should be reinforced as an element of Washington's design through transportation, streetscape, and economic development programs.

222.4 (31) Connections to and between the city's celebrated open spaces, such as Rock Creek Park and the National Mall, should be improved. At the same time, creation of new parks along the Anacostia River and enhancement of the federal Fort Circle Parks, should be supported to connect communities and enhance "green infrastructure" in the city.

222.5 (32) The District continues to grow in reputation as an international cultural center. To sustain this growth, it must continue to support a healthy arts and cultural community through its land use, housing, and economic development policies. The power of the arts to express the identity of each community while connecting neighborhoods and residents must be recognized.

222.6 (33) Residents are connected by places of "common ground," such as Union Station and Eastern Market. Such public gathering places should be protected and should be created in all parts of the city as development and change occurs.

222.7 (34) The District's communities are connected by a shared heritage of urban design, reflecting the legacy of the L 'Enfant Plan, the McMillan Plan, the Height Act of 1910, and preservation of much of the historic urban fabric. After more than two centuries of building, the nation's capital is still a remarkable place. Urban design and streetscape policies must retain the historic, majestic, and beautiful qualities that make Washington unique among American cities.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 222*

##### **10-A DCMR § 223** BUILDING GREEN AND HEALTHY COMMUNITIES: GUIDING PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-a223 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A223}

223.1 (35) Focus the city 's resilience goals on supporting inclusive growth for all residents, preparing the city for the impacts of climate change, and embracing advances in technology, while minimizing the negative impacts of change.

223.2 (36) The site selected for the national capital was characterized by a very special topography, including hills interlaced with broad rivers and streams. The topography allowed for the construction of a special collection of buildings that gives the District a unique profile. This profile has been further protected by local and national ordinances and must continue to be protected in the future. This should include the protection of views and vistas and the enhancement of city gateways.

223.3 (37) The earth, water, air, and biotic resources of the District must be protected. Furthermore, such resources should be restored and enhanced where they have been degraded by past human activities. In particular, reforestation of the District and maintenance of its tree cover should be emphasized to sustain the District's reputation as one of America's "greenest" cities.

223.4 (38) As the nation's capital, the District should be a role model for environmental sustainability. Building construction and renovation should minimize the use of nonrenewable resources, promote energy and water conservation, encourage the use of distributed energy resources like rooftop solar, and reduce harmful effects on the natural environment.

223.5 (39) Planning decisions should improve the health of District residents by reducing exposure to hazardous materials, improving the quality of surface and groundwater, and encouraging land-use patterns and land uses that reduce air pollution and facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel.

223.6 (40) The District's parks and open spaces provide health, recreational, psychological, aesthetic, and ecological benefits that contribute to the quality of life. Maintenance and improvement of existing parks and increased access to open space and recreation across the city are basic elements of the city 's vision. The District's public open spaces should be protected against exploitation, and their recreational and environmental values should be conserved.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 223*

##### **10-A DCMR § 224** PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER {#sec-10-a224 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A224}

224.1 Taken together, the forces driving change, growth projections, and guiding principles in the Framework Element provide a foundation for planning the future of the District of Columbia. The subsequent elements of the Comprehensive Plan following this Framework Element examine these conditions in much more detail and outline the journey from vision to reality.

224.2 The Comprehensive Plan provides direction to many District agencies in several important ways. One way is its role in careful land-use decisions that accommodate growth and ensure that the city is an inclusive and desirable place to live and work. Another is through continuing consideration of the plan's infrastructure priorities to inform the District's Capital Improvement Plan.

224.3 The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations are linked in law, and subsequently in application. A Congressional Act of June 20, 193 8 established that zoning "regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan...". In 1973, the District of Columbia Home Rule charter included changes to the 1938 Act, as follows: "Zoning maps and regulations, and amendments thereto, shall not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan for the national capital" (emphasis added). The relationship between the Comprehensive Plan and the District's Zoning Regulations, and how these are used in the city's development review process, is described below.

224.4 The Comprehensive Plan, which includes a Generalized Policy Map and a Future Land Use Map, provides generalized guidance. The Generalized Policy Map provides guidance on whether areas are designated for conservation, enhancement, or change, as explained in Section 225. The Future Land Use Map shows anticipated future land uses, which may be the same, or different than, the current land uses. Both maps are part of the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the categories used for each map are described later in this Framework.

224.5 Small Area Plans are prepared with community input, to provide more detailed planning guidance, and typically are approved by resolution of the Council. Unless a Small Area Plan has been made binding on the Zoning Commission through its enactment as part of a Comprehensive Plan amendment, a Small Area Plan provides only supplemental guidance to the Zoning Commission and it does so only to the extent it does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.

224.6 The Zoning Commission is required to use the Comprehensive Plan in its land use decision-making. The Zoning Commission may amend the District of Columbia zoning map in two ways, both requiring a finding of "not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan." The first way is to establish a zone district for a specific parcel or an area of land. A zone district specifies uses allowed as a matter-of-right or through a special exception, and development standards such as maximum density, height, and lot occupancy.

224.7 The second way is through a Planned Unit Development (PUD), often for sites that have more than one parcel or building. The goal of a PUD is to permit development flexibility greater than specified by matter-of-right zoning, such as increased building height or density, provided that the project offers a commendable number or quality of public benefits, and protects and advances the public health, safety, welfare, and convenience. These public benefits should be lasting and are developed through discussions between developers, District representatives, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, civic organizations, and the community. As part of the PUD process, the Zoning Commission may include a zoning map amendment for the purpose of the PUD, which is applicable only for the duration of the PUD, and subject to PUD conditions. The PUD process is not to be used to circumvent the intent and purposes of the Zoning Regulations or result in an action inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In considering whether a PUD is "not inconsistent" with the Comprehensive Plan, it is appropriate to consider the context of the entire site, such as aggregating density on one portion so as to increase open space on another portion - achieving an overall density that is consistent with the Plan.

224.8 In its decision-making, the Zoning Commission must make a finding of "not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan." To do so, the Zoning Commission must consider the many competing, and sometimes conflicting, policies of the Comprehensive Plan, along with the various uses, development standards and requirements of the zone districts. It is the responsibility of the Zoning Commission to consider and balance those policies relevant and material to the individual case before it in its decision-making, and clearly explain its decision-making rationale.

224.9 Specific public benefits are determined through each PUD application and should respond to critical issues facing the District as identified in the Comprehensive Plan and through the PUD process itself. In light of the acute need to preserve and build affordable housing, described in Section 206, and to prevent displacement of on-site residents, the following should be considered as high-priority public benefits in the evaluation of residential PUDs:

The production of new affordable housing units above and beyond existing legal requirements or a net increase in the number of affordable units that exist on-site;

The preservation of housing units made affordable through subsidy, covenant, or rent control, or replacement of such units at the same affordability level and similar household size;

The minimizing of unnecessary off-site relocation through the construction of new units before the demolition of existing occupied units; and

The right of existing residents of a redevelopment site to return to new on-site units at affordability levels similar to or greater than existing units.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 224*

##### **10-A DCMR § 225** GENERALIZED POLICY MAP {#sec-10-a225 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A225}

225.1 Purpose of the Generalized Policy Map:

The purpose of the Generalized Policy Map is to categorize how different parts of the District may change between 2005 and 2025. It highlights areas where more detailed policies are necessary, both within the Comprehensive Plan and in follow-up plans, to manage this change.

225.2 The map should be used to guide land-use decision-making in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan text, the Future Land Use Map, and other Comprehensive Plan maps. Boundaries on the map are to be interpreted in concert with these other sources, as well as the context of each location.

225.3 Categories:

The Generalized Policy Map identifies the following four different types of areas:

Neighborhood Conservation Areas, Neighborhood Enhancement Areas, Land Use Change Areas, and Commercial/Mixed Use Areas. Although each area has specific characteristics, all provide opportunities for future development that advances District goals and policies.

225.4 Neighborhood Conservation Areas:

Neighborhood Conservation areas have little vacant or underutilized land. They are generally residential in character. Maintenance of existing land uses and community character is anticipated over the next 20 years. Where change occurs, it will typically be modest in scale and will consist primarily of infill housing, public facilities, and institutional uses. Major changes in density over current (20 17) conditions are not expected but some new development and reuse opportunities are anticipated, and these can support conservation of neighborhood character where guided by Comprehensive Plan policies and the Future Land Use Map. Neighborhood Conservation Areas that are designated "PDR" on the Future Land Use Map are expected to be retained with the mix of industrial, office, and retail uses they have historically provided.

225.5 The guiding philosophy in Neighborhood Conservation Areas is to conserve and enhance established neighborhoods, but not preclude development, particularly to address city-wide housing needs. Limited development and redevelopment opportunities do exist within these areas. The diversity of land uses and building types in these areas should be maintained and new development, redevelopment, and alterations should be compatible with the existing scale, natural features, and character of each area. Densities in Neighborhood Conservation Areas are guided by the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan policies. Approaches to managing context-sensitive growth in Neighborhood Conservation Areas may vary based on neighborhood socio-economic and development characteristics. In areas with access to opportunities, services, and amenities, more levels of housing affordability should be accommodated. Areas facing housing insecurity (see Section 206.4) and displacement should emphasize preserving affordable housing and enhancing neighborhood services, amenities, and access to opportunities.

225.6 Neighborhood Enhancement Areas:

Neighborhood Enhancement Areas are neighborhoods with substantial amounts of vacant and underutilized land. They include areas that are primarily residential in character; as well as mixed-use and industrial areas. Many of these areas are characterized by a patchwork of existing homes and individual vacant lots, some privately owned and others owned by the public sector or non-profit developers. These areas present opportunities for compatible infill development, including new single-family homes, townhomes, other density housing types, mixed-use buildings, and, where appropriate, light industrial facilities. Land uses that reflect the historical mixture and diversity of each community and promote inclusivity should be encouraged.

225.7 The guiding philosophy in Neighborhood Enhancement Areas is to ensure that new development responds to the existing character, natural features, and existing/planned infrastructure capacity. New housing should be encouraged to improve the neighborhood and must be consistent with the land-use designation on the Future Land Use Map and with Comprehensive Plan policies. The unique and special qualities of each area should be maintained and conserved, and overall neighborhood character should be protected or enhanced as development takes place. Publicly owned open space within these areas should be preserved and enhanced to make these communities more attractive and desirable.

225.8 The main difference between Neighborhood Enhancement Areas and Neighborhood Conservation Areas is the large amount of vacant and underutilized land that exists in the Enhancement Areas. Neighborhood Enhancement Areas often contain many acres of undeveloped lots, whereas Neighborhood Conservation Areas appear to be mostly " built out." Existing housing should be enhanced through rehabilitation assistance. New development in these areas should support neighborhood and city-wide housing needs, reduce crime and blight, and attract complementary new uses and services that better serve the needs of existing and future residents.

225.9 Land Use Change Areas:

Land Use Change Areas are areas where change to a different land use from what exists today is anticipated. In some cases, the Future Land Use Map depicts the specific mix of uses expected for these areas. In other cases, the Future Land Use Map shows these sites as "Federal," indicating the District does not currently have the authority to develop appropriate plans for these areas but expects to have this authority by 2025.

225.10 There are more than two dozen Land Use Change Areas identified on the Generalized Policy Map. They include many of the city 's large development opportunity sites, and other smaller sites that are undergoing redevelopment or that are anticipated to undergo redevelopment. Together, they represent much of the city's supply of vacant and underutilized land.

225.11 The guiding philosophy in the Land Use Change Areas is to encourage and facilitate new development and promote the adaptive reuse of existing structures. Many of these areas have the capacity to become mixed-use communities containing housing, retail shops, services, workplaces, parks, and civic facilities. The Comprehensive Plan's Area Elements provide additional policies to guide development and redevelopment within the Land Use Change Areas, including the desired mix of uses in each area.

225.12 As Land Use Change Areas are redeveloped, the District aspires to create high quality neighborhoods that demonstrate exemplary site and architectural design and innovative environmental features, compatible with nearby neighborhoods, protect cultural and historic assets, and provide significant affordable-housing and employment opportunities. Measures to ensure that public benefits are commensurate with increased density and to avoid and mitigate undesirable impacts of development of the Land Use Change Areas upon adjacent neighborhoods should be required as necessary. Such measures should prioritize equity by accounting for the needs of underserved communities.

225.13 Commercial/Mixed Use Areas:

The areas identified as commercial or mixed use correspond to the city's business districts, many of which form the heart of the city's neighborhoods. Five categories are used, defining the physical and economic character of each area along with generalized long-range conservation and development objectives. The commercial areas are: "Main Street Mixed Use Corridors," "Neighborhood Commercial Centers," "Multi-Neighborhood Centers," "Regional Centers," and the "Central Employment Area." All categories allow commercial and residential uses.

225.14 Main Street Mixed Use Corridors:

These are traditional commercial business corridors with a concentration of older storefronts along the street. The area served can vary from one neighborhood (e.g., 14th Street Heights or Barracks Row) to multiple neighborhoods (e.g., Dupont Circle, H Street, or Adams Morgan). Their common feature is that they have a pedestrian-oriented environment with traditional storefronts. Many have upper-story residential or office uses. Some corridors are underutilized, with capacity for redevelopment. Conservation and enhancement of these corridors is desired to foster economic and housing opportunities and serve neighborhood needs. Any development or redevelopment that occurs should support transit use and enhance the pedestrian environment.

225.15 Neighborhood Commercial Centers:

Neighborhood Commercial Centers meet the day-to-day needs of residents and workers in the adjacent neighborhoods. The area served by a Neighborhood Commercial Center is usually less than one mile. Typical uses include convenience stores, sundries, small food markets, supermarkets, branch banks, restaurants, and basic services such as dry cleaners, hair cutting, and childcare. Office space for small businesses, such as local real estate and insurance offices, doctors and dentists, and similar uses, also may be found in such locations. Many buildings have upper-story residential uses.

225.16 Unlike Main Street Mixed Use Corridors, the Neighborhood Commercial Centers include both auto-oriented centers and pedestrian-oriented shopping areas. Examples include Penn Branch Shopping Center on Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E. and the Spring Valley Shopping Center on Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. New development and redevelopment within Neighborhood Commercial Centers must be managed to conserve the economic viability of these areas while allowing additional development, including residential, that complements existing uses.

225.17 Multi-Neighborhood Centers:

Multi-Neighborhood Centers contain many of the same activities as Neighborhood Commercial Centers, but in greater depth and variety. The area served by a Multi-Neighborhood Center is typically one to three miles. These centers are generally found at major intersections and along key transit routes. These centers might include supermarkets, general merchandise stores, drug stores, restaurants, specialty shops, apparel stores, and a variety of service-oriented businesses. These centers also may include residential and office space for small businesses, although their primary function remains retail trade.

225.18 Examples of Multi-Neighborhood Centers include Hechinger Mall, Columbia Heights, Brentwood, and Skyland Shopping Centers. Mixed-use infill development at these centers should be encouraged to provide new retail and service uses, and additional housing and job opportunities. Infrastructure improvements to allow safe access by all transportation modes to these centers are also important for increasing equitable access.

225.19 Regional Centers:

Regional Centers have the largest range of commercial functions outside the Central Employment Area and are likely to have major department stores, many specialty shops, concentrations of restaurants, movies, and other leisure or entertainment facilities. They typically draw patrons from across the city, as well as patrons from nearby suburban areas. A large office component is also associated with Regional Centers. As with Multi-Neighborhood Centers, infill development at Regional Centers should provide new retail, entertainment, service uses, additional housing, and employment opportunities.

225.20 These centers are generally located along major arterials and are served by transit, but may also see demand for parking. Off-street parking may be provided on a cooperative/shared basis within the area, using both self-contained and nearby commercial parking lots and garages, while also ensuring access for other transportation modes. Regional centers are higher in density and intensity of use than other commercial areas, except downtown. Building height, massing, and density should support the role of regional centers while scaling appropriately to development in adjoining communities and should be further guided by policies in the Land Use Element and the Area Elements. Examples of regional centers include Friendship Heights and Georgetown.

225.21 Central Employment Area:

The Central Employment Area is the business and retail heart of the District and the metropolitan area. It has the widest variety of commercial uses, including but not limited to major government and corporate offices; retail, cultural, and entertainment uses; hotels, restaurants, and other hospitality uses; as well as high-density residential uses. The Central Employment Area draws patrons, workers, and visitors from across the region, and, consequently, safe access for all transportation modes should be provided. The Comprehensive Plan's Land Use and Economic Development Elements, and the Central Washington Area and Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Elements provide additional guidance, policies and actions related to the Central Employment Area.

225.22 Other Areas:

The Generalized Policy Map also identifies parks and open space, land owned by or under the jurisdiction of the District or federal government, federal lands with federal buildings, Downtown Washington, and major institutional land uses. The fact that these areas are not designated as Conservation, Enhancement, or Land Use Change Areas does not mean they are exempt from the Comprehensive Plan or that their land uses will remain static. Public parks and public open space will be conserved and carefully managed in the future. Federal lands are called out to acknowledge the District's limited jurisdiction over them but are still discussed in the text of the District Elements. Downtown includes its own set of conservation, enhancement, and change areas, described in more detail in the Central Washington Area Element. Much of the land identified as institutional on the map represents colleges and universities; change and infill can be expected on each campus consistent with campus plans. Other institutional sites, including hospitals and religious orders, likewise may see new buildings or facilities added. Policies in the Land Use and the Educational Facilities Elements address the compatibility of such uses with surrounding neighborhoods.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 225*

##### **10-A DCMR § 226** THE DISTRICT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP {#sec-10-a226 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A226}

226.1 Maps showing the general distribution and character of future land uses in the city have been an essential part of the Comprehensive Plan for over half a century. Both the 1950 and 1967 Comprehensive Plans for the National Capital depicted " high density," "moderate density," and "low density" residential neighborhoods. These Plans further defined "Local Commercial" areas along many corridor streets, a "Downtown Commercial" area, and a "Central Federal Employment Area". The Maps also called out hospitals, universities, industrial areas, and federal installations.

226.2 The District portion of the 1984 Comprehensive Plan- the first Plan of the Home Rule era - was initially adopted without a Land Use Map. A set of four large maps was adopted in 1985, along with the Land Use Element itself. In the years that followed, the four maps were consolidated into two maps-a Generalized Land Use Map and a Generalized Land Use Policy Map.

226.3 An illustrative "paintbrush" format, reminiscent of those used in the 1950 and 1967 Plans, was initially used for the 1985 Land Use Map. This format was rejected as being too imprecise and " bloblike." ln subsequent years it was replaced by a map with more clearly defined edges, although the maps continue to note that these designations are generalized. The Comprehensive Plan text stipulated that streets and street names be displayed on the map to ensure its legibility. Its 15 land use categories were defined in broad terms- typical uses were described, but no density or intensity ranges were assigned.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 226*

##### **10-A DCMR § 227** FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND CATEGORIES {#sec-10-a227 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A227}

227.1 Purpose of the Future Land Use Map:

The Future Land Use Map is part of the adopted Comprehensive Plan and carries the same legal weight as the Plan document itself. The Map uses color-coded categories to express public policy for future land uses across the city. The Future Land Use Map is intended to be used in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan's policies and actions. Preparation of this map is explicitly required by D.C. Law; its purpose is to "represent the land use policies set forth in the proposed Land Use Element," using "standardized colors for planning maps." (D.C. Official Code§ 1-306.02).

227.2 Each land use category identifies representative zoning districts and states that other zoning districts may apply. The Zoning Commission, in selecting a zone district such as through a Planned Unit Development or Zoning Map Amendment, determines if it is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In making this determination for a selected zone district, the Zoning Commission considers and balances the competing and sometimes conflicting aspects of the Comprehensive Plan, including the policies and text; the intent of the Future Land Use Map land use category; and the Future Land Use Map and Generalized Policy Map. Under the Zoning Regulations, a proposed Planned Unit Development should not result in unacceptable project impacts on the surrounding area.

227.3 Definitions of Land Use Categories: Sections 227.4 through 227.23 describe the land use categories depicted on the Future Land Use Map. References herein to density, scale, use or other features are intended to distinguish generally between the categories. Citing Floor Area Ratios (FAR) in the land use categories does not eliminate the need for height limits and other dimensional requirements established in the Zoning Regulations for a particular zone district, although the Zoning Regulations provide "flexibility around such standards for Inclusionary Zoning and Planned Unit Developments. The residential and commercial land use categories run a spectrum from low to high density. It is important to consider the categories in relationship to each other. For each category, one to three zone districts are listed as illustrative. Accordingly, other zones may also apply. Some zones may straddle categories, reflecting the higher end of one category, or the lower end of another.

227.4 Definitions of Land Use Categories: Residential Categories.

Four residential categories appear on the Future Land Use Map. Density in the residential categories is typically calculated either as the number of dwelling units per minimum lot area, or as a FAR. FAR is a ratio between a building's total gross floor area and lot area, and is used to regulate density. Using this approach, some aspects of a building may be higher than is characteristic for the land use category, but still consistent with the category's density range. Similarly, density on a portion of a site may be greater, provided the density for the site overall is not inconsistent with the specified range.

227.5 Low Density Residential: This designation is used to define neighborhoods generally, but not exclusively, suited for single family detached and semi-detached housing units with front, back, and side yards. The R-1 and R-2 Zone Districts are consistent with the Low Density Residential category, and other zones may also apply.

227.6 Moderate Density Residential: This designation is used to define neighborhoods generally, but not exclusively, suited for row houses as well as low-rise garden apartment complexes. The designation also applies to areas characterized by a mix of single-family homes, two- to four-unit buildings, row houses, and low-rise apartment buildings. In some neighborhoods with this designation, there may also be existing multi-story apartments, many built decades ago when the areas were zoned for more dense uses (or were not zoned at all). Density in Moderate Density Residential areas is typically calculated either as the number of dwelling units per minimum lot area, or as a FAR up to 1.8, although greater density may be possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The R-3, RF, and RA-2 Zone Districts are consistent with the Moderate Density Residential category, and other zones may also apply.

227.7 Medium Density Residential: This designation is used to define neighborhoods or areas generally, but not exclusively, suited for mid-rise apartment buildings. The Medium Density Residential designation also may apply to taller residential buildings surrounded by large areas of permanent open space. Pockets of low and moderate density housing may exist within these areas. Density typically ranges from 1.8 to 4.0 FAR, although greater density may be possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The RA-3 Zone District is consistent with the Medium Density Residential category, and other zones may also apply.

227.8 High Density Residential: This designation is used to define neighborhoods and corridors generally, but not exclusively, suited for high-rise apartment buildings. Pockets of less dense housing may exist within these areas. Density is typically greater than a FAR of 4.0, and greater density may be possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The RA-4 and RA-5 Zone Districts are consistent with the High Density Residential category, and other zones may also apply.

227.9 Commercial Categories: Four commercial categories appear on the Map. The predominant use is commercial, with housing permitted in all categories, and incentivized in all but the High Density category. Although all Commercial Categories accommodate a mix of uses, a separate category (Mixed Use, defined in Section 227.20) is used to identify areas where the mixing of commercial, residential, and sometimes industrial uses is strongly encouraged. Density is typically calculated as a FAR. Using this approach, some aspects of a building may be higher than is characteristic for the land use category, but still consistent with the category's density range. Similarly, density on a portion of a site may be greater, provided the density for the site overall is not inconsistent with the specified range.

227.10 Low Density Commercial: This designation is used to define shopping and service areas that are generally lower in scale and intensity. Retail, office, and service businesses are the predominant uses. Areas with this designation range from small business districts that draw primarily from the surrounding neighborhoods to larger business districts that draw from a broader market area. Their common feature is that they are comprised primarily of commercial and mixed-use buildings that range in density generally up to a FAR of2.5, with greater density possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The MU-3 and MU-4 Zone Districts are consistent with the Low Density category, and other zones may also apply.

227.11 Moderate Density Commercial: This designation is used to define shopping and service areas that are somewhat greater in scale and intensity than the Low-Density Commercial areas. Retail, office, and service businesses are the predominant uses. Areas with this designation range from small business districts that draw primarily from the surrounding neighborhoods to larger business districts uses that draw from a broader market area. Buildings are larger and/or taller than those in Low Density Commercial areas. Density typically ranges between a FAR of2.5 and 4.0, with greater density possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The MU-5 and MU-7 Zone Districts are representative of zone districts consistent with the Moderate Density Commercial category, and other zones may also apply.

227.12 Medium Density Commercial: This designation is used to define shopping and service areas that are somewhat greater in scale and intensity than the Moderate Density Commercial areas. Retail, office, and service businesses are the predominant uses, although residential uses are common. Areas with this designation generally draw from a citywide market area. Buildings are larger and/or taller than those in Moderate Density Commercial areas. Density typically ranges between a FAR of 4.0 and 6.0, with greater density possible when complying with Inclusionary Zoning or when approved through a Planned Unit Development. The MU-8 and MU-10 Zone Districts are consistent with the Medium Density category, and other zones may also apply.

227.13 High Density Commercial: This designation is used to define the central employment district, other major office centers, and other commercial areas with the greatest scale and intensity of use in the District. Office and mixed office/retail buildings with densities greater than a FAR of 6.0 are the predominant use, although high-rise residential and many lower scale buildings (including historic buildings) are interspersed. The MU-9, D-3, and D-6 Zone Districts are consistent with the High Density Commercial category, and other zones may also apply.

227.14 Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR): The Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) category is used to define areas characterized by manufacturing, warehousing, wholesale and distribution centers, transportation services, food services, printers and publishers, tourism support services, and commercial, municipal, and utility activities which may require substantial buffering from housing and other noise-, air-pollution and light-sensitive uses. This category is also used to denote railroad rights-of-way, switching and maintenance yards, bus garages, and uses related to the movement of freight, such as truck terminals. It is important to ensure that adequate, appropriate land is provided for these PDR uses that are critical to supporting the retail, transportation and service needs of the city. A variety of zone districts apply within PDR areas, recognizing the different intensities of use and impacts generated by various PDR activities. The corresponding zone category is PDR, and the present density and height limits set in these districts are expected to remain for the foreseeable future. Other districts may also apply where the PDR map designation is striped with other land uses. In an area striped to include PDR, development must include PDR space, and on sites containing existing PDR space the amount of PDR space on-site should be substantially preserved.

227.15 Public and Institutional Categories:

Four Public and Institutional Land Use categories appear on the Map, as follows:

227.16 Federal: This designation includes land and facilities owned, occupied and used by the federal government, excluding parks and open space. Uses include military bases, federal government buildings, the International Chancery Center, federal hospitals, museums, and similar federal government activities. The "Federal" category generally denotes federal ownership and use. Land with this designation is generally not subject to zoning. In the event federal interests on any given federal site terminate, zoning for these areas should be established in a manner that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies.

227.17 Local Public Facilities: This designation includes land and facilities occupied and used by the District of Columbia government or other local government agencies (such as WMAT A), excluding parks and open space. Uses include public schools including charter schools, public hospitals, government office complexes, and similar local government activities. Other non-governmental facilities may be co-located on site. While included in this category, local public facilities smaller than one acre including some of the District 's libraries, police and fire stations, and similar uses may not appear on the map due to scale. Zoning designations vary depending on surrounding uses.

227.18 Institutional: This designation includes land and facilities occupied and used by colleges and universities, large private schools, hospitals, religious organizations, and similar institutions. While included in this category, smaller institutional uses such as churches are generally not mapped, unless they are located on sites that are several acres in size. Zoning designations vary depending on surrounding uses. Institutional uses are also permitted in other land use categories.

227.19 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space: This designation includes the federal and District park systems, including the National Parks, such as the National Mall; the circles and squares of the L'Enfant city and District neighborhoods; settings for significant commemorative works, certain federal buildings such as the White House and the U.S. Capitol grounds, and museums; and District-operated parks and associated recreation centers. It also includes permanent open space uses such as cemeteries, open space associated with utilities such as the Dalecarlia and McMillan Reservoirs, and open space along highways such as Suitland Parkway. This category includes a mix of passive open space (for resource conservation and habitat protection) and active open space (for recreation). While included in this category, parks smaller than one acre - including many of the triangles along the city's avenues - may not appear on the map due to scale. Zoning designations for these areas vary. The federal parklands are generally unzoned, and District parklands tend to be zoned the same as surrounding land uses.

227.20 Mixed Use Categories: The Future Land Use Map indicates areas where the mixing of two or more land uses is especially encouraged. The particular combination of uses desired in a given area is depicted in striped patterns, with stripe colors corresponding to the categories defined on the previous pages. A Mixed Use Future Land Use Map designation should not be confused with the Mixed Use (MU) zoning districts, although they frequently apply to the same area or parcel of land. The Mixed Use Category generally applies in the following circumstances:

Established, pedestrian-oriented commercial areas that also include substantial amounts of housing, typically on the upper stories of buildings with ground-floor retail or office uses;

Commercial corridors or districts which may not contain substantial amounts of housing today, but where more housing is desired in the future. The pattern envisioned for such areas is typically one of pedestrian-oriented streets, with ground-floor retail or office uses and upper story housing;

Large sites (generally greater than 10 acres in size), where opportunities for multiple uses exist, but a plan depicting the precise location of these uses has yet to be prepared; and

d. Development that includes residential uses, particularly affordable housing, and residentially compatible industrial uses, typically achieved through a Planned Unit Development or in a zone district that allows such a mix of uses.

227.21 The general density and intensity of development within a given Mixed Use area is determined by the specific mix of uses shown. If the desired outcome is to emphasize one use over the other (for example, ground-floor retail with three stories of housing above), the Future Land Use Map may note the dominant use by showing it at a slightly higher density than the other use in the mix (in this case, Moderate Density Residential/Low Density Commercial). The Comprehensive Plan Area Elements may also provide detail on the specific mix of uses envisioned.

227.22 It should also be acknowledged that because of the scale of the Future Land Use Map and the fine-grained pattern of land use in older parts of the city, many of the areas shown purely as "Commercial" may also contain other uses, including housing. Likewise, some of the areas shown as purely "Residential" contain existing incidental commercial uses such as corner stores or gas stations, or established institutional uses, such as places of worship. The "Mixed Use" designation is intended primarily for larger areas where no single use predominates today, or areas where multiple uses are specifically encouraged in the future.

227.23 A variety of zoning designations are used in Mixed Use areas, depending on the combination of uses, densities, and intensities. All zone districts formerly identified as commercial, SP, CR and Waterfront were renamed as MU zone districts in 2016, and are considered to be mixed use. Residential uses are permitted in all of the MU zones, however, so many Mixed Use areas may have MU zoning.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 227*

##### **10-A DCMR § 228** GUIDELINES FOR USING THE GENERALIZED POLICY MAP AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP {#sec-10-a228 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A228}

228.1 The Generalized Policy Map and Future Land Use Map are intended to provide generalized guidance for development and conservation decisions, and are considered in concert with other Comprehensive Plan policies. Several important parameters, defined below, apply to their use and interpretation.

The Future Land Use Map is not a zoning map. Whereas zoning maps are parcel-specific, and establish detailed requirements and development standards for setbacks, height, use, parking, and other attributes, the Future Land Use Map is intended to be "soft-edged" and does not follow parcel boundaries, and its categories do not specify allowable uses or development standards. By definition, the Future Land Use Map is to be interpreted broadly and the land use categories identify desired objectives.

The Future Land Use Map is a generalized depiction of intended uses in the horizon year of the Comprehensive Plan, roughly 20 years in the future. It is not an "existing land use map," although in many cases future uses in an area may be the same as those that exist today.

While the densities within any given area on the Future Land Use Map reflect all contiguous properties on a block, there may be individual buildings that are larger or smaller than these ranges within each area. Similarly, the land-use category definitions describe the general character of development in each area, citing typical Floor Area Ratios as appropriate. The granting of density bonuses (for example, through Planned Unit Developments or Inclusionary Zoning) may result in density that exceed the typical ranges cited here.

The zoning of any given area should be guided by the Future Land Use Map, interpreted in conjunction with the text of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Citywide Elements and the Area Elements.

The designation of an area with a particular Future Land Use Map category does not necessarily mean that the most intense zoning district described in that category is automatically permitted. And, even if a zone is not identified in a category, it can be permitted as described in Section 227.2. A range of densities and intensities applies within each category, and the use of different zone districts within each category should reinforce this range. There are many more zone districts than there are Comprehensive Plan land-use categories. Multiple zone districts should continue to be used to distinguish the different types of low- or moderate-density residential development which may occur within each area.

Some zone districts may be compatible with more than one Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation. As an example, the MU-4 zone is consistent with both the Low Density Commercial and the Moderate Density Commercial designation, depending on the prevailing character of the area and the adjacent uses.

g. The intent of the Future Land Use Map is to show use rather than ownership. However, in a number of cases, ownership is displayed to note the District's limited jurisdiction. Specifically, non-park federal facilities are shown as "Federal" even though the actual uses include housing and industry (e.g., Bolling Air Force Base), offices (e.g., the Federal Triangle), hospitals (e.g., Veteran's Administration), and other activities. Similarly, the "Local Public Facility" designation includes high-impact uses such as solid waste transfer stations and stadiums, as well as low-impact uses such as schools. Other maps in the Comprehensive Plan are used to show the specific types of public uses present in each area.

The Map does not show density or intensity on institutional and local public sites. If a change in use occurs on these sites in the future (for example, a school becomes surplus or is redeveloped), the new designations should be generally comparable in density or intensity to those in the vicinity, unless otherwise stated in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements or an approved Campus Plan.

Streets and public rights-of-way are not an explicit land-use category on the Future Land Use Map. Within any given area, the streets that pass through are assigned the same designation as the adjacent uses.

j. Urban renewal plans remain in effect for parts of the District of Columbia,

including Shaw, Downtown, and Fort Lincoln. These plans remain in effect and their controlling provisions must be considered as land use and zoning decisions are made.

k. If a development or redevelopment requires discretionary approvals, the

developer must address the permanent, offsite displacement of residents and businesses.

l. Finally, the Future Land Use Map and the Generalized Policy Map can be

amended. The Comprehensive Plan is intended to be a dynamic document that is periodically updated in response to the changing needs of the city. Requests to amend the maps can be made by residents, property owners, developers, and the District itself. In all cases, such changes require formal public hearings before the Council of the District of Columbia, and ample opportunities for formal public input. The process for Comprehensive Plan amendments is described in the Implementation Element.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 228*

##### **10-A DCMR § 229** INVESTING FOR AN INCLUSIVE CITY {#sec-10-a229 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A229}

229.1 Investing in adequate, well-maintained public facilities and infrastructure that meet the needs of a growing city will help implement the Comprehensive Plan and fulfill our vision of an inclusive city. Public facilities and infrastructure offer vital services to residents, businesses and visitors. They shape and enhance the public realm; provide affordable housing; contribute to health, wellness, and quality of life; support economic growth; and advance the District as a smart, sustainable, and resilient city.

229.2 Public facility and infrastructure investments should address three priorities: reach and maintain a state of good repair; add capacity necessary to meet the needs of growth; and address the forces driving change to successfully respond to future opportunities and challenges. Capital investments that incorporate sustainable, resilient, and high-quality design features and respond to emerging technologies make the District a more attractive, efficient place to live and work, and will pay future dividends by reducing costs to public health and the environment. These investments ensure that the city's transportation, housing at various income levels, communications, energy, water, and wastewater systems adequately serve the needs of the District, and that education, public-safety, and health and wellness facilities effectively and efficiently deliver high-quality services to residents, workers and visitors. The District must prioritize public investment in security, trauma, and violence prevention in the context of a public health crisis.

229.3 The District must use its resources and assets strategically to advance the well-being of all residents. When a development project depends on public subsidies, surplus land, and/or entitlements such as Zoning Map or Future Land Use Map amendments, Planned Unit Developments, variances, tax increment financing, and tax abatements, the District should leverage the enhanced value of the land that results. The enhanced value shall meet the equity needs of DC's neighborhoods in the form of deeply affordable housing and other priorities detailed in the Comprehensive Plan. The leverage can take the form of deeply affordable housing units in excess of the Inclusionary Zoning requirements, special assessment cash contributions or increased tax rates, or other tools supported by the Comprehensive Plan. As an example, transit infrastructure investments, such as a new station, should be aligned with land use policies that support uses, densities, and connections that support transit-oriented development. The primary goal of this equity-leveraging effort is to ensure that land-use policies and actions align with the public investment and that District residents' interests are balanced with the developers' interests.

Public and private infrastructure and facilities within in the District include:

Over 1,100 miles of streets, 2401 bridges, 1650 signalized intersections, and 70,000 streetlights;

40 stations and 38 miles of track within the regional Metrorail system;

87.9 miles of bicycle lanes, with 44 miles added since 2010, and 290 Capital Bikeshare stations;

Approximately 400 miles of fiber optic cable;

Over 40,000 subsidized affordable rental units;

236 traditional public and private charter schools, 26 public libraries, approximately 370 parks, and recreation facilities, and 60 public safety facilities;

Over 2,200 miles of electrical cable and related substations;

Over 2,300 miles of natural gas pipelines; and

Over 1,300 miles of drinking water pipes and I ,800 miles of sewer lines, with pumping stations.

229.5 Since the adoption of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, the District and other entities undertook a variety of important facility and infrastructure investments to improve the quality of life for District residents. These investments have largely replaced aging infrastructure, improved existing facilities, or addressed environmental problems; however, few investments have actually expanded capacity to meet the city's growing needs. Between 2006 and 2016, the city rehabilitated existing infrastructure such as schools, transit and electrical networks that were largely developed prior to the 1980's. The city benefitted from the increasing tax revenues from growth while not experiencing the costs of expanding infrastructure to the same degree. The same cannot be said going forward. Increasingly, further population and job growth will require investments in new capacity.

229.6 The Forecast of D.C. Residents by Age in Figure 2.11 provides an example of increased demand: the District can expect more than 21 ,000 additional school-age children and another 7,000 infants and toddlers by 2025. D.C. Public Schools has capacity, but not necessarily in the neighborhoods expected to have the greatest growth in children. Other public and private infrastructure has investment needs to address both deferred maintenance and upgrade out-of-date facilities before investments can be made to expand capacity. The Metro transportation system, facilities for municipal fleets, and the electrical grid are only a few examples of where new investments are necessary to meet the growing needs of the city.

229.7 Forecasted growth will occur with competing priorities, rising costs, uncertain federal resources, and limited borrowing capacity. This will challenge the District to seek new ways of delivering the underlying structural supports that serve the residents and businesses of the city. Adding to the complexity, the District must function as a city, county, and a state, along with serving as the nation's capital and the seat of the federal government. These are unique challenges not experienced by any other municipality in our nation.

229.8 The District's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is the official plan for making improvements to public facilities and infrastructure over a six-year horizon. The 2006 Comprehensive Plan strengthened the linkage between the Plan and the CIP. Proposed projects are now evaluated for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and other District policies and priorities. As a result, the Comprehensive Plan became a guide for capital investments, leading to greater coordination across agencies doing public facilities planning; and the development of review criteria for a more objective and transparent process.

229.9 Recognizing the difficulty of developing an appropriate capital plan to support the District's needs, within the resources available, the District has implemented a new modeling tool called the Capital Asset Replacement Scheduling System (CARSS). The tool provides a set of mechanisms and models that: enable the District to inventory and track all assets; uses asset condition assessments to determine the needs and timing for replacement; provide a tool to then prioritize and rank the associated capital projects, both new and maintenance projects; and then determine the funding gap and assess the impact on out-year budgets from insufficient capital budget.

229.10 The current FY 2017-2022 CI P allocates approximately $6.3 billion to a wide range of capital projects in the District, including maintenance, replacement, or upgrade of vehicular fleets for police, fire, and emergency medical services; street, sidewalks, and alley infrastructure; and public buildings and facilities, such as schools, recreation centers, parks, health and wellness facilities, and police, fire, and government administration buildings.

229.11 The District also uses a 15-year Long-Range Capital Financial Plan to estimate the replacement needs of aging assets, evaluate how population growth will require expansion of existing infrastructure and facilities, and determine the District's fiscal capacity to fund these projects. This long-range plan was conducted in 2016 and included an analysis that estimated a capital budget shortfall of approximately $4.2 billion through 2022. This gap includes unfunded new capital projects needed to support the growing population and unfunded capital maintenance of existing assets.

229.12 Perhaps the most significant challenge the District faces to meet the needs of growth is an already relatively high debt per capita. District law requires that annual debt service be no more than 12 percent of general fund expenditures. This means the city has limited capacity to borrow funds for new long-term investments. Going forward, the District must consider innovative ways to deliver and finance infrastructure, perhaps learning from other parts of the country experiencing rapid growth similar to that of the District.

229.13 The District has already begun the process. The Long-Range Capital Financial Plan represents a more rigorous and efficient analysis of capital needs and fiscal capacity. On large sites with significant infrastructure needs, such as the Wharf along the Southwest Waterfront, the District is using tools like tax increment financing or payments in lieu of taxes to fund the needed infrastructure for the projects. The District recently created an Office of Public Private Partnerships, which is charged with building collaborations between the private sector and District government to design, build, fund, operate, and/or maintain key infrastructure and facility projects. The Office is exploring ideas such as co-location of private sector uses on District-owned land and social-impact bonds to fund new local public facilities. All are important steps, but more is needed to fully invest in an inclusive city.

**History**
- *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)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 229*

### **10-A3** LAND USE ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 300** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A300}

300.1 The Land Use Element is the cornerstone of the Comprehensive Plan. It establishes the basic policies guiding the physical form of the District, and provides direction on a range of development, preservation, and land-use compatibility issues. The element describes the range of considerations and balancing of priorities involved in accommodating an array of land uses within Washington, DC.

300.2 The critical land use issues are addressed in this element. These include the following:

Providing adequate housing, particularly affordable housing;

Conserving, creating, and maintaining inclusive neighborhoods, while allowing new growth that fosters equity, including racial equity, and accessibility;

Strengthening downtown;

Enhancing neighborhood commercial districts and centers;

Balancing competing demands for finite land resources;

Directing growth and new development to achieve economic vitality and creating jobs while minimizing adverse impacts on residential areas and open spaces;

Promoting transit-accessible, sustainable development;

Improving resilience; and

Siting challenging land uses.

300.3 More than any other part of the Comprehensive Plan, this element lays out the policies through which growth and change occur, while conserving and enhancing neighborhoods, commercial districts, and other areas. The Land Use Element integrates and balances competing policies of all the other District Elements and should be given greater weight than other elements.

300.4 Although Washington, DC was almost fully developed by 1960, the demand for land, housing, and jobs has continued to fuel land use change. The changing needs of the federal government, private industry, and other institutions continually reshape the landscape. Aging, environmentally inefficient, and underused building stock requires refurbishment and replacement. The renewed popularity of urban living generates the need for more housing and new amenities.

300.5 Land use changes have the potential to make Washington, DC more vibrant, economically healthy, exciting, and even more environmentally sustainable, equitable, and resilient than it is today. But without proper direction and coordinated public investment, change can also be adverse. Not all areas of the District are as economically healthy, and not all are positioned to benefit from future change. The Land Use Element strives for positive outcomes in all parts of the District and for all residents by setting policies on appropriate uses and densities and describing how different uses can successfully co-exist.

300.7 The element is divided into several sections. The first section provides basic data on land use and density in Washington, DC. Subsequent sections of the element present policies and actions organized under the following major topic headings:

Shaping the District;

Creating and Maintaining Vibrant Neighborhoods; and

Balancing Competing Demands for Land.

The definitions of land use categories and descriptions of the Future Land Use Map and Generalized Policies Map may be found in Chapter 2 (Framework Element).

##### **10-A DCMR § 301** LAND USE PROFILE OF WASHINGTON, DC {#sec-10-a301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A301}

301.1 The District of Columbia comprises 69 square miles, including approximately eight square miles of water and 61 square miles of land. Land use patterns, illustrated in Map 3.1, reveal an expansive District core of about four-square miles centered on the open spaces of federal Washington, DC. The core is surrounded by an inner ring of moderate- to high-density residential and mixed-use neighborhoods, extending west to Georgetown, north to Columbia Heights and Petworth, east across Capitol Hill, and south to the Anacostia River and Near Southwest. Beyond the inner ring is an outer ring of less dense development, characterized largely by single-family housing and garden apartments. The two rings generally correspond to historic development patterns, with most of the inner ring developed by 1920 and the outer ring developed after 1920.

301.2 The impact of the District’s transportation network on land use patterns is apparent in Map 3.1. Most of the commercial and higher-density development beyond the core of Washington, DC hugs radial avenues like Connecticut Avenue NW and Pennsylvania Avenue SE. Most of the District’s industrial development follows the railroad corridors running from Union Station east along New York Avenue and north to Silver Spring. The historic connection between transportation and land use continues to shape the District today, with Metrorail station areas being the most robust activity centers.

301.3 Map 3.1: Existing Land Use 2017

301.4 Map 3.1 reveals other distinctive land use patterns. Open space networks, particularly those along Rock Creek and the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, are apparent. Large institutional uses including some 2,000 acres of colleges, universities, hospitals, seminaries, and similar uses are visible. Federal enclaves beyond Washington, DC’s core, such as Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, the St. Elizabeths Hospital West Campus, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home, appear prominently. Many of the federal and institutional uses are located in areas that are otherwise residential in character. While this creates the potential for land use conflicts, these uses are also important open space buffers, job centers, community anchors, and resources for the surrounding neighborhoods.

301.5 Figure 3.1 shows the location of each of the city’s 10 Planning Areas. Each of these planning areas are of different acreage and land use configuration About 27 percent of the District consists of road rights-of-way, although only about 60 percent of this acreage actually consists of the paved streets. For instance, road rights-of-way constitute 40 percent of Capitol Hill, but most of this land consists of landscaped or bricked front yards along streets with exceptionally wide rights-of-way.

301.6 Despite the significant number of jobs in Washington, DC, commercial uses represent less than five percent of the District’s land area, and industrial uses represent less than one percent. Commercial uses represent about 14 percent of the land area in Central Washington but less than two percent of the land area in Far Southeast/Southwest. Many of the District’s jobs are associated with federal facilities and institutional uses, which together make up about 10 percent of its land area. Institutional lands appear throughout the District but are especially prevalent in the four Northwest Planning Areas: Central Washington, Near Northwest, Mid-City, Rock Creek West, as well as in Upper Northeast.

301.7 Maps 3.2 and 3.3 show estimated population and employment density in Washington, DC and approximate suburbs as of 2017. The data is based on the traffic analysis zones used by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) for transportation modeling. Map 3.2 again illustrates the ring of fairly dense neighborhoods around the District center, and the denser residential development along major corridors like Connecticut Avenue NW and 14th Street NW. It also shows areas of fairly dense development in Wards 7 and 8, primarily associated with large low-rise garden apartment complexes in Far Southeast. Areas like Woodridge, Burrville, and Shepherd Park have low population densities and, in some cases, even lower than the adjacent neighborhoods in suburban Maryland. The contrast is especially stark with the intense residential and commercial development in Silver Spring.

301.8 Map 3.3 shows that employment is highly concentrated in Central Washington. Beyond the District center, other major employment centers include the universities and federal enclaves, the New York Avenue corridor, the West End, the Georgetown waterfront, the Capitol Riverfront area, and several corridors in Upper Northwest. Large concentrations of employment also appear beyond the District limits in Downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring, Maryland, and in Rosslyn, Crystal City, the Pentagon area, and Alexandria, Virginia.

301.9 Figure 3.1: Planning Areas

301.10 Map 3.2: Population Density 2017

301.11 Map 3.3: Employment Density 2017

##### **10-A DCMR § 302** LAND USE GOAL {#sec-10-a302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A302}

302.1 Ensure the efficient use of land resources to meet long-term neighborhood, District-wide, and regional needs to help foster other District goals; to protect the health, safety, and welfare of District residents, institutions, and businesses; to address past and current inequalities disproportionately impacting communities of color; to sustain, restore, or improve the character, affordability, and equity of neighborhoods in all parts of the District; to provide for additional housing and employment opportunities; and to effectively balance the competing demands for land to support a growing population and the many activities that take place within Washington, DC’s boundaries.

##### **10-A DCMR § 303** LU-1 SHAPING WASHINGTON, DC {#sec-10-a303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A303}

303.1 This section of the Land Use Element describes the desired pattern of growth and development in the District. Its focus is on the specific areas or types of areas where change is most likely to take place. The section begins with information about supporting growth and guiding policies for the District. It then turns to the large sites where changes are envisioned. This is followed by information about the opportunities for change along corridors and transit station areas. Policies for neighborhood infill development are also included.

##### **10-A DCMR § 304** LU-1.1 SUPPORTING GROWTH {#sec-10-a304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A304}

304.1 Washington, DC has been experiencing a shift in growth over the past decade. This growth has occurred in a variety of forms: land development, income, economic strength, population, and innovation. Previous planning efforts focused on retaining residents and attracting growth to strengthen the economy. Since the Comprehensive Plan was developed in 2006, the District’s population has grown almost 20 percent and is anticipated to reach 987,200 residents after 2045. The continued interest in living and working in the District requires a shift in planning efforts to manage such growth and the challenges it brings, while also supporting current residents. The needs and desires of a growing District in the 21st century are different and the approach to how growth is supported reflects that difference. While growth is anticipated as the long-term trend, the District may experience periodic slowdowns or declines during the time horizon of this plan.

304.2 The Comprehensive Plan’s companion document, A Vision for an Inclusive City, sets forth the District’s desire to employ the highest and best use of its land for the benefit of all residents. Managing growth through an equity lens means providing additional attention and support to communities of color, low-income households, and vulnerable populations and neighborhoods to allow them to share in the prosperity of the District. Vulnerable and underserved communities experience high and rising housing costs, persistent unemployment, worse health outcomes than their higher-income peers, and potential displacement.

304.3 Supporting growth through an equity lens places a different emphasis on development guidance and expectations, as described in section 213.7 of the Framework Element. Growth cannot be ignored, as it is necessary for continued prosperity and revenues to provide for social supports and municipal services. A change in the Future Land Use Map designations can affect the value of the designated and neighboring properties, the capacity of the infrastructure and civic services, and the short- and long-term expectations of development. Previous benefits and amenities used to catalyze growth are now necessities for supporting growth: affordable housing, transportation improvements, infrastructure improvements, open-space development and maintenance, sustainable and resilient design, and arts and culture. Affordable housing is described in detail in the Housing Element. As used here, it is housing available to households earning 80 percent or less of the regional median family income (MFI). Deeply affordable housing refers to units affordable to households earning 40 percent of less of the MFI.

304.4 Growth through an equity lens must address and reduce existing racial inequities resulting from systemic racism and meet the needs of the District’s most vulnerable residents. The District has divides by income and race, a result of factors that include urban renewal, redlining, segregation, restrictive racial covenants, infrastructure development, and disinvestment. Washington, DC has some of the country’s highest disparities in income, education, and access to jobs and housing by race. The District’s Black population saw declines between 1980 and 2010, with the most recent period of decline between 2000 and 2010, where the Black population decreased by 11 percent (39,030 residents). Between 2010 and 2019, the Black population has increased by five percent (14,105 residents). As the Land Use Element guides the direction of future growth, it also affects future access to housing, education, jobs, services, amenities, and transportation and impacts the health and safety of residents. Growth can and must occur in a way that expands access to affordable housing, education, transportation, employment, and services for communities of color, low-income households, and vulnerable populations. Achieving equitable development requires attention to both the context and needs of different planning areas and to District-wide equity issues, described throughout the Comprehensive Plan.

304.5 Washington, DC’s built environment and natural features can buffer against the acute shocks and reduce the chronic stresses the District is facing; conversely, without proper planning or maintenance, the built environment and natural features can make communities vulnerable to these shocks and stresses, particularly communities of color and low-income residents. The Land Use Element addresses the provision, preservation, and enhancement of physical assets and critical facilities, including housing, infrastructure and transportation systems, and its natural, historic, and cultural resources to become truly resilient. The vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure, and ecosystems to the adverse effects of climate change is expected to increase due to more days with high temperatures, more flooding caused by heavy rainfall and rising sea levels, and more economic disruption from extreme weather events.

304.6 Washington is a city of distinctive neighborhoods. The terms “neighborhood character” and “historic character” are used extensively in the Land Use Element and other elements. Neighborhood “character,” however, has been a term associated with exclusion and discrimination by race, income, religion, and other categories. As used in the comprehensive plan, neighborhood “character” and historic “character” reflect the sense of place defined by neighborhood architecture, visual landmarks and vistas, streets, public spaces, and historic or cultural places; for instance, the differences between the Anacostia and Bloomingdale neighborhoods. This term must not be construed to refer to the characteristics of people living and working in these areas. Many policies referencing neighborhood character also speak to the interest in improving affordability and racial equity, recognizing the potential balance needed between policy objectives.

304.7 Innovations, such as autonomous vehicles (AVs), sustainable infrastructure, and smart city technology, will shape growth. The unprecedented impacts of the global pandemic may accelerate or create new changes in land use patterns. The change in retail from brick-and-mortar businesses to online platforms, the mobile workplace, and the increasingly prevalent use of automation across sectors are recent examples of why continuously monitoring and adjusting the understanding of the District and responding to change is needed.

304.8 Policy LU-1.1.1: Future Planning Analysis and Resilience Focus Areas

The Generalized Policy Map shows areas of large tracts and corridors where future analysis is anticipated to plan for inclusive, equitable growth and climate resilience. Boundaries shown are for illustrative purposes. Final boundaries will be determined as part of the future analysis process for each area. In certain locations, planning efforts will be undertaken to analyze land use and policy impacts and ways to capitalize on, mitigate, and incorporate the anticipated growth. Current infrastructure and utility capacity should be evaluated against full build-out and projected population growth. The planning process will target issues most relevant to the community that can be effectively addressed through neighborhood planning. Planning analyses generally establish guiding documents, such as Small Area Plans, Development Frameworks, Retail Strategies, or Design Guidelines. Areas anticipated for future planning analysis include the following:

New York Avenue NE corridor;

Upper Wisconsin Avenue NW corridor;

Upper Connecticut Avenue NW corridor;

Foggy Bottom/West End;

Benning Road corridor;

Poplar Point;

Congress Heights;

North Capitol Crossroads—Armed Forces Retirement Home; and

RFK Stadium.

For areas within the 100- and 500-year floodplain, future planning efforts are intended to guide resilience to flooding for new and existing development and infrastructure projects, including public capital projects. Resilience focus areas will explore watershed resilience to encourage the implementation on a neighborhood scale, as well as site-specific solutions, design guidelines and policies for a climate adaptive and resilient District. Watershed resilience analysis areas include the following:

Georgetown;

Federal Triangle;

Hains Point;

Southwest Waterfront;

RFK;

Watts Branch; and

Poplar Point.

304.9 Policy LU-1.1.2: Resilience and Land Use

Implement District-wide, neighborhood-scale, and site-specific solutions for a climate adaptive, emergency responsive, and resilient Washington, DC.

304.10 Action LU-1.1.A: Resilience Equity and Land Use

Develop projects that decrease the vulnerability of people and places to climate risks and public health emergencies, as well as promote future resilience. Use an equity lens to consider and address the disproportionate impacts of climate change on low income and vulnerable residents and communities of color.

Please refer to the Implementation Element for additional guidance on the Future Planning Analysis Areas, Small Area Plans, and other planning studies, and periodic progress reports.

##### **10-A DCMR § 305** LU-1.2 STRENGTHENING THE CORE {#sec-10-a305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A305}

305.1 Key to the Comprehensive Plan is the transformation of Washington, DC’s core (generally referred to throughout the Comprehensive Plan as Central Washington) into a lively, connected urban center. The Central Business District and the Central Employment Area (CEA) may overlap with Central Washington, but do not comprise the total Planning Area. The distinct commercial districts that make up Central Washington already comprise one of the largest central business districts in the United States. Yet, with a few notable exceptions, much of the area lacks the dynamic 24/7 character that defines other great world capitals. For decades, the District’s planners aspired to create a living downtown: a place alive with housing, theaters, retail stores, and restaurants, as well as the vast expanse of office space that defines central Washington, DC today. New neighborhoods such as the area around Gallery Place, Penn Quarter, North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa), and downtown have been developed with a mix of uses. Physical barriers, including the Center Leg Freeway and Union Station open railyard, are being bridged over with mixed-use developments that will reconnect the District. These efforts are paying off, but the area has even more potential for lively mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-friendly developments and easy and safe connectivity among neighborhoods.

305.2 Between 2005 and 2025, approximately 30 percent of the District’s housing growth and 70 percent of its job growth occurred, and will have occurred, within the District’s urban core and adjacent close-in areas along the Anacostia River. After 2025, growth is anticipated to occur throughout Washington, DC, including outside of the urban core. This growth must be accommodated in a way that protects the area’s historic character, including the street and open space frameworks, civic vistas, and monumental spaces established by the Plan of the City of Washington and the 1910 height limit and the concentration of architectural landmarks downtown. Infill and redevelopment will take place within the established business districts west of 5th Street NW, but a majority of downtown Washington, DC’s future growth will be achieved through redevelopment of areas on its east side.

305.3 NoMa and Capitol Riverfront, two areas adjoining the traditional downtown and each more than 300 acres in size, have accommodated much of the central District’s growth. The former includes land in the triangle bounded by New York Avenue, Massachusetts Avenue NW, and the CSX railroad, along with adjacent lands around the New York Avenue Metro station. The latter area includes the South Capitol corridor and Near Southeast, including the Capitol Riverfront area. Whereas much of traditional downtown Washington was redeveloped for single purpose (office) uses during the second half of the 20th century, recent development focused on a walkable and mixed-use environment, including housing, employment, and recreation with an emphasis on modes of transportation other than the individual automobile.

305.4 As the urban core expands, reinvestment in established business districts, such as the Golden Triangle, the Downtown Core, and the Near Southwest should also continue. These areas are being modernized, better connected to one another, and developed with new infill uses and public improvements. Areas outside the traditional downtown, such as the Florida Avenue Market and Rhode Island Avenue, NE, provide opportunities for revitalization and re-envisioning how people work and live in the District, while smaller sites present the opportunity for new retail, housing, and office development. Across larger and smaller sites, efforts to strengthen the core should serve and attract businesses and people from across the income spectrum, including through the creation and preservation of affordable housing.

305.5 Additional information on planning issues in these areas may be found in the Central Washington Area Element, the Upper Northeast Area Element, and the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Element. These chapters should be consulted for specific policies and actions.

305.6 Policy LU-1.2.1: Sustaining a Strong District Center

Provide for the continued vitality of Central Washington as a thriving business, government, retail, financial, hospitality, cultural, and residential center. Promote continued reinvestment in central District buildings, infrastructure, and public spaces; continued preservation and restoration of historic resources; and continued efforts to create safe, attractive, and pedestrian-friendly environments, while minimizing displacement of residents and community-focused businesses.

305.7 Policy LU-1.2.2.: CEA

Continue the joint federal/District designation of a CEA within Washington, DC. The CEA shall include existing core federal facilities, such as the U.S. Capitol Building, the White House, and the Supreme Court, as well as most of the legislative, judicial, and executive administrative headquarters of the U.S. government. Additionally, the CEA shall include the greatest concentration of the District’s private office development, and higher-density mixed land uses, including commercial/retail, hotel, residential, and entertainment uses. Given federally imposed height limits, the scarcity of vacant land in the core of the District, and the importance of protecting historic resources, the CEA may include additional land necessary to support economic growth and federal expansion. The CEA may be used to guide the District’s economic development initiatives and may be incorporated in its planning and building standards (e.g., parking requirements) to reinforce urban character. The CEA is also important because it is part of the point system used by the General Services Administration (GSA) to establish federal leases. The boundaries of the CEA are shown in Map 3.4.

305.8 Policy LU-1.2.3: Appropriate Uses in the CEA

Ensure that land within the CEA is used in a manner which reflects the area’s national importance, its historic and cultural significance, and its role as the center of the metropolitan region. Federal siting guidelines and District zoning regulations should promote the use of this area with high-value land uses that enhance its image as the seat of the national government and the center of Washington, DC and that make the most efficient possible use of its transportation facilities. An improved balance in the mix of uses will help to achieve Washington, DC’s aspiration for an even larger living downtown.

305.9 Map 3.4: Central Employment Area (CEA) Map

305.10 Both the District and Federal Elements include a joint federal/District designation of a Central Employment Area (CEA) within Washington, DC. The CEA includes the existing core of federal facilities, such as the U.S. Capitol Building, the White House, as well as the Supreme Court, and most of the legislative, judicial, and executive administrative headquarters of the United States government. The CEA is the District of Columbia’s commercial core where the greatest concentration of employment is encouraged. Additional Federal Employment Areas, such as Parkside, are located in other parts of the District. Federal Employment Areas are also part of the GSA point system used to establish federal leases.

305.11 Policy LU-1.2.4: Urban Mixed-Use Neighborhoods

Encourage new mixed-use neighborhoods combining high-density residential, office, retail, cultural, and open space uses in the following areas:

Mt Vernon Triangle;

NoMa;

Downtown East and Pennsylvania Avenue;

Buzzard Point/National Park/Audi Field;

Near Southeast/Navy Yard;

Capitol Crossing (neighborhood between Capitol Hill and Gallery Place);

Union Station air rights; and

Near Southwest/Wharf/L’Enfant Plaza Metro Area.

The location of these areas is shown in the Central Washington, and Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Elements. Land use regulations and design standards for these areas should require that they are developed as attractive pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods, with high-quality architecture and public spaces. Housing, including affordable housing, is particularly encouraged and should be a vital component of the future land use mix. As areas continue to redevelop, community engagement and actions shall be undertaken to retain existing residents, particularly communities of color and vulnerable populations, and enable them to share in the benefits of area redevelopment while addressing adverse short and long-term impacts.

305.12 Policy LU-1.2.5: CEA Historic Resources

Preserve the scale and character of the CEA’s historic resources, including historic landmarks and districts and the features of the Plan of the City of Washington. Development must be sensitive to the area’s historic character and should enhance important reminders of Washington, DC’s past.

Please consult the Historic Preservation and Urban Design Elements for related policies.

305.13 Policy LU-1.2.6: CEA Edges

Support the retention of the established residential neighborhoods adjacent to the CEA. Appropriate building setbacks, lot coverage standards, and transitions in land use intensity and building height shall be required along the edges of the CEA to protect the integrity and scale of adjacent neighborhoods and to establish a compatible relationship between new structures and the existing neighborhood fabric.

Please refer to the Urban Design Element for additional guidance on the appropriate transition of intensity at the edges of the CEA.

305.14 Policy LU-1.2.7: Reconnecting the District Through Air Rights

Support the development of air rights over rail tracks, major corridors, and highways. In several parts of central Washington, DC there is the potential to build over existing railway tracks, major corridors, and highways. These undeveloped air rights are the result of the interjection of massive transportation infrastructure after the establishment and development of the original District. The tracks, major corridors, and highways have created gaps in the historic urban fabric that have left large areas of the center District divided and difficult to traverse. With substantial investment, these sites represent opportunities for development of housing, retail, and commercial buildings, as well as for the reconnection of neighborhoods and the street grid. While maximizing opportunities to provide housing and various amenities, future development should equitably address the potentially adverse impacts of locating housing uses next to active transportation corridors.

305.15 Where possible, streets should be reconnected, and air rights development should be constructed at and measured from a grade level consistent with adjacent land. When development at grade level is not physically possible, air rights should be measured by a means that provides for density and height commensurate with the zone district. Establishment of a measuring point for any particular air rights development shall be consistent with the act that regulates the height of buildings in the District of Columbia, approved June 1, 1910 (36 Stat. 452; D.C. Official Code § 6-601.01 et seq., known as the Height Act), and should not be taken as precedent for other development projects in the District. Densities and heights should be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhoods and developments and be sufficient to induce the investment needed for such construction.

305.16 Policy LU-1.2.8: New Waterfront Development

New and renovating waterfront development shall actively address flood risk and incorporate adaptive siting and design measures.

305.17 Policy LU-1.2.9: Public Space Design

Strongly encourage the design of parks, wetlands, open spaces, natural covers, and rights-of-way that can withstand a 100-year flood event or stricter standards as prescribed by District law while improving quality of life in neighborhoods.

305.18 Action LU-1.2A: CEA Boundary

Work with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) to ensure the boundary of the CEA depicted in the Federal Elements matches the boundary shown in the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

305.19 Action LU 1.2.B Explore Alternative CEA Approaches

Considering Washington, DC’s unique role as the seat of federal government and nation’s capital, work with NCPC, GSA, and other stakeholders to consider other approaches to the CEA, including non-contiguous sites, to designate locations for future federal facilities and uses that reflects the diverse missions of federal agencies, security, transportation, and the economic development considerations, existing development constraints, and goals of the District.

305.20 Action LU-1.2.C: Center City Action Agenda

Update the 2008 Center City Action Agenda to reflect changing conditions, priorities, and projections (the agenda is Center City’s strategic plan for future growth, improvement, and conservation). The revised agenda should define Center City more broadly to include the multiple business districts that comprise the CEA.

More specific policies for this area are contained in the Central Washington Area

Element and the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Element.

305.21 Action LU-1.2D: Development of Air Rights

Analyze the unique characteristics of the air rights development sites within Washington, DC. Development sites should address the growing need for housing, and especially affordable housing, reconnect the L’Enfant grid, and enhance mobility.

305.22 Action LU-1.2.E: Development on Former Federal Sites

When sites in the CEA shift from federal to private or local use, employ planning and zoning approaches that provide for the integration of the sites into the surrounding fabric. Replace the monumental scale needed for major federal buildings with a scale suitable to the local context by reconstructing historic rights-of-way, dividing superblocks into smaller parcels, and encouraging vibrant contemporary architectural expression. Encourage mixed-use, mixed-income, development with residential, retail, and cultural uses visible from the street and open outside of core business hours, as well as offices, to help support a living downtown.

305.23 Action LU-1.2.F Reuse of Existing Buildings

Evaluate opportunities to encourage appropriate use repositioning of existing buildings (for example, from office to mixed housing and retail) to provide varied office and retail space, more housing and especially affordable housing, and a mix of uses that support District goals.

##### **10-A DCMR § 306** LU-1.3 LARGE SITES AND THE DISTRICT FABRIC {#sec-10-a306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A306}

306.1 During the next 20 years, about 15 percent of Washington, DC’s housing growth and 10 percent of its job growth will take place on 11 large sites outside of the CEA. The large sites include properties in federal ownership, District ownership, and private ownership. The status of each site varies; redevelopment on a few is imminent, but others may be over a decade away. Some still contain vital, active uses. Others have been dormant for years.

306.2 Four of the 11 sites are owned (at least in part) by the federal government. Consequently, policies in the District Elements for these lands are intended only to express the District’s vision for these properties should they be transferred out of federal ownership or use. In collaboration with the federal government and the community, Washington, DC will make its planning and development decisions regarding these sites to be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods and to further the goals and policies of the District Elements.

306.3 Some large recreational sites owned by the federal government are not intended to be transferred out of federal ownership and are not included in this list. However, the District continues to work with and advocate for community-friendly management of these lands. The golf courses at East Potomac Park, Rock Creek, and the historic Langston Golf Course have the potential to become assets and positive defining features for their neighborhoods.

306.4 The large sites are shown in Map 3.5 and listed in Figure 3.2. The Area Elements should be consulted for a profile of each site and specific policies for its future use. The policies in this section focus on broader issues that apply to all sites. As shown on Map 3.5, several of the sites fall within the boundaries of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI), an economic revitalization and environmental protection program now being implemented by the District government.

306.5 Figure 3.2: Large Sites

306.6 Policy LU-1.3.1: Reuse of Large Publicly-Owned Sites

Recognize the potential for and encourage the reuse of large, government-owned properties to supply needed community services and facilities; provide significant affordable housing and desired housing types such as family housing; create education and employment opportunities; remove barriers between neighborhoods; enhance equity, including racial equity, and inclusion; provide large and significant new parks, including wildlife habitats; enhance waterfront access; improve resilience; and enhance Washington, DC’s neighborhoods.

306.7 Map 3.5: Large Sites

306.8 Policy LU-1.3.2: Mix of Uses on Large Sites

Ensure that the mix of new uses on large, redeveloped sites is compatible with adjacent uses and provide benefits to surrounding neighborhoods and to Washington, DC as a whole. The particular mix of uses on any given site should be generally indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and more fully described in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements. Zoning should be compatible with adjacent uses but need not be identical.

306.9 Policy LU-1.3.3: Federal Sites

Work closely with the federal government and the community on reuse planning for those federal lands where a change of use may take place. Even where such properties will remain in federal use, the impacts of new activities on adjacent neighborhoods should be acknowledged and proactively addressed by federal parties.

306.10 Policy LU-1.3.4: New Methods of Land Regulation

Recognize the opportunity afforded by large sites for innovative land regulation and the application of sustainable design and resilience principles (green building, biophilic design, and low-impact development) on a large scale.

306.11 Policy LU-1.3.5: Public Benefit Uses on Large Sites

Given the significant leverage the District has in redeveloping properties that it owns, include appropriate public benefit uses on such sites if and when they are reused, and involve the public in identifying benefits. Examples of such uses are housing, especially affordable housing, and housing serving families, older adults, and vulnerable populations; new parks and open spaces; health care and civic facilities; public educational facilities and other public facilities; and uses providing employment opportunities for District residents.

306.12 Policy LU-1.3.6: New Neighborhoods and the Urban Fabric

On those large sites that are redeveloped as new neighborhoods (such as Reservation 13), integrate new development into the fabric of the District to the greatest extent feasible. Incorporate extensions of the street grid, public access and circulation improvements, and new public open spaces. Establish a compatible relationship between new structures and uses and the existing neighborhood fabric. Such sites should not be developed as self-contained communities, isolated or gated from their surroundings, and they should enhance community resilience, equitable development, and promote inclusion.

306.13 Policy LU-1.3.7: Protecting Existing Assets on Large Sites

Identify and protect existing assets, such as historic buildings, historic site plan

elements, important vistas, and major landscape elements as large sites are

redeveloped.

306.14 Policy LU-1.3.8: Large Sites and the Waterfront

Use the redevelopment of large sites to achieve related urban design, open space, environmental, resilience, equity, accessibility, and economic development objectives along the Anacostia Waterfront, as well as other shoreline areas. Large waterfront sites should be used for water-focused recreation, housing including affordable housing, commercial, and cultural development, with activities that are accessible to both sides of the river. Create opportunities for adjacent communities to benefit from site redevelopment. Large sites should further be used to enhance the physical and environmental quality of the rivers.

306.15 Action LU-1.3.A: Federal Land Transfer

Continue to work with the federal government to transfer federally owned sites to local control, long-term leases, or ownership to capitalize more fully on unrealized development and parkland opportunities.

Policies and actions for large sites are also contained in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements.

306.16 Action LU-1.3.B: Encouraging Livability of Former Federal Lands

When land is identified to shift from federal to private or local use, develop planning and zoning approaches that provide for, as appropriate, the reconstruction of historic rights-of-way and reservations, integration of the sites into the adjoining neighborhoods, and the enhancement of special characteristics or opportunities of the sites. Foster uses that create jobs. Encourage cultural, residential, open space, recreational, and retail uses to advance mixed-use, and as appropriate, mixed income neighborhoods, even if the site is designated as high-density commercial on the District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Coordinate with the NCPC as appropriate.

##### **10-A DCMR § 307** LU-1.4 TRANSIT-ORIENTED AND CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A307}

307.1 Over the last five decades, Washington, DC, the federal government, and neighboring jurisdictions have invested billions of dollars in a mass transit system that effectively connects residents in many parts of the District with major employment centers and other destinations. Additional investments in rapid transit, consisting primarily of streetcars, dedicated bus lanes, transit signal priority, and express/limited-stop service, are planned along major corridors. These improvements are essential to enhancing regional mobility and accessibility, responding to future increases in demand, and providing alternatives to single-passenger automobiles. The improvements also create the potential to reinforce one of the signature elements of Washington, DC’s urban form: its major streets and thoroughfares.

307.2 Fully capitalizing on the investment made in Metrorail requires effective use of the land around transit stations and along transit corridors. While many of the District’s 40 Metrorail stations epitomize the concept of a transit village, with pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential development of varying scales, a few do not. Some stations continue to be surrounded by large surface parking lots and auto-oriented commercial land uses. The same is true for those corridors where premium surface transit service has been implemented or proposed. Some commercial buses pass through fairly dense, walkable neighborhoods. Other station areas consist of long, undifferentiated commercial strips with vacant storefronts, little or no housing, and few amenities for pedestrians.

307.3 Much of the planning during the last decade has focused on making better use of transit station areas. Plans have been developed for Columbia Heights, Takoma, Anacostia, Georgia Avenue-Petworth, Brookland, Deanwood, Hill East, Southwest, Maryland Avenue NE, Rhode Island Avenue NE/NW, Florida Avenue Market, H Street NE, and Shaw/Howard University. In each case, the objective was to identify ways to better capitalize on Metrorail and more efficiently use land in the station vicinity. One objective of these initiatives has been to strengthen transit stations as neighborhood centers and attract new investment to business districts facing economic challenges. Another important objective has been to accommodate growth in a way that minimizes the number and length of auto-trips generated and reduce household expenses on transportation by providing options for car-free (or one car) living.

307.4 The District’s Metrorail stations include 15 stations within the CEA and 25 neighborhood stations (see Map 3.6). Looking forward, certain principles should be applied in the management of land around all of the neighborhood stations.

These principles include:

A preference for mixed residential and commercial uses rather than single-purpose uses and in many areas a preference for housing above ground-floor retail uses;

Providing diverse housing types, including both market rate and affordable units; a mix of unit sizes that can accommodate both smaller and larger households; and housing for older adults and persons with disabilities;

A priority on attractive, pedestrian-friendly design and a de-emphasis on auto-oriented uses and surface parking;

Provision of well-designed, well-programmed, and well-maintained public open spaces;

Appropriate transitions of densities and heights between stations and lower-density uses in the vicinity recognizing, however, that some major corridors well served by transit can support higher-density uses even farther away from the Metrorail station;

Convenient and comfortable connections to the bus system, thereby expanding access to the stations and increasing Metro’s ability to serve all parts of the District; and

Pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between the stations and the surrounding neighborhoods

307.5 Beyond these core principles, station area development policies must respond to the unique needs of each community and the unique setting of each station, and seek community and broader public input in station area planning and development. Some station areas wrestle with concerns over too much development, while others experience difficulties attracting development. Moreover, the District’s role in facilitating transit-oriented development (TOD) must vary from station to station. In some parts of Washington, DC, weak demand may require public investment and zoning incentives to catalyze development or achieve the desired mix of uses. In other areas, the strength of the private market provides leverage to require public benefits (such as affordable housing, plazas, parks, and childcare facilities) when development approval is requested.

307.6 While TOD is most commonly thought of as a strategy for Metrorail station areas, it is also applicable to premium transit corridors.

307.7 Map 3.6: Priority Transit Corridors and Transit Stations

307.8 The reach of TOD around any given station or along a high-volume transit corridor should vary depending on neighborhood context. While a quarter to a half- mile is generally used across the country to define the walkable radius around each station, and therefore the area in which higher densities may accommodate growth without unacceptable increases in traffic congestion, applying a uniform radius is not always appropriate in the District. The established character and scale of the neighborhood surrounding the station should be considered, as should factors such as topography, demographics, and the station’s or corridor’s capacity to support new transit riders. Many stations abut historic or low-density neighborhoods. Similarly, many priority transit corridors transition to single-family homes or row houses just one-half block or less off the street itself. Careful planning and design to appropriately transition from desired growth around stations and corridors to adjacent neighborhoods is needed when development is planned.

307.9 Policy LU-1.4.1: Station Areas as Neighborhood Centers

Encourage the development of Metro stations as anchors for residential, economic, and civic development and to accommodate population growth with new nodes of residential development, especially affordable housing, in all areas of the District in order to create great new walkable places and enhance access and opportunities for all District residents. The establishment and growth of mixed-use centers at Metrorail stations should be supported as a way to provide access to housing opportunities at all income levels and emphasizing affordable housing, improve air quality, increase jobs, provide a range of retail goods and services, reduce reliance on the automobile, enhance neighborhood stability, create a stronger sense of place, provide civic gathering places, and capitalize on the development and public transportation opportunities that the stations provide. Station area development should have population and employment densities guided, but not dictated, by desired levels of transit service. This policy should be balanced with other land use policies, which include conserving neighborhoods. The Future Land Use Map expresses the desired intensity and mix of uses around each station, and the Area Elements (and in some cases Small Area Plans) provide more detailed direction for each station area.

307.10 Policy LU-1.4.2: Development Around Metrorail Stations

In developments above and around Metrorail stations emphasize land uses and building forms that minimize the need for automobile use and maximize transit ridership while reflecting the design capacity of each station and respecting the character and needs of the surrounding areas.

307.11 Policy LU-1.4.3: Housing Around Metrorail Stations

Build housing adjacent to Metrorail stations that serves a mix of incomes and household types, including families, older adults, and persons with disabilities, and prioritize affordable housing production. Leverage the lowered transportation costs offered by proximity to transit to increase affordability for moderate and low-income households.

307.12 Policy LU-1.4.3: Affordable Rental and For-Sale Multi-family Housing Near

Metrorail Stations

Explore and implement as appropriate mechanisms, which could include community land trusts, public housing, and shared appreciation models, to encourage permanent affordable rental and for-sale multi-family housing, adjacent to Metrorail stations, given the need for accessible affordable housing and the opportunity for car-free and car-light living in such locations.

307.13 Policy LU-1.4.4: Design to Encourage Transit Use

Require architectural and site-planning improvements around Metrorail stations that support pedestrian and bicycle access to the stations and enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of passengers walking to the station or transferring to and from local buses. These improvements should include sidewalks, bicycle lanes, lighting, signage, landscaping, and security measures. Discourage the development of station areas with conventional suburban building forms, such as shopping centers surrounded by surface parking lots or low-density housing.

307.14 Policy LU-1.4.5: Development Along Corridors

Encourage growth and development along major corridors, particularly priority transit and multimodal corridors. Plan and design development adjacent to Metrorail stations and corridors to respect the character, scale, and integrity of adjacent neighborhoods, including appropriate transitions and buffers, while balancing against the District’s broader need for housing.

307.15 Policy LU-1.4.6: Parking Near Metro Stations

Encourage the creative management of parking around transit stations, ensuring that multimodal needs are balanced. New parking should generally be set behind or underneath buildings. Parking should be managed and priced to focus on availability and turnover rather than serving the needs of all-day commuters, while considering the commuting characteristics of District residents, such as access to transit stations and mode use, to provide equitable outcomes. As existing parking assets are redeveloped, one-for-one replacement of parking spaces should be discouraged, as more transit riders will be generated by people living, working, and shopping within walking distance of the transit station.

307.16 Policy LU-1.4.7: Transit-Oriented Development Boundaries

Tailor the reach of TOD policies and associated development regulations to reflect the specific conditions and community input at each Metrorail station and along each transit corridor. The opportunity to provide affordable housing and access to employment for low-income households, presence of historic districts, landmark status, and conservation areas should be significant considerations as these policies are applied.

307.17 Policy LU-1.4.8: Public Facilities

Encourage the siting (or retention and modernization) of public facilities, such as schools, libraries, and government offices, near transit stations and along transit corridors. Such facilities should be a focus for community activities and enhance neighborhood identity.

307.18 Policy LU-1.4.9: Co-location of Private and Public Facilities

District-wide, analyze the opportunity to co-locate private and public uses, including multiple public uses, where the District seeks to modernize, expand, or build new public facilities. Co-located uses should align with District-wide priorities and can include affordable housing for older adults and families, affordable multi-family housing, recreation facilities, and health-related facilities.

307.19 Action LU-1.4.A: Station Area and Corridor Planning

Conduct detailed station area and corridor plans and studies collaboratively with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and local communities that include detailed surveys of parcel characteristics (including lot depths and widths), existing land uses, structures, street widths, potential for buffering, and possible development impacts on surrounding areas. Plans should also address joint public-private development opportunities, urban design improvements, transportation demand and parking management strategies, integrated bus service and required service facilities, capital improvements, neighborhood conservation and enhancement, and recommended land use and zoning changes throughout the District. Conduct studies District-wide but prioritize stations and corridors in Future Planning Analysis Areas.

307.20 Action LU-1.4.B: Zoning Around Transit

With public input, develop and use zoning incentives to facilitate new and mixed-use development, and particularly the provision of new housing, and new affordable housing in high opportunity areas to address more equitable distribution.

307.21 Action LU-1.4.C: Metro Station and Inclusionary Zoning

Encourage developments in and around Metro station areas to exceed the affordable units required by the Inclusionary Zoning Program, with appropriate bonus density and height allowances.

307.22 Action LU-1.4.D: Co-Location Opportunity Evaluation

District-wide, encourage the co-location of new development, such as housing or retail, as part of public facilities’ modernization, expansion, and new construction.

##### **10-A DCMR § 308** LU-1.5 NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A308}

308.1 Hundreds of small vacant lots across Washington, DC are located away from transit stations and off the major boulevards. Analysis conducted through the Comprehensive Plan revision determined that vacant, residentially zoned lots totaled more than 400 acres in 2005. Approximately 50 percent of this acreage was zoned for single-family homes, 15 percent was zoned for townhomes and row houses, and 35 percent was zoned for multi-family development. Most of the sites were less than one acre in size. Some of this land may not be developable to the limits allowed by zoning due to site constraints, such as poor access, awkward parcel shapes, and steep topography.

308.2 Infill development on vacant lots is strongly supported in the District, provided that such development is compatible with its surroundings and consistent with environmental protection and public safety objectives. There are opportunities for change from vacant to vibrant in residential and commercial areas. In residential areas, infill sites present some of the best opportunities for family housing and low-to-moderate-density development, as well as community gardens and pocket parks. In commercial areas, infill development can fill gaps in the street wall and create more cohesive and attractive neighborhood centers. Vacant lots in such settings may also present opportunities for public uses.

308.3 In both residential and commercial settings, infill development must be sensitive to neighborhood context including density and scale. High-quality design standards should be required.

308.4 Infill development may also include the restoration of vacant and abandoned structures. In 2003, there were an estimated 2,700 vacant and abandoned residential properties in the District. While the number has declined since then, some parts of Washington, DC continue to have a relatively higher mount of vacant buildings.

308.5 Accessory dwelling units as part of new infill development can provide opportunities for addressing affordability, aging in community, or help pay a mortgage.

308.6 Policy LU-1.5.1: Infill Development

Encourage infill development on vacant land within Washington, DC, particularly in areas where there are vacant lots that create gaps in the urban fabric and detract from the character of a commercial or residential street. Such development should reflect high-quality design, complement the established character of the area and should not create sharp changes in the physical development pattern.

308.7 Policy LU-1.5.2: Long-Term Vacant Sites

Facilitate the reuse of vacant lots that have historically been difficult to develop due to infrastructure or access problems, inadequate lot dimensions, fragmented or absentee ownership, or other constraints. Explore lot consolidation, acquisition, and other measures that would address these constraints.

See the Housing Element for policies on the development of New Communities on the sites of aging public affordable housing complexes and information about the District’s PADD Home Again program for rehabilitating vacant property.

##### **10-A DCMR § 309** LU-2 CREATING AND MAINTAINING INCLUSIVE NEIGHBORHOODS {#sec-10-a309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A309}

309.1 This section of the Land Use Element focuses on land use issues within Washington, DC’s neighborhoods. It begins with a set of broad policies, which state the District’s commitment to sustaining neighborhood diversity and enhancing the defining characteristics of each community. This is followed by information about neighborhood appearance, particularly the treatment of abandoned and underused properties. This section then turns to residential land use compatibility issues, followed by neighborhood centers and commercial land use compatibility issues.

##### **10-A DCMR § 310** LU-2.1 A DISTRICT OF NEIGHBORHOODS {#sec-10-a310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A310}

310.1 The same effort given to keep Washington, DC’s monumental core a symbol of national pride must be given to the District’s neighborhoods. After all, Washington, DC’s public image is defined as much by the diversity and vibrancy of its communities, local culture, homes, businesses, streets, and neighborhood spaces as it is by its monuments and federal buildings. For Washington, DC’s residents, the neighborhoods are the essence of the District’s social and physical environment. Strong neighborhoods are key to continued livability in a growing and changing District. Land use policies must seek to ensure that all neighborhoods have adequate access to commercial services, parks, educational and cultural facilities, economic mobility, and sufficient and accessible housing opportunities while protecting their rich historic and cultural legacies. In addition, land use policies and actions must be viewed through a racial equity lens to provide equitable development that provides adequate access to these services and opportunities within neighborhoods of color and low-income communities.

310.2 Today, Washington, DC has no fewer than 130 distinct and identifiable neighborhoods. They range from high-density, urban mixed-use communities like the West End and Mount Vernon Square to quiet, low-density neighborhoods like Crestwood and Spring Valley, providing a wide range of choices for many different types of households. Just as their physical qualities vary, the social and economic characteristics of neighborhoods also vary. In 2001, the DC Office of Planning (OP) studied neighborhoods using a range of social and economic indicators, including income, home value and sales, school performance, crime rates, poverty rates, educational attainment, and building permit activity, among others. While much has changed since 2001, including substantial population growth, the emergence of new residential neighborhoods, and the revitalization of established neighborhoods, the neighborhood data remains instructive for the purposes of land use policy and should be updated when a new Comprehensive Plan is undertaken.

310.3 Many of the District’s planning efforts have focused on transitional, emerging, and underfunded neighborhoods. Land use strategies for these areas have emphasized the reuse of vacant sites, the refurbishment (or replacement) of abandoned or deteriorating buildings, the removal of illegal land uses, and the improvement of the public realm (e.g., streets and public buildings). These strategies have been paired with incentives for the private sector to reinvest in each neighborhood and provide new housing choices and services. A different set of land use strategies has been applied in established neighborhoods, emphasizing commercial enhancement strategies, public space design, neighborhood character, and appropriate infill. Land use policies in these areas have focused on retaining neighborhood character, mitigating development impacts on services and infrastructure, preventing demolition in historic districts, and improving the connection between zoning and present and desired land uses. To advance the vision of an inclusive, equitable city, future planning must guide all neighborhoods to stable, high-opportunity outcomes while addressing issues specific to each area.

310.4 Other planning efforts have focused on reconnecting neighborhoods divided by large transportation infrastructure, such as highways and railyards. This infrastructure, often developed as part of urban renewal, frequently destroyed or physically divided Black and Brown neighborhoods. Reconnection must strengthen and bring benefits to existing neighborhoods and create new neighborhoods to accommodate growth, such as in the NoMa, Capitol Crossing, and Southwest. These planning efforts include framework plans to provide design guidance, define and activate the public realm, support neighborhood sustainability and resilience, and identify retail strategies.

310.5 Continued growth, competing demands for land, and the desire to manage policy priorities across Washington, DC requires renewed attention to all areas in the District.

310.6 During the coming decades, the District will keep striving for equity across all neighborhoods in terms of access to housing affordable to a range of incomes and household types, job opportunities, economic mobility, energy innovation, and amenities. This does not mean that all neighborhoods should become the same or that a uniform formula should be applied to each community. Rather, it means that each neighborhood should have certain basic assets and amenities (see What Makes a Great Neighborhood). These assets and amenities should be protected and enhanced where they exist today and created or restored where they do not.

310.7 Policy LU-2.1.1: Variety of Neighborhood Types

Maintain a variety of neighborhoods, ranging from low-density to high-density. The positive elements that create the identity and character of each neighborhood should be preserved and enhanced while encouraging the identification of appropriate sites for new development and/or adaptive reuse to help accommodate population growth and advance affordability and opportunity.

310.8 An inclusive neighborhood should create a sense of belonging, civic pride, and a collective sense of stewardship and responsibility for the community’s future among all residents. Indeed, a neighborhood’s vibrancy has to be measured by more than the income of its residents or the size of its homes. The 2004 A Vision for Growing an Inclusive City identified essential physical qualities that all neighborhoods should share. These included the following:

Transportation options for those without a car, including convenient bus

service, carsharing, bicycle facilities, and safe access for pedestrians;

Easy access to shops and services that meet day-to-day needs, such as child care, groceries, and sit-down restaurants;

Housing choices, including homes for renters and for owners, and a range of units that meet the different needs of the community;

Safe, clean public gathering places, such as parks and plazas—places to meet neighbors, places for children to play, and places to exercise or connect with nature;

Quality public services, including police and fire protection, high-quality, safe, and modernized schools, health services, as well as libraries and recreation centers that can be conveniently accessed;

Distinctive character and a sense of place defined by neighborhood architecture, visual landmarks and vistas, streets, public spaces, and historic places;

Evidence of visible public maintenance and investment—proof that the District is responsive to neighborhood needs; and

A healthy natural environment, with street trees and greenery, and easy access to Washington, DC’s open space system.

The understanding of what makes a great neighborhood has evolved, particularly in terms of eliminating existing inequalities by race, income, and geography and promoting equitable development, advancing sustainability, and building community resilience to everyday and long-term challenges, such as environmental and manmade disasters and public health emergencies. Where a resident lives—a person’s neighborhood—remains one of the greatest predictors of individual health and economic outcomes. Vibrant neighborhoods have distinct character and can support growth. Investment and development should advance neighborhood vitality, growth, and economic mobility, and increase access, equity, and where appropriate, jobs. The positive elements that create the identity and character of each neighborhood should be preserved and enhanced.

310.9 Policy LU-2.1.2: Neighborhood Revitalization

Facilitate neighborhood revitalization by focusing District grants, loans, housing rehabilitation efforts, commercial investment programs, capital improvements, and other government actions in those areas that are most in need, especially where projects advance equitable development and racial equity, and create opportunities for disadvantaged persons. Engage and partner in these efforts with the persons intended to be served by revitalization. Use social, economic, and physical indicators, such as the poverty rate, the number of abandoned or substandard buildings, the crime rate, and the unemployment rate, as key indicators of need.

310.10 Policy LU-2.1.3: Conserving, Enhancing, and Revitalizing Neighborhoods

Recognize the importance of balancing goals to increase the housing supply, including affordable units, and expand neighborhood commerce with parallel goals to protect neighborhood character, preserve historic resources, and restore the environment. The overarching goal to create vibrant neighborhoods in all parts of the District requires an emphasis on conserving units and character in some neighborhoods and revitalization in others, although all neighborhoods have a role to play in helping to meet broader District-wide needs, such as affordable housing, public facilities, and more.

310.11 Policy LU-2.1.4: Rehabilitation Before Demolition

In redeveloping areas characterized by vacant, abandoned, and underused older buildings, generally encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of architecturally or historically significant existing buildings rather than demolition.

310.12 Policy LU-2.1.5: Support Low-Density Neighborhood

Support and maintain the District’s established low-density neighborhoods and related low-density zoning. Carefully manage the development of vacant land and alterations to existing structures to be compatible with the general design character and scale of the existing neighborhood and preserve civic and open space.

310.13 Policy LU-2.1.6: Teardowns and Mansionization

Discourage the replacement of quality homes in good physical condition with new single-family homes that are substantially larger, taller, bulkier or likely to require more energy than the prevailing building stock.

310.14 Policy LU-2.1.7: Row House Neighborhood Character

Respect the character of row house neighborhoods by ensuring that infill development is compatible with existing design patterns and maintains or expands the number of family-sized units. Upward and outward extension of row houses that compromise their design should be discouraged.

310.15 Policy: LU-2.1.8 Explore Approaches to Additional Density in Low and

Moderate Density Neighborhoods

Notwithstanding Policy LU-2.1.5, explore approaches, including rezoning, to

accommodate a modest increase in density and more diverse housing types in low-density and moderate density neighborhoods where it would result in the appropriate production of additional housing and particularly affordable housing. However, detailed neighborhood planning is a condition predicate to any proposals. Infill and new development shall be compatible with the general design character and scale of existing neighborhoods and minimize demolition of housing in good condition.

310.16 Policy LU-2.1.9: Alterations to Row Houses and Apartments

Generally discourage alterations to existing row houses and apartments that result in a loss of family sized units. Encourage alterations if it results in an increase in family-sized units. Roof structures should only be permitted if they respect the architectural character of the building on which they are proposed and of other nearby buildings.

310.17 Policy LU-2.1.10: Multi-Family Neighborhoods

Maintain the multi-family residential character of the District’s medium- and high-density residential areas. Limit the encroachment of large-scale, incompatible commercial uses into these areas. Make these areas more attractive, pedestrian-friendly, and transit accessible, and explore opportunities for compatible commercial development which provides jobs for nearby residents.

310.18 Policy LU-2.1.11: Residential Parking Requirements

Parking requirements for residential buildings should respond to the varying levels of demand associated with different unit types, unit sizes, unit locations (including proximity to transit), and emerging transportation trends and new technology (such as the sharing economy and autonomous vehicles (AVs). Parking should be accommodated in a manner that maintains an attractive environment at the street level and minimizes interference with traffic flow. Reductions in parking may be considered where transportation-demand management measures are implemented and a reduction in demand can be demonstrated.

Please refer to the Transportation Element for additional policies and actions

related to parking management.

310.19 Policy LU-2.1.12: Reuse of Public Buildings

Rehabilitate vacant or outdated public and semi-public buildings for continued use including residential uses, particularly if located within residential areas. Reuse plans should be compatible with their surroundings and co-location of uses considered to meet broader District-wide goals. Reuse of public buildings should implement Small Area and Framework Plans where possible.

310.20 Policy LU-2.1.13: Planned Unit Developments in Neighborhood Commercial

Corridors

Planned unit developments (PUDs) in neighborhood commercial areas shall provide high-quality developments with active ground floor designs that provide for neighborhood commercial uses, vibrant pedestrian spaces and public benefits, such as housing, affordable housing, and affordable commercial space.

310.21 Action LU-2.1.A: Residential Rezoning

Provide a better match between zoning and existing land uses in residential areas, with a particular focus on:

Blocks of well-established, single-family and semi-detached homes that are zoned R-3 or higher;

Blocks that consist primarily of row houses that are zoned R-5-B or higher; and

Historic districts where the zoning does not match the predominant contributing properties on the block face.

In all three of these instances, consider rezoning to appropriate densities to protect the predominant architectural character and scale of the neighborhood.

310.22 Action LU-2.1.B: Study of Neighborhood Indicators

Conduct an ongoing review with periodic publication of social and economic neighborhood indicators for the purpose of targeting neighborhood investments, particularly for the purposes of achieving neighborhood diversity, equitable development, and fair housing.

310.23 Action LU-2.1.C Study of Land Use Inequalities

Additional study, public engagement, and consideration of the District’s history of systemic racism, distinct land use and housing patterns, and understanding of best practices to address land use inequalities are needed to address housing affordability, meet equitable development objectives, and address past land use practices that segregated areas by race and income.

##### **10-A DCMR § 311** LU-2.2 MAINTAINING COMMUNITY STANDARDS {#sec-10-a311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A311}

311.1 Community standards encompasses a broad range of topics relating to the physical appearance and quality of neighborhoods. The District maintains planning, building, housing, zoning, environmental, tax, and other regulations and codes aimed at protecting public safety and keeping neighborhoods in first-rate physical condition. However, instances of neglected and abandoned properties, illegal uses, unpermitted construction, and code violations are still common in many parts of Washington, DC. Despite dramatic improvements in code enforcement during recent years and a 50 percent drop in the number of vacant properties since 2000, more effective and responsive enforcement remains one of the most frequently raised planning issues.

311.2 Policy LU-2.2.1: Code Enforcement as a Tool for Neighborhood Stabilization

Recognize the importance of consistent, effective, and comprehensive code enforcement, and enforcement of the higher tax rates applied to vacant and underused property, to the enhancement of neighborhoods. Housing, building, property tax, and zoning regulations must be strictly applied and enforced in all neighborhoods to prevent deteriorated, unsafe, and unhealthy conditions; reduce illegal activities; maintain the general level of residential uses, densities, and heights; provide incentives for rehabilitating property and getting it occupied; and promptly correct health and safety hazards. Efforts should recognize and focus on consistent enforcement in disproportionately affected areas to improve neighborhood outcomes.

311.3 Policy LU-2.2.2: Appearance of Vacant Lots and Structures

Maintain and enforce programs that keep vacant lots and buildings free of debris, litter, and graffiti. Such sites must be treated in a way that eliminates underused or under-maintained properties, improves visual quality, and enhances public safety.

311.4 Policy LU-2.2.3: Restoration or Removal of Vacant and Abandoned Buildings

Reduce the number of vacant and abandoned buildings through renovation, rehabilitation, and, as necessary, demolition. Implement programs that encourage the owners of such buildings to sell or renovate them, and apply liens, fines, higher taxes, charges for public clean-up of the property, and other penalties for noncompliant properties.

311.5 Policy LU-2.2.4: Neighborhood Beautification

Encourage projects that improve the visual quality of neighborhoods, including landscaping and tree planting, facade improvement, anti-litter campaigns, graffiti removal, murals, improvement or removal of abandoned buildings, street and sidewalk repair, park improvements, and public realm enhancements and activations.

311.6 Policy LU-2.2.5: Enforcement of Approval Conditions

Fully enforce conditions of approval for new development, reuse and renovation, including design, building, and operating criteria.

311.7 Policy LU-2.2.6: Public Stewardship

Support efforts by local Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), citizen/civic associations, garden clubs, homeowner groups, and other organizations to initiate neighborhood improvement and beautification programs. Provide information, guidance, and technical assistance to these groups as appropriate or feasible.

311.8 Policy LU-2.2.7: Alley Use

Discourage the conversion of alleys into private yards or developable land when the alleys are part of the historic fabric of the neighborhood and would otherwise continue to perform their intended functions, such as access to rear garages and service areas for trash collection. Support the greening of residential alleys where feasible to enhance sustainability and stormwater management. Encourage potential activation of commercial alleys in business districts through art, programming, and events where not in conflict with the intended function of the alley network.

311.9 Action LU-2.2.A: Vacant Building Inventories

Maintain and continuously update data on vacant and abandoned buildings,

follow up on public reports of vacant buildings, and regularly assess the potential for such buildings to support new uses and activities. This should include periodic assessment of vacant building monitoring and taxation programs and exploring creative ways to deal with vacant properties and long-term vacant sites. Strategically purchase such properties at tax delinquency sales when such properties could be put to use for affordable housing.

311.10 Action LU-2.2.B: Education and Outreach on Public Space Maintenance

Develop a public outreach campaign on the District’s public space regulations

(including the use of such space for announcements, campaign signs, and

advertising) and resident/District responsibilities for maintenance of public space,

including streets, planting strips, sidewalks, and front yards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 312** LU-2.3 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE COMPATIBILITY {#sec-10-a312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A312}

312.1 Many of Washington, DC’s neighborhoods were developed before 1920 when its first zoning regulations were applied. As a result, the older neighborhoods tend to have a patchwork pattern of land uses, with business and residential activities sometimes occurring on the same block. While this pattern has created some desirable and interesting neighborhoods, it has also introduced the potential for conflict. Certain commercial and industrial uses may generate noise, odor, traffic, litter, and other impacts that affect the quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods. Similarly, introducing new residential uses to commercial or industrial areas can make it difficult for established businesses to operate effectively.

312.2 Land use compatibility is addressed through the District’s zoning regulations. The regulations list uses that are permitted as a matter-of-right and those that are permitted with a special exception (and in some cases uses that are prohibited) in each zone. Over the years, a variety of standards for external effects have been applied to address the effects of different activities on adjacent uses. In 2016, the Zoning Commission adopted a comprehensive update to the zoning regulations— the first comprehensive revision in more than 50 years. The revised zoning regulations, referred to as ZR16, address land use compatibility issues, more effective use of performance standards, buffering and screening requirements, updated development and design standards, and new standards for parking and loading. ZR16 also includes new definitions, new zones, and changes to matter-of-right and special exception uses. ZR16 is an important step in implementing goal for achieving a healthy, vibrant, diverse, and environmentally sustainable and resilient District.

312.3 Policy LU-2.3.1: Managing Non-Residential Uses in Residential Areas

Maintain zoning regulations and development review procedures that prevent the encroachment of inappropriate commercial uses in residential areas. Limit the scale and extent of non-residential uses that are generally compatible with residential uses but present the potential for conflicts when they are excessively concentrated or out of scale with the neighborhood.

312.4 Policy LU-2.3.2: Mitigation of Commercial Development Impacts

Manage new commercial development to maximize benefits such as enlivened neighborhoods, tax generation, and job creation, while ensuring that it does not result in unreasonable and unexpected traffic, parking, litter, shadow, view obstruction, odor, noise, and vibration impacts on surrounding residential areas. Establish appropriate requirements for transportation demand management and noise control, parking and loading management, building design, hours of operation, and other measures as needed before commercial development is approved.

312.5 Policy LU-2.3.3: Buffering Requirements

Buffer new commercial development adjacent to residential areas to avoid adverse effects. Buffers may include setbacks, landscaping, fencing, screening, height step-downs, and other architectural and site-planning measures that avoid potential conflicts.

312.6 Policy LU-2.3.4: Transitional and Buffer Zone Districts

Maintain mixed-use zone districts, which serve as transitional or buffer areas between residential and commercial districts and that also may contain institutional, nonprofit, embassy/chancery, and office-type uses. Through application of zoning regulations, consider appropriate height, design, density and operational standards to provide appropriate transitions between districts and enhance neighborhood character in each district.

312.7 Policy LU-2.3.5: Institutional Uses

Recognize the importance of institutional uses, such as private schools, childcare facilities, hospitals, churches, and similar uses, to the economy, character, history, livability, and future of Washington, DC and its residents. Ensure that when such uses are permitted in residential neighborhoods, their design and operation is sensitive to neighborhood issues and neighbors’ quality of life. Encourage institutions and neighborhoods to work proactively to address issues, such as transportation and parking, hours of operation, outside use of facilities, and facility expansion.

312.8 Policy LU-2.3.6: Places of Worship and Other Religious Facilities

Recognize places of worship and other religious facilities as an ongoing, important part of the fabric of the District’s neighborhoods. Work proactively with the faith-based community, residents, ANCs, and neighborhood groups to address issues associated with these facilities’ transportation needs, operations, and expansions so that existing and new religious facilities may be sustained as neighborhood anchors and a source of spiritual guidance. Recognize also that places of worship or religious assembly, and some other religious facilities or institutions, are accorded important federal constitutional and statutory protections under the First Amendment (U.S. Const. Amend. I) and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, approved September 22, 2000 (114 Stat. 803; 42 U.S.C. 2000cc). The missions of many religious institutions involve service to those in need, and institutions offer important services, such as providing food banks, meals, clothing, counseling services, shelter, and housing.

312.9 Policy LU-2.3.7: Nonconforming Institutional Uses

Carefully control and monitor institutional uses that do not conform to the underlying zoning to promote long-term compatibility. In the event such institutions are sold or cease to operate, encourage conformance with existing zoning and continued compatibility with the neighborhood.

312.10 Policy LU-2.3.8: Nonconforming Commercial and Industrial Uses

Limit nonconforming uses in residential areas that generate noise, truck traffic, odors, air and water pollution, and other adverse effects. Consistent with the zoning regulations, limit the expansion of such uses and fully enforce regulations regarding their operation to avoid harmful effects on their surroundings.

312.11 Policy LU-2.3.9: Transient Accommodations in Residential Zones

Continue to distinguish between transient uses, such as hotels, bed and breakfasts, and inns, and permanent residential uses, such as homes and apartments in the District’s zoning regulations. The development of new hotels on residentially zoned land should continue to be prohibited, and owner occupancy should continue to be required for transient accommodations in residential zones, consistent with applicable laws. Short-term housing for persons receiving social services is outside the scope of this policy’s prohibition.

312.12 Policy LU-2.3.10: Conversion of Housing to Guest Houses and Other Transient

Uses

Control the conversion of entire residences to guest houses, bed and breakfast establishments, clinics, and other non-residential or transient uses. Zoning regulations should continue to allow larger bed and breakfasts and small inns within residential zones through the special exception process, with care taken to avoid the proliferation of such uses in any one neighborhood. Short term rental uses shall conform to existing regulations.

Please refer to Policy 2.4.11 of this element for additional guidance on hotel uses and the need to address their impact.

312.13 Policy LU-2.3.11: Home Occupations

Maintain appropriate regulations (including licensing requirements) to address the trend toward home occupations, accommodating such uses but also ensuring that they do not inappropriately impact residential neighborhoods.

312.14 Policy LU-2.3.12: Arts and Culture Uses in Neighborhoods

Recognize the importance of low-profile, neighborhood-serving arts and culture as assets for community preservation and building. Encourage the preservation or expansion of arts and culture in discretionary review of development projects.

Please refer to the Arts and Culture Element for additional guidance.

312.15 Action LU-2.3.A: Analysis of Nonconforming Uses

Complete an analysis of nonconforming commercial, industrial, and institutional uses in residential areas. Use the findings to identify the need for appropriate actions, such as zoning text or map amendments and relocation assistance for problem uses.

312.16 Action LU-2.3.B Short-Term Rental Studies

Conduct periodic studies of short-term rental locations and numbers and examine their impact on neighborhood livability and affordable housing.

##### **10-A DCMR § 313** LU-2.4 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND CENTERS {#sec-10-a313 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A313}

313.1 Commercial uses and local public facilities are an essential part of the District’s neighborhoods. Many of these uses are clustered in well-defined centers that serve as the heart of the neighborhood. These areas support diverse business, civic, and social activities. Each center reflects the identity of the neighborhood around it through the shops and establishments it supports and the architecture and scale of its buildings. These centers are also often connecting points for public transit lines—in fact, many originated around streetcar stops and continue to be important transit points today.

313.2 Since 2006, the District has experienced significant population growth with the emergence of new neighborhoods and revitalization of existing ones. Growth of commercial centers has favored walkability and a retail mix led by food establishments and neighborhood shopping options. Residential growth has also spurred local commercial growth, buoying the success of more commercial centers and alleviating the District’s long-standing retail gap. These changes have reshaped the retail landscape. Established retail areas have new competition while new opportunities emerged in underused centers. Commercial centers in neighborhoods provide amenities to residents, help to define public life, and provide community anchors and places for social interaction. Planning areas east of the Anacostia River remain underserved by retail and grocery stores, limiting access and options for the predominantly Black communities in these areas. Online retail and other emerging issues, some created or accelerated by the pandemic, will also shape future commercial development.

313.3 In 2012, OP developed the DC Vibrant Retail Streets Toolkit to help community and business leaders maximize the potential of their commercial centers with a road map based on extensive market research. The most important factor for vibrant commercial districts is support from a management organization, such as a business improvement district (BID), Main Street, merchants’ association, or other community group. Management organizations present a unified identity and efficiently communicate the center’s interests and needs.

313.4 The structure of retail space is another important factor. Retail space is most likely to be most vibrant when it is contiguous with other retail spaces, ceilings are at least 12 feet high, storefronts are transparent, and sidewalks are at least eight feet wide. Each commercial center has its own market position based on numerous factors, including the characteristics of the residential and daytime populations, function and composition of nearby centers, and accessibility. The type of retail mix and amount of space that can be supported depends on a center’s market position, which can change by increasing housing and jobs in or near the center and/or increasing access to the center.

313.5 Improving access to neighborhood commercial centers for pedestrians, transit riders, bicyclists, and drivers is an important factor for vibrant retail operations. Pedestrian access is the most important accessibility factor for all commercial centers because it is the common thread that connects retail space with patrons using all other modes.

313.6 Curbside management is another major factor for vibrant commercial areas. Manage the curbside of streets in commercial centers to promote greater access and turnover for customers. Curbside management may be done through strategies such as adjusting parking prices and time limits. Curbside lanes are used for multiple purposes, including parking, loading, bicycle lanes, and transit movements. All such uses should be carefully considered when determining how to manage access in each commercial center. Additionally, management organizations should manage off-street parking in commercial centers to promote shared parking among different uses at different times of day and days of the week.

313.7 Even the most inclusive neighborhood centers have to deal with land use conflicts. Areas with a high prevalence of bars, liquor stores, fast-food outlets, convenience stores, and similar uses are causes for concern regarding noise, litter, traffic, and other sources of potential conflict in almost every part of the District. Commercial parking demand affects nearby residential streets around many centers. In some locations, commercial and residential rear yards abut one another, causing concerns over rodents, odors, noise, shadows, view obstruction, and other effects. Effective zoning and buffering requirements are important in addressing such concerns while accommodating growth, enhancing local amenities, and protecting neighborhood character. Zoning has been used in some commercial districts to limit the range of allowable uses and reduce the likelihood of external impacts.

313.8 Not all commercial uses occur in defined centers. Many thoroughfares are lined with strip commercial development, much of it auto-oriented and not particularly focused on residents of the adjacent neighborhoods. Activities such as auto dealerships and repair services, motels, and similar uses can be important contributors to the economy. Again, zoning regulations establish where these uses are appropriate and should set buffering and screening requirements and other standards that improve the compatibility of such uses with their surroundings.

313.9 Policy LU-2.4.1: Promotion of Commercial Centers

Promote the vitality of commercial centers and provide for the continued growth of commercial land uses to meet the needs of residents, expand employment opportunities, accommodate population growth, and sustain Washington, DC’s role as the center of the metropolitan area. Commercial centers should be inviting, accessible, and attractive places, support social interaction, and provide amenities for nearby residents. Support commercial development in underserved areas to provide equitable access and options to meet the needs of nearby communities.

313.10 Policy LU-2.4.2: Hierarchy of Commercial Centers

Maintain and reinforce a hierarchy of neighborhood, multi-neighborhood regional, and main street commercial centers in the District. Activities in each type of center should reflect the center’s intended role and market area, as defined in the Framework Element. Established centers should be expanded in areas where the existing range of goods and services is insufficient to meet community needs.

313.11 Policy LU-2.4.3: Regional Centers

Support and enhance the District’s regional commercial centers to help serve area shopping needs that are not met downtown. Permit the District’s two established regional commercial centers, at Georgetown and Friendship Heights, to develop and evolve in ways that are compatible with other land use policies, including those for accommodating population growth and increasing affordable housing, especially along corridors; strengthening commercial vitality; maintaining established neighborhoods; mitigating negative environmental impacts; strengthening transit options; managing parking; and minimizing adverse transportation impacts. Promote equitable access to regional shopping by encouraging the continued development of the emerging regional centers at Minnesota-Benning and Hechinger Mall in a manner that is consistent with other policies, including those noted above, in the Comprehensive Plan.

313.12 Policy LU-2.4.4: Heights and Densities in Regional Centers

Provide heights and densities in established and proposed regional centers that provide daytime and residential populations to support successful retail and services, allow for additional housing, and offer employment opportunities. Use buffer areas, siting, massing, design, and other strategies to compatibly transition to adjoining residential neighborhoods.

313.13 Policy LU-2.4.5: Encouraging Nodal Development

Discourage auto-oriented commercial strip development and instead encourage pedestrian-oriented nodes of commercial development at key locations along major corridors. Zoning and design standards should ensure that the height, mass, and scale of development within nodes respects the integrity and character of surrounding residential areas and does not unreasonably impact them.

313.14 Policy LU-2.4.6: Scale and Design of New Commercial Uses

Develop new uses within commercial districts at a height, mass, scale, and design that is appropriate for a growing, densifying Washington, DC, and that is compatible with surrounding areas.

313.15 Policy LU-2.4.7: Location of Nightclubs and Bars

Provide zoning and alcoholic beverage control laws that encourage a mix of ground-floor uses in commercial areas, creating stronger retail environments and minimizing potential negative effects of liquor licensed establishments (e.g., nightclubs and bars) in neighborhood commercial districts and adjacent residential areas. New uses that generate late-night activity and large crowds should be prioritized downtown, in designated arts or entertainment districts, and in areas where there is a limited residential population nearby.

313.16 Policy LU-2.4.8: Addressing Commercial Parking Impacts

Apply zoning and other regulations, and as needed develop new regulations, to consider the transportation and parking impacts of different commercial activities and include provisions to mitigate the parking demand and congestion problems that may result as new development occurs, especially related to loading and goods delivery.

Please refer to the Transportation Element, Section 3.2 for additional policies and actions related to parking.

313.17 Policy LU-2.4.9: High-Impact Commercial Uses

Limit the location and proliferation of fast-food restaurants, sexually oriented businesses, late-night alcoholic beverage establishments, 24-hour mini-marts and convenience stores, and similar high-impact commercial establishments that generate excessive late-night activity, noise, or otherwise affect the quality of life in nearby residential neighborhoods. Efforts should recognize and focus on consistent enforcement in disproportionately affected areas to improve neighborhood outcomes.

313.18 Policy LU-2.4.10: Use of Public Space within Commercial Centers

Carefully manage the use of sidewalks and other public spaces within commercial districts to avoid pedestrian obstructions and to provide an attractive and accessible environment for shoppers. Continue to encourage the identification and transition of excess public right-of-way into temporary or permanent plazas that contribute to social interaction within commercial centers. Where feasible, the development of outdoor sidewalk cafes, flower stands, and similar uses that animate the street should be encouraged. Conversely, the enclosure of outdoor sidewalk space with permanent structures should generally be discouraged.

313.19 Policy LU-2.4.11: Hotel Impacts

Manage the impacts of hotels on surrounding areas, particularly in the Near Northwest neighborhoods where large hotels adjoin residential neighborhoods. Provisions to manage truck movement and deliveries, overflow parking, motor coach parking, and other impacts associated with hotel activities should be developed and enforced.

Please refer to Policies 2.3.9 and 2.3.10 of this element for additional guidance on hotel uses within residential neighborhoods.

313.20 Policy LU-2.4.12: Monitoring of Commercial Impacts

Maintain a range of monitoring, inspection, and enforcement programs for commercial areas to ensure that activities are occurring in accordance with local planning, building, zoning, transportation, health, alcoholic beverage control, and other District rules and regulations. Prompt and effective action should be taken in the event non-compliance with these rules and regulations is observed.

313.21 Policy LU-2.4.12: Commercial Uses Outside Designated Centers

Not all commercial uses can be appropriately sited within designated neighborhood, multi-neighborhood, and regional centers. For example, automobile sales, nurseries, building supply stores, large nightclubs, hotels, and similar uses may require locations near parking and major roads. Retain and support such uses and accommodate them on appropriately located sites.

##### **10-A DCMR § 314** LU-3 BALANCING COMPETING DEMANDS FOR LAND {#sec-10-a314 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A314}

314.1 This section of the Land Use Element addresses five specific activities that require a greater level of direction than can be covered in the neighborhood policies listed and described in the previous sections. These activities are an essential part of Washington, DC and are vital to the District’s future. Each of these uses presents a unique set of challenges and land use compatibility issues.

They include:

Public works and industrial uses that are essential to government operations and the local economy but also create external impacts and face displacement for higher value land uses;

Institutional uses, including places of worship and other religious facilities that seek vacant land or developed properties for expansion but where expansion is limited because the properties are hemmed in by adjacent neighborhoods;

Foreign missions—namely, the chanceries and embassies of foreign governments that seek to locate or expand in some of the District’s most vibrant neighborhoods;

Federal facilities that often operate in immediate proximity to residential neighborhoods, creating the need for sensitive planning as these uses expand, contract, and implement new security measures.

##### **10-A DCMR § 315** LU-3.1 PUBLIC WORKS AND PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND REPAIR (PDR) LAND USES {#sec-10-a315 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A315}

315.1 Approximately 333 acres of land in Washington, DC are zoned for industrial uses. PDR areas support a variety of uses, many of which are essential to the delivery of municipal services or are part of the business infrastructure that underpins the local economy. Furthermore, PDR businesses and uses create opportunities for entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and higher-paying jobs than comparable jobs for similar education attainment in economic sectors like retail and health care. It is estimated that nine percent of the employment in the District is in PDR industries. These jobs are often accessible to residents with lower education attainment and returning citizens. In 2005, the inventory of private industrial floor space in the District was approximately 13 million square feet.

315.2 Washington, DC’s industrial land exists in part because of historic development factors that made certain areas suitable for these uses or unsuitable for residential and commercial development. Such factors include proximity to road, rail, or water routes needed to transport heavy goods, relative isolation from residential areas, and effects of noisy or noxious uses and infrastructure. Where these factors remain, PDR facilities are likely to continue to be an appropriate use of this land. Since much of this land has always been devoted to industrial use, many of Washington, DC’s prominent examples of historic industrial architecture are located here. Of the 25 properties identified as potentially significant in the DC State Historic Preservation Office’s 1991-1992 historic resources study of District warehouses and workshops, 16 have received historic designation.

315.3 Additionally, racial discrimination including local and federal policies affected the site selection of industrial uses in the District. A challenge today is recognizing that industrial land is almost entirely located proximate to predominantly low-income (i.e. Black) neighborhoods. Accordingly, there are racial equity and environmental justice concerns about the use of PDR lands.

315.4 Some of the municipal activities housed on industrial land include trash transfer and hauling, bus storage and maintenance, vehicle impoundment, police and fire training, street repair and cleaning equipment storage, and water and sewer construction services. Private activities on industrial lands include food and beverage services, laundries, printers, concrete and asphalt batching plants, distribution centers, telecommunication facilities, construction contractors and suppliers, and auto salvage yards, to name only a few. The contribution and importance of these uses to the economy is covered below and in the Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

315.5 Given the lenient zoning standards within industrial areas (most of which actually favor commercial uses over industrial uses), as well as the market pressure to provide additional residential housing, much of the industrial land supply is at risk. In addition, many of the public works uses that take place on industrial land are not optimally organized, resulting in inefficient use of space. Plans to reorganize and consolidate many of these activities have been developed. The repositioning of these resources should result in more effective service delivery reduced impacts to nearby properties, provision of amenities for surrounding neighborhoods, and creation of jobs on land freed up for further public or private investment.

315.6 Some historically industrial areas now have mixed-use land use designations that combine PDR with commercial and/or residential uses. These designations indicate that PDR uses with lower impacts, such as maker space, beverage manufacturing, and food preparation should be integrated with a broader range of uses, including housing. The intent is to support community revitalization while supporting existing PDR uses and encouraging new PDR businesses and more affordable housing.

315.7 In areas not identified by mixed-use land use designations, the District should continue to review PDR zoning, to encourage needed and efficiently developed production, distribution, and repair uses. This approach reflects increasing clarity within land use policy on where PDR uses should be accompanied by other uses while recognizing that the District benefits from focused areas where higher-impact commercial and governmental activities can occur.

315.8 In 2005, the District commissioned an analysis of industrial land supply and demand to provide a framework for new land use policies (see text box). In 2014, another industrial land study was released by the District: Ward 5 Works: Ward 5 Industrial Land Transformation. This study furthered the findings in 2005 with particular emphasis on the Upper Northeast area where approximately 50 percent of the District’s industrial uses are located. The recommendations of these studies are incorporated in the policies and actions that follow.

315.9 One of the most important findings of the 2005 industrial land use analysis was an immediate unmet need of approximately 70 acres for municipal-industrial activities. Facility needs range from a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) Evidence Warehouse to replacement bus garages for WMATA. Several agencies, including the Architect of the Capitol (AOC), indicate that their acreage needs will increase even more in the next 10 years. At the same time, efficiencies could be achieved through better site layouts and consolidation of some municipal functions, particularly for vehicle fleet maintenance. The findings provide compelling reasons to protect the limited supply of industrial land and to organize municipal-industrial activities more efficiently. One example of this approach is showcased in the Department of Public Works (DPW) Campus Master Plan, a study conducted as a recommendation from the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study. The DPW Campus Master Plan aims to consolidate operations and administrative offices to a new state-of-the-art campus at West Virginia Avenue NE that would transform the current site into a neighborhood asset while efficiently using the District-owned industrial land.

##### **10-A DCMR § 316** LU-3.2 TAKING A HARD LOOK AT THE DISTRICT’S INDUSTRIAL LANDS {#sec-10-a316 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A316}

316.1 The 2005-2006 Industrial Land Use Study classified DC’s industrially zoned lands into four categories:

Areas for retention and reinforcement have healthy PDR uses and have good prospects for hosting such uses in the future.

Areas for intensification/evolution will continue to be desirable for PDR activities but show patterns of underuse and opportunities for intensified uses. Some non-PDR activities may take place in these areas in the long-term future.

Areas for strategic public use are needed to accommodate municipal and utility needs.

Areas for land use change are areas where a move away from PDR uses may be appropriate due to a lack of viable PDR businesses and the desirability of these sites for other uses. In some of these areas, the District may let the market take its course. In others, proactive measures such as rezoning may be in order.

The District developed criteria for evaluating rezoning requests, which reflect these typologies and further consider the land use, transportation, and environmental context of each site, its unique characteristics, and its potential need for future municipal purposes.

316.2 Policy LU-3.2.1: Retain Areas for Industrial Uses

Retain an adequate, appropriate supply of industrial land designated for the range of Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) uses to meet the District’s current and future PDR activities and economic needs. These needs include public works functions, retail warehousing, transportation storage and maintenance, construction staging, such as concrete manufacturing, and back-office service needs. These services are essential to support the local economy. This policy recognizes that these services are a benefit to the entire District, yet impacts are disproportionately borne by those residents living in close proximity to industrial uses; therefore, opportunities to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts, abate nuisances, and ensure residents have neighborhood services and amenities shall be considered. The supply of areas designated for PDR on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) should not fall below its current level, unless the land is designated for mixed uses including PDR through a Small Area Plan (including those changes made to the FLUM as a result of a Small Area Plan). Efforts to convert areas except as just stated to other designations must be resisted. Any further designation of PDR land must consider the racial impact, and ideally should be designated throughout the District. Zoning regulations and land use decisions shall continue to preserve active and viable PDR land uses while considering compatible uses and development under standards established within PDR zoning. Economic development programs should work to include the retention of PDR uses.

316.3 Policy LU-3.2.2: Retain Areas for High-Impact Industrial Activities

Within the supply of land designated for PDR uses on the FLUM, ensure adequate areas are provided for essential and high impact PDR uses such as municipal services, utilities, and asphalt and concrete batch plants. Unless land is designated for mixed uses, including PDR, on the FLUM, uses such as retail, office, or residential must be accessory to these high impact PDR uses and must not overwhelm the PDR use or pose potential conflicts in use. Users of these areas must minimize any adverse impacts on adjacent areas that have more restrictive land uses.

316.4 Policy LU-3.2.3: Retain and Support PDR Uses in Areas Designated for Mixed PDR Uses

To promote long term retention of PDR uses, development on areas striped to include PDR on the Future Land Use Map must include industrial space intended for use during the life of the project, and on sites containing existing industrial space the amount of industrial space on-site should be substantially preserved. The mix of uses and site design of these areas must support the long-term retention of PDR uses, and minimize potential conflicts with PDR uses. PDR uses that are less intense and/or have less impacts may be more appropriate for areas striped to include PDR. The Florida Avenue Market Study area shall be subject to the industrial use concepts set forth in that Small Area Plan but is not subject to this policy. Use the Ward 5 Industrial Land Transformation Study recommendations to guide current and future uses and redevelopment in that area.

316.5 Policy LU-3.2.4: Redevelopment of Obsolete Industrial Uses

Encourage the reuse of nonproductive industrial sites, such as vacant warehouses and open storage yards, with higher value PDR uses, including public works facilities, and other activities that support the core sectors of the District economy (federal government, hospitality, higher education, etc.).

316.6 Policy LU-3.2.5: Location of PDR Areas

Accommodate PDR uses, including municipal public works facilities, in areas that are well buffered from residential uses (and other sensitive uses such as schools), easily accessed from major roads and railroads, and characterized by existing concentrations of PDR and industrial uses. Such areas are generally designated as PDR on the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map.

316.7 Policy LU-3.2.6: Rezoning of Industrial Areas

Allow the rezoning of industrial land for non-industrial purposes only when the land can no longer viably support industrial or PDR activities is located such that industry cannot co-exist adequately with adjacent existing uses. Examples include land in the immediate vicinity of Metrorail stations and small sites in the midst of established residential neighborhoods. In the event such rezoning results in the displacement of active uses, assist these uses in relocating to designated PDR areas.

316.8 Policy LU-3.2.7: Mitigating Industrial Land Use Impacts

Mitigate the adverse impacts created by industrial uses through a variety of measures, including buffering, site planning and design, strict environmental controls, performance standards, and use of a range of industrial zones that reflect the varying impacts of different kinds of industrial uses. Industrial uses shall meet all environmental and operational requirements to reduce or eliminate impacts such as pollution to the surrounding neighborhoods and to the environment. Uses shall provide buffers, screening, operational strategies, and other measures to reduce or abate nuisances, including noise, light, odor, vibration, and trash, to adjacent residential communities. As appropriate, create amenities for adjacent residents through art, creative uses, retail, and other services. Encourage continuing outreach to adjoining neighborhoods to identify and reduce impacts.

316.9 Policy LU-3.2.8: Siting of Industrial-Type Public Works Facilities

Use performance standards (such as noise, odor, and other environmental controls), minimum distance requirements, and other regulatory and design measures to ensure the compatibility of industrial-type public works facilities, such as trash transfer stations with surrounding land uses. Improve the physical appearance and screening of such uses and strictly regulate operations to reduce the incidence of land use conflicts, especially with residential uses.

316.10 Policy LU-3.2.9: Promote Efficient and High-Performing PDR Uses

Promote new, and transform existing, PDR uses to achieve high environmental performance and be efficient, sustainable, and resilient in design and operations. Encourage pro-active facility management and continuous improvements to reduce impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods.

316.11 Policy LU-3.2.10: Cottage Industries and Makers

Support low-impact cottage industries and makers in neighborhood commercial districts and on appropriate industrial lands. Maintain zoning regulations that regulate such uses in residential areas to avoid land use conflicts and negative business-related impacts while allowing residents to explore low-impact entrepreneurship in or near their homes.

316.12 Policy LU-3.2.11: Optimizing Municipal Public Works Functions

Strategically manage District-owned land in industrial areas to improve operational capacity, use land effectively, incorporate principles of environmental stewardship, resilience, and sustainability, and create community amenities and job opportunities. Demonstrate leadership in effective, exemplary measures to address impacts to adjacent neighborhoods. This approach may include the consolidation of public works activities on a smaller number of sites, enabling vacated sites to be repurposed for other PDR uses, or high-priority, but hard to site, public uses. Use the Ward 5 Industrial Land Transformation Study recommendations to guide current and future uses and redevelopment in that area.

See also the Infrastructure Element, for additional information.

316.13 Policy LU-3.2.12: Land Use Efficiency Through Technology

Encourage the more efficient use of PDR land through the application of technologies that reduce acreage requirements for public works. Examples of such applications include the use of diesel-electric hybrid or electric buses (that can be accommodated in multilevel garages), using distributed power generation rather than large, centralized facilities, and emphasizing green building technologies to reduce infrastructure needs.

316.14 Policy LU-3.2.13: Infrastructure Adequacy

The District and utility providers shall seek to provide adequate, equitable levels of infrastructure District-wide currently, and appropriately plan and develop infrastructure to address existing service deficiencies and meet the future needs of growing and existing neighborhoods. As needed, upgrades to ensure infrastructure adequacy and reliability should occur in tandem with proposed development. Infrastructure upgrades should be developed to achieve multiple objectives, such as sustainable development, green buildings, or undergrounding.

316.15 Action LU-3.2.A: Industrial Zoning Use Changes

Provide a new zoning framework for industrial land, including:

Prohibiting high-impact heavy industries in low intensity PDR zones to reduce the possibility of land use conflicts;

Prohibiting certain civic uses that detract from the industrial character of exclusively PDR areas and that could ultimately interfere with business operations;

Requiring special exceptions for potentially incompatible large retail uses in the PDR zones to provide more control over such uses without reducing height and bulk standards. Avoid displacing existing PDR uses or foreclosing opportunities for future PDR uses. Where appropriate, encourage retail or commercial uses that are accessory to PDR uses as a way to activate ground floors;

Limiting non-industrial uses in high-intensity PDR areas to avoid encroachment by uses that could impair existing industrial and public works activities (such as trash transfer); and

Creating a mixed-use district where residential, commercial, and lesser-impact PDR uses are permitted, thereby accommodating live-work space, artisans and studios, and more intensive commercial uses.

Once these changes have been made, update zoning as appropriate. The zoning changes should continue to provide the flexibility to shift the mix of uses within historically industrial areas and should not diminish the economic viability of existing industrial activities or the other compatible activities that now occur in PDR areas.

316.16 Action LU-3.2.B: Joint Facility Development

Actively pursue intergovernmental agreements to develop joint facilities for District and federal agencies (such as the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and National Park Service (NPS)), District and transit agencies (DPW and WMATA), multiple public utilities, and multiple District agencies performing different public works functions.

316.17 Action LU-3.2.C: Inventory of Housing in Industrial Areas

Compile an inventory of existing housing units within industrially zoned areas to identify pockets of residential development that should be rezoned (to mixed-use or residential) to preserve the housing stock.

316.18 Action LU-3.2.D: DPW Co-location and Campus

Actively pursue funding resources or allocation for the implementation of the West Virginia Avenue DPW Campus Master Plan study that was conducted by District agencies in 2015.

316.19 Action LU-3.2.E: Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study

Implement the recommendations provided in the Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study released in 2014.

316.20 Action: LU-3.2.F: PDR Land Use Retention Study

Prepare a study for submittal to the Council on the following: (1) identification of the amount, location, and characteristics of land sufficient to meet the District’s current and future needs for PDR land; (2) quantifiable targets for PDR land retention; and (3) identification of strategies to retain existing and accommodate future PDR uses, particularly for high impact uses. Any strategies to expand PDR land designations or accommodate future PDR uses shall prioritize areas that do not currently have a disproportionate amount of PDR-designated land. Strategies should consider technological advances or efficiency measures to utilize PDR land more effectively. The study shall incorporate racial equity analyses. Further, the study will address the Council’s concern that mixing other uses, particularly residential, with PDR uses will create economic conditions and land use conflicts that will reduce areas available for PDR uses. Any industrial zoning use changes as identified in Action LU-3.2.A must be informed by this study.

Please see the Economic Development, Environment, and Urban Design Elements for additional policies and actions related to industrial uses. Please see the Infrastructure Element for additional policies and actions related to infrastructure adequacy.

##### **10-A DCMR § 317** LU-3.3 INSTITUTIONAL USES {#sec-10-a317 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A317}

317.1 Institutional uses occupy almost 2,300 acres—an area larger than all of Washington, DC’s retail, office, and hotel uses combined. These uses include colleges and universities, private schools, childcare facilities, places of worship and other religious facilities, hospitals, private and nonprofit organizations, and similar entities.

317.2 The District is home to about a dozen colleges and universities, enrolling more than 85,000 students. There are also nearly 70 non-local college and university programs that occupy space in Washington, DC. The District contains more than a dozen hospitals, some located on the campuses of its universities and others occupying their own campuses or federal enclaves. Hundreds of nonprofit and private institutions also operate within the District, ranging from private schools and seminaries to historic home museums and the headquarters of leading international organizations. Major institutional uses are shown on Map 3.7.

317.3 Map 3.7: Colleges, Universities, and Hospitals

317.4 Institutions make an important contribution to the District economy and are an integral part of Washington, DC’s landscape and history. The colleges and universities alone employ 29,682 workers. Through partnerships with government and private industry, museums, higher education, and health care institutions provide services and resources to the community that could not possibly be provided by the government alone.

317.5 Private institutions are stewards of historic and architecturally distinguished campuses. Several of these campuses are already recognized by historic designations but other historically significant campuses are not.

317.6 The growth of private institutions has generated significant concern in many neighborhoods. These concerns relate both to external impacts, such as traffic and parking, and broader concerns about the character of communities where institutions are concentrated or expanding.

Please see the Educational Facilities Element for additional policies and actions related to colleges and universities.

317.7 Policy LU-3.3.1: Transportation Impacts of Institutional Uses

Support ongoing efforts by institutions to mitigate their traffic and parking impacts by promoting ridesharing, carpooling, public transportation, shuttle service and bicycling; providing on-site parking; and undertaking other transportation demand management measures.

317.8 Policy LU-3.3.2: Corporate Citizenship

Support continued corporate citizenship among large institutions, including colleges, universities, hospitals, private schools, and nonprofits. Given the large land area occupied by these uses and their prominence in the community, institutions (along with the District itself) should be encouraged to be role models for smaller employers in efforts to improve the physical environment. This should include a continued commitment to high-quality architecture and design on local campuses, expanded use of green building methods and low-impact development, and adaptive reuse and preservation of historic buildings.

Please see the Economic Development Element for additional policies and actions related to encouraging corporations to support the local economy through hiring and contracting.

317.9 Policy LU-3.3.3: Nonprofits, Private Schools, and Service Organizations

Plan, design, and manage large nonprofits, service organizations, private schools, seminaries, colleges and universities, and other institutional uses that occupy large sites within residential areas in a way that minimizes objectionable impacts on adjacent communities. Expansion of these areas should not be permitted if the quality of life in adjacent residential areas is significantly adversely impacted.

##### **10-A DCMR § 318** LU-3.4 FOREIGN MISSIONS {#sec-10-a318 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A318}

318.1 There are more than 170 countries across the globe with foreign missions in Washington, DC. These missions assist the U.S. government in maintaining positive diplomatic relations with the international community. By international treaty, the U.S. government is obligated to help foreign governments in obtaining suitable facilities for their diplomatic missions. This obligation was reinforced through the Foreign Missions Act of 1982, which established an Office of Foreign Missions within the Department of State and empowered the secretary of state to set criteria relating to the location of foreign missions in the District. As noted in the section entitled Washington’s Foreign Missions, foreign missions are housed in many different types of buildings, ranging from row houses and mansions to custom-designed office buildings.

318.2 The number of foreign missions in the District is dynamic, with some growth likely. In addition, some of the existing missions are likely to relocate as they outgrow their facilities, respond to increased security requirements, and move beyond their traditional diplomatic functions. The Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan indicate that sites for as many as 100 new and relocated chanceries may be needed during the next 25 years. The availability of sites that meet the needs of foreign missions within traditional diplomatic areas is limited and the International Chancery Center on Van Ness Avenue has no available sites remaining. A portion of the Walter Reed campus is planned for chancery use, but additional areas may be needed for chancery use, and it may be necessary for foreign missions to look beyond traditional diplomatic enclaves.

318.3 The facilities that house diplomatic functions in Washington, DC are commonly referred to as embassies. To differentiate the functions that occur in buildings occupied by foreign missions, a variety of designations are used:

Chanceries, colloquially referred to as embassies, are the principal offices used by a foreign mission.

Chancery annexes are used for diplomatic purposes in support of the mission, such as cultural attaches or consular operations.

Ambassadors’ residences are the official homes of ambassadors or chiefs of missions.

318.4 Many foreign governments occupy chanceries, chancery annexes, and ambassador’s residences in more than one location. In 2004, the federal government indicated that there were 483 separate facilities in the District serving these functions.

318.5 Since 1982, chanceries have been allowed to locate in most of Washington, DC’s non-residential zone districts as a matter-of-right. They are also permitted in higher-density residential and special purpose (SP) zones, as well as in less dense residential areas covered by a diplomatic overlay district.

318.6 Historically, chanceries have been concentrated in Northwest Washington, particularly along Massachusetts Avenue NW (also known as Embassy Row), and in the adjacent Sheridan-Kalorama and Dupont Circle neighborhoods. There are also 16 chanceries on a large federal site adjacent to the Van Ness-UDC Metro station, specifically created to meet the demand for foreign missions.

318.7 The Foreign Missions Act of 1982 established procedures and criteria governing the location, replacement, or expansion of chanceries in the District. The act identifies areas where foreign missions may locate without regulatory review (matter-of-right areas), including all areas zoned commercial, industrial, waterfront, or mixed-use. These areas are located in all quadrants of Washington, DC, and include large areas south of the National Mall and in Wards 7 and 8. The 1982 act also identifies areas where foreign missions may locate subject to disapproval by the District of Columbia Foreign Missions Board of Zoning Adjustment (FMBZA). These include areas zoned medium-high and high-density residential, SP, and areas within a diplomatic overlay zone.

318.8 As a result of the analysis accomplished in support of the Foreign Missions Act, a methodology was developed in 1983 to determine the most appropriate areas for foreign missions to locate, subject to FMBZA review. The 1983 methodology allows foreign missions to locate in low- and moderate-density District blocks (squares) in which one-third or more of the area is used for office, commercial, or other non-residential uses. In some cases, a consequence of the square-by-square determination has been an unanticipated increase in chanceries.

318.9 In 2015, NCPC updated the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Foreign Missions and International Organization Element. The Foreign Mission Element recognizes “a key challenge with locating chanceries is balancing the need to plan secure locations for diplomatic activities while being sensitive to residential neighborhoods.” The Foreign Mission Element acknowledges that the State Department is preparing a master plan for a new foreign mission center to be developed on the former Walter Reed Medical Center site and suggests that new chanceries be encouraged to locate first in areas where their use is considered a matter-of-right under local zoning. Working with NCPC and the State Department, clarified zoning regulations were written regarding applications to locate, replace, or expand a chancery use not otherwise permitted as a matter-of-right. The new zoning standards were adopted as part of the 2016 amendments to the zoning regulations.

318.10 Policy LU-3.4.1: Chancery Encroachment in Low-Density Areas

Encourage foreign missions to locate their chancery facilities where adjacent existing and proposed land uses are compatible (i.e., office, commercial, and mixed-use), taking special care to protect the integrity of residential areas. Discourage the location of new chanceries in any area that is essentially a residential use area to the extent consistent with the Foreign Missions Act.

318.11 Policy LU-3.4.2: Target Areas for New Chanceries

Encourage the development of new chancery facilities in locations where they would support neighborhood revitalization and economic development goals, particularly in federal enclaves and east of 16th Street NW. Work with the Department of State, the NCPC, and other organizations to encourage foreign missions to locate in these areas.

318.12 Policy LU-3.4.3: Compatibility of New Chanceries

Promote the design and maintenance of chanceries in a manner that protects open space and historic resources, mitigates impacts on nearby properties, is compatible with the scale and character of its surroundings, and enhances Washington, DC’s international image as a city of great architecture and urban design.

318.13 Action LU-3.4.A: Foreign Mission Mapping Improvements

On an ongoing basis, accurately inventory foreign mission locations, distinguishing, chanceries, ambassador’s residences, and institutional land uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 319** LU-3.5 FEDERAL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a319 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A319}

319.1 When streets and highways are subtracted out, about one-third of the land area of the District is owned by the federal government. Most of this land is managed by the NPS, but a significant amount—more than 2,700 acres—consists of federal installations, offices, military bases, and similar uses. This acreage includes nearly 2,000 buildings, with more than95 million square feet of floor space. Federal uses occupy a range of physical settings, from self-contained enclaves, such as Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, to grand office buildings in the heart of Downtown Washington, DC. Federal uses operate in all quadrants of the District, often amid residential neighborhoods. Since they are largely exempt from zoning, coordination and communication are particularly important to ensuring land use compatibility.

319.2 Many of the District’s federal uses have unique security requirements and operational needs. This became particularly apparent after September 11, 2001, as streets around the U.S. Capitol were permanently closed and major federal offices and monuments were retrofitted to improve security. Security needs are likely to create further changes to the District’s landscape; the ongoing relocation of thousands of Homeland Security workers to the west campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital is just one example.

319.3 The size of the federal workforce in the District is not expected to grow substantially during the next decade, following more than 25 years of downsizing. The District supports continued adherence to a 1968 federal policy to maintain 60 percent of the region’s federal employees within Washington, DC. At the same time, the federal government is in the process of transferring several tracts of land to the District, potentially reducing the land area for expansion. This suggests the need for even greater coordination on the planning and development front. Several successful joint planning efforts have recently been completed, including plans for the Armed Forces Retirement Home, Poplar Point, and Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Efforts like these must continue as the future of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Labor Department buildings, RFK Stadium, and other large federal sites is resolved.

319.4 Major federal activities in the District are shown on Map 3.8. Priorities for the use of these lands are expressed in the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Federal Workplace Element of that Plan includes policies to reinforce the preeminence of the monumental core through future siting decisions, give preference to urban and transit-served sites when siting new workplaces, and emphasize the modernization of existing structures before building new structures. The Federal Elements include guidelines on the types of federal functions that are appropriate within the Capitol Complex, CEA, federal installations, and other areas within the District, as well as elsewhere in the region.

319.5 Map 3.8: Federal Lands, 2017

319.6 Policy LU-3.5.1: District/Federal Joint Planning

Coordinate with NCPC, NPS, GSA, AOC, and other federal agencies to address planning issues involving federal lands, including the monumental core, the waterfront, and the park and open space network. Encourage the use of master plans, created through participatory planning processes, to guide the use of large federal sites.

319.7 Policy LU-3.5.2: Federal Sites and Adjacent Neighborhoods

Support expansion of the federal workforce and redevelopment of federal sites in a manner that is compatible with neighborhood revitalization, urban design, housing, economic development, environmental quality, and socioeconomic equity goals. Federal land uses should strive to maintain land use compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods.

319.8 Policy LU-3.5.3: Recognition of Local Planning and Zoning Regulations

Encourage the federal government to abide by local planning and zoning regulations to the maximum extent feasible. Ensure federal partners are aware of local priorities and goals, and when decisions require the input or actions of federal agencies, encourage swift decision-making so as not to delay achievement of local goals.

319.9 Policy LU-3.5.4: Federal Workplaces and District Goals

Strongly support the implementation of Federal Element policies for federal workplaces calling for parking guidelines that align with local guidelines, sustainable design, energy conservation, additional low- and moderate-income housing, and creation of job opportunities in underserved communities within the District.

319.10 Policy LU-3.5.5: Neighborhood Impact of Federal Security Measures

Consistent with the Federal Elements, ensure that federal security measures do not impede the District’s commerce and vitality, excessively restrict or impede the use of public space or streets, or affect the health of the existing landscape. Additional street closures are to be avoided to the maximum extent possible.

319.11 Policy LU-3.5.6: Reducing Exposure to Hazardous Materials

Avoid locating and operating federal facilities that produce hazardous waste or increase the threat of accidental or terrorist-related release of hazardous materials in heavily populated or environmentally sensitive areas.

Actions relating to federal facility sites may be found in the Comprehensive Plan

Area Elements.

### **10-A4** TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 400** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A400}

400.1 The Transportation Element provides policies and actions to maintain and improve the District’s transportation system and enhance the travel choices of current and future residents, visitors, and workers. These policies are complemented by policies in the Land Use, Urban Design, and Environmental Protection Elements on related topics, such as air quality and the management of public space. Recognizing the interplay between transportation and these related topics is critical to improving safety, mobility, and accessibility in Washington, DC.

400.2 The critical transportation issues facing the District are addressed in this element. These include:

Eliminating fatalities and serious injuries on the transportation network;

Expanding the District’s transportation system to provide alternatives to the use of single-occupant autos;

Enhancing the District’s corridors for all modes of transportation;

Increasing bicycle and pedestrian connections, routes, and facilities;

Improving the efficiency of the existing transportation system;

Investing in bridge and roadway maintenance and repair;

Investing in transit network maintenance and repair;

Providing equitable transportation choices and access that meet the needs of communities of color, residents at all income levels, and vulnerable populations;

Reducing pollution and negative health and environmental effects resulting from transportation; and

Promoting transportation demand management (TDM).

400.3 A safe, well-balanced, and multimodal transportation system is integral to the District’s efforts to sustain and enhance residents’ quality of life. It is also key to the District’s future economic growth and its role as the nation’s capital. Creating such a system requires integrating land use and transportation and implementing a range of improvements that enhance safety, connectivity, livability, equity, health, sustainability, resiliency, and vitality.

400.4 As the nation’s capital and the center of one of the country’s fastest-growing metropolitan areas, Washington, DC faces increasingly complex mobility challenges as it plans for its future. The District has the largest share of the region’s jobs; however, the region continues to grow, creating longer commutes, increased peak congestion, and poor air quality. Within the District, the major surface transportation arteries are highly congested during morning and evening commuting, and Metrorail has faced safety and reliability issues related to deferred maintenance. Funding to maintain the existing transportation system, let alone expand the system to meet increased demand, is severely constrained.

400.5 However, these challenges also present opportunities. The District has one of the most extensive mass transit systems in the country, densities that support and promote transit use, a growing network of bicycle and pedestrian trails, and a unique system of radial boulevards that distinguish it from all other American cities. Washington, DC’s gracious avenues, bridges, and parkways are part of its history and are defining elements of its urban form and character. With appropriate strategies, these transportation assets can enhance the quality of life in Washington, DC and increase the District’s attractiveness while still performing their essential function to move people and goods in and around the District.

400.6 The District is also augmenting and sustaining its existing transportation network. It is expanding transit via limited-stop bus routes to areas not served by Metrorail and has established streetcar service on a major commercial corridor. It is replacing the Anacostia River bridges to improve mobility and roadway operations and to support economic development and urban beautification. It is improving sidewalks and bicycle routes across the District. It has instituted a highly successful bikeshare system and has supported private sector innovations in car sharing, ride-hailing services, and dockless bicycle and scooter sharing. The on-demand ride-hailing services offered by transportation network companies (TNCs) have created new opportunities and challenges for mobility in the District. They provide individuals with new transportation options but increase demands on the District’s limited roadway capacity. Figure 4.1 summarizes the transportation assets of the District.

400.7 Emerging smart-city technologies—such as dynamic parking meters, connected signals, and digital sensors—provide new opportunities to meet many of the transportation challenges facing the District. These technologies build on existing transportation infrastructure, including the signal network, transit and vehicle technologies, and user tools and applications. The District aims to employ these technologies in an integrated, accessible, and equitable fashion, encouraging coordination among the District, regional agencies, smart infrastructure providers, and users. Data exchange will be a critical part of the process—as will feedback and adaptation—to encourage greater safety within, equity regarding, and accessibility to the transportation network.

400.8 Figure 4.1: Transportation Assets of the District

Transportation Asset

Description

Roadway System

1,171 miles

Rail Mass Transit (Metrorail)

38 miles (total for region = 117 miles)

40 stations (total for region = 91 stations)

Bus Mass Transit

Metrobus

DC Circulator

Service on 281 miles of road

Service on 52 miles of road

Sidewalks

1,808 miles

Bicycle Routes

Protected bicycle lanes

On-road bicycle lanes

Signed routes

Off-road trails

9 miles

75 miles

100 miles

60 miles

Capital Bikeshare

Bikes

Stations

2,300 Capital Bikeshare bikes (total for region = 3,600 bikes)

300 Capital Bikeshare stations (total for region = 525 stations)

Parking Meters

11,166 parking meters serving 18,903 spaces

Street Lights

70,263 street lights

Airports*

Two international airports (Washington Dulles International and Baltimore/Washington International) and one domestic (Reagan National)

Railroads

27.2 miles of rail line (serving Amtrak passenger rail, Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) and Virginia Rail Expressway (VRE) commuter rail, and CSX and Norfolk Southern freight rail). Union Station, within walking distance of the Capitol, provides connections to bus and rail transit, and to shared cars, rental cars, and sightseeing services.

**History**
- *Source: DC Office of Planning, 2017 Facilities serving Washington, DC, located outside of its boundaries 400.9 In the District, the transportation system should strike a careful balance between serving the needs of its residents—a large workforce that arrives and departs Washington, DC each day—and serving the many people who visit. The system must meet residents’ needs, which should be coordinated with regional infrastructure and policy. In 2014, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) produced moveDC, a multimodal transportation vision plan that addresses these challenges. 400.10 moveDC, the District’s multimodal long-range transportation plan, presents a transportation infrastructure model and District-wide multimodal policies that will guide the District’s transportation vision for the next two decades. The plan describes the recommended networks of facilities, services, and policies to achieve the District’s transportation goals. The Comprehensive Plan accepts moveDC’s policies and recommendations as the basis for transportation planning and policy in the District and integrates them within the broader policy framework laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. 400.11 The policies and actions in this section must be considered in the context of racial equity to address existing disparities and historic inequities. Transportation options are critical to access job opportunities, healthy food, education, and many services, and for the ability to afford to live in the District. In planning areas east of the Anacostia River, where 90 percent of residents are Black, people travel farther for employment opportunities, often by car. Black and Brown residents are proportionately higher users of transit, particularly bus services. Historically, many of the District’s transportation initiatives in the 20th century, such as highways, caused displacement of Black communities and many facilities such as the Metrorail system were sited and designed to limit use by communities of color. Communities of color and low-income communities disproportionately reside near highways, rail, and freight routes and thus experience the negative environmental and health impacts of this infrastructure. It is important to design and implement transportation systems, including new technologies, that consider the specific needs of these communities through a racial equity lens, reduce barriers to access, and increase transportation accessibility and mobility.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 400*

##### **10-A DCMR § 401** TRANSPORTATION GOAL {#sec-10-a401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A401}

401.1 The overarching goal for transportation in the District is: Create a safe, sustainable, equitable, efficient, and multimodal transportation system that meets the access and mobility needs of District residents, the regional workforce, and visitors; supports local and regional economic prosperity; and enhances the quality of life for District residents.

##### **10-A DCMR § 402** T-1 LINKING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION {#sec-10-a402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A402}

402.1 Transportation and land use are fundamental components of development and are inextricably linked to each other and to the formation of cities. The construction of a new transportation facility, such as a Metrorail station or streetcar line, influences the nature and location of new development in that area. The nature and location of development, in turn, influence patterns of travel for residents.

402.2 Transportation facilities themselves are a significant element of the built environment, creating connections but at times also creating barriers. They can spur economic development and help attract private investment, but they can also create land use conflicts and environmental and health issues if land use, equity, and environmental concerns are not considered in the planning process.

##### **10-A DCMR § 403** T-1.1 LAND USE: TRANSPORTATION COORDINATION {#sec-10-a403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A403}

403.1 As laid out in the Framework Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the District and region are expected to continue to gain jobs and households over the next 20 years. Coordination of transportation and land use decisions is critical to making the best use of the infrastructure and finite land resources as these gains occur. The balance between housing and jobs plays a clear role in travel patterns. In general, the demands on the transportation system are reduced when homes are located close to places of employment, shopping, and leisure. People spend less time traveling, and overall quality of life may be improved. The transportation system as a whole benefits when more mixed-use residential and employment areas are situated along major transit routes. Travel times are reduced, and there is better use of public transportation investments. Future efforts should account for differences in transportation options and access available to households with varying incomes and to communities of color, and seek to improve affordability and access to services for underserved areas of the District.

403.2 Although the District has already developed walkable, transit-oriented neighborhoods, future opportunities will arise to strengthen the linkage between land use and transportation as new development takes place. Design features play an important role in this equation. Residential communities should be developed so that services, such as shopping, are accessible by walking, taking transit, or riding a bicycle—not just by driving a car. The design of transportation infrastructure can also have a major impact on travel behavior and system performance. For example, the redesigns of the Anacostia River crossings that are planned, under construction, and implemented provide for pedestrian and bicycle access across the river, improving the historical bridge crossings, which discouraged or prohibited access. There are also opportunities to enhance bike and pedestrian connectivity with the redesign of the Long Bridge across the Potomac River.

403.3 The space needs of transportation support facilities, including space for bus garages, service yards, and motor vehicle inspection facilities, also call for stronger coordination of land use and transportation planning. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) already has a critical need for additional and improved bus storage and service yards and anticipates a need for greater rail yard space when the Metrorail fleet adds more eight-car trains. The lack of modern bus garages in the District severely impedes better bus service. As new transit lines are developed for the Circulator and DC Streetcar, additional land will be needed for new support facilities. Just as corridor preservation efforts anticipate the future need for transportation facilities, there is a need for land use planning to preserve opportunities for transportation support facilities, such as vehicle maintenance and storage. Failure to preserve areas for this use forces the location of facilities at great distances from service areas, increasing costs and limiting vehicle availability in emergencies. In some cases, as with rail facilities, location of vehicle maintenance and storage with operation service is essential. As service needs grow, transportation support facilities are needed to support existing services and future growth across the District.

403.4 Closer coordination of transportation and land use planning can result in better congestion management, more efficient use of transit and parking, and transportation infrastructure that is sensitive and complementary to its surrounding context.

403.5 Assessing and measuring the transportation impacts of land use decisions are also important steps in integrated land use and transportation planning. New development generates new trips—be they auto trips, transit trips, pedestrian trips, or bicycle trips. Major land use changes, such as the development of large housing complexes or office buildings, should be evaluated for their impacts on existing and planned transportation infrastructure to ensure that the network can function adequately when the projects are completed. New methods of managing transportation impacts—such as TDM (additional information can be found in Section T-3.1 of this chapter)—should be pursued in lieu of simply building more roads. Additionally, as new technologies—such as transportation network companies (TNCs) and connected and autonomous vehicles (AVs)—emerge, the District will evaluate potential land use impacts and continue to encourage mixed-use and accessible development patterns.

403.6 In the past, the traditional way of measuring traffic impacts was to use a series of lettered grades (A through F) based on factors such as vehicle speed, the volume of cars that pass along a street compared to the street’s capacity, and the length of time for a car to pass through an intersection. These level of service (LOS) standards continue to be widely used in the suburbs, where most trips are made by car. But traditional LOS measures are not appropriate in a built out District, where widening streets to increase capacity is rarely an option (or a desired outcome). In the District, LOS measures should integrate vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit travel. The benchmark should be the number of people who can pass along a corridor or through an intersection rather than just the number of cars.

403.7 Policy T-1.1.1: Transportation Impact Assessment

Require appropriate environmental analysis for major transportation projects, including new roadways, bridges, transit systems, road design changes, and rerouting of traffic from roads classified as principal arterials or higher onto minor arterials or neighborhood streets with lesser volumes.

403.8 Policy T-1.1.2: Land Use Impact Assessment

Assess the transportation impacts of development projects using multimodal standards rather than traditional vehicle standards to more accurately measure and more effectively mitigate development impacts on the transportation network. Environmental and climate change impacts, including that of carbon dioxide, should be included in the assessment of land use impacts.

403.9 Policy T-1.1.3: Context-Sensitive Transportation

Design transportation infrastructure to support current land uses as well as land use goals for mixed-use, accessible neighborhoods. Make the design and scale of transportation facilities compatible with planned land uses. Facilities should comply with the District’s Complete Streets policy, adopted in October 2010, with an emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle-friendly design.

403.10 Policy T-1.1.4: Transit-Oriented Development

Support transit-oriented development by investing in pedestrian-oriented transportation improvements at or around transit stations, major bus corridors, and transfer points. Encourage development projects to build or upgrade the pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure leading to the nearest transit stop to create last-mile connections. Pedestrian movements and safety should be prioritized around transit stations.

See also Section LU-1.4 of the Land Use Element for transit-oriented development policies.

403.11 Policy T-1.1.5: Joint Development

Maximize ridership potential, housing including affordable housing, and economic development opportunities by fostering transit-supportive commercial and residential joint development projects on WMATA-owned or -controlled land, public land, and private properties adjacent to Metrorail stations.

403.12 Policy T-1.1.6: Transportation Support Facilities

Prioritize in place preservation and rehabilitation for mass transit facilities and prioritize new, efficient support facility locations for storage and/or maintenance for Metrobus, DC Circulator, commuter bus, motor coach, Metrorail, streetcar, commuter rail, and intercity rail to serve residential and commercial areas throughout the District to equitably distribute access to these services throughout all wards. Recognize bus service and its support facilities as critical components of the District’s public transportation system. Agencies should work to integrate mass transit facilities in the urban form and development program.

403.13 Policy T-1.1.7: Equitable Transportation Access

Transportation within the District shall be accessible and serve all users. Residents, workers and visitors should have access to safe, affordable and reliable transportation options regardless of age, race, income, geography or physical ability. Transportation should not be a barrier to economic, educational, or health opportunity for District residents. Transportation planning and development should be framed by a racial equity lens, to identify and address historic and current barriers and additional transportation burdens experienced by communities of color.

403.14 Policy T-1.1.8: Minimize Off-Street Parking

An increase in vehicle parking has been shown to add vehicle trips to the transportation network. In light of this, excessive off-street vehicle parking should be discouraged.

403.15 Action T-1.1.A: Transportation Measures of Effectiveness

Implement moveDC performance measures and the District Mobility Project to quantify transportation service and assess land use impacts on the transportation system. Priority performance measures include mode share, access to transportation options, person-carrying capacity or throughput, travel time reliability, and accessibility and equity for potentially vulnerable populations.

403.16 Action T-1.1.B: Transportation Improvements

Require TDM measures and transportation support facilities—such as crosswalks, bus shelters, transit resource and information kiosks, Capital Bikeshare stations, and bicycle facilities—with large development projects and major trip generators, including projects that go through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. Consider improvements to transit stations—such as additional stairs, escalators, and in some cases new entrances—with large developments.

403.17 Action T-1.1.C: Create Regional Network of Transportation Support Facilities

Work with WMATA and regional jurisdictions and partners to strategically locate new transportation infrastructure support facilities for the greater Washington metropolitan area where they best serve the transportation network and complement nearby land uses.

403.18 Action T-1.1.D: Land Use—Transportation Coordination

Establish regular meetings with neighboring jurisdictions to discuss planned transportation projects and transportation needs. Encourage all jurisdictions to engage in planning and project coordination so that projects that occur near borders are considered by all those impacted.

403.19 Action T-1.1.E Update Zoning Regulations Regarding Mass Transit

Include Metrobus service and its support facilities (i.e., parking, refueling, routine cleaning and maintenance, cosmetic repairs, employee breakrooms and lockers, offices and training facilities) in the definition of “mass transit facilities” in the Zoning Regulations to ensure that bus service is recognized as a critical component of the District’s public transportation system.

Please consult the Land Use and Economic Development Elements for additional policies and actions on transit-oriented development. Policies on parking are included in Section T3.2 of this element and in the Land Use Element. Please see Section T-3.1 for additional policies on transportation demand management.

##### **10-A DCMR § 404** T-1.2 TRANSFORMING CORRIDORS {#sec-10-a404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A404}

404.1 Avenues and boulevards are much more than simple transportation routes. They are a legacy of the 1791 L’Enfant Plan and are still one of Washington, DC’s most distinctive features. They were designed to be beautiful corridors lined with distinctive buildings, affording dramatic vistas for those passing by. Today, these corridors handle hundreds of thousands of private vehicles each day, as well as pedestrians, bicycles, trucks, and buses.

404.2 Different corridors in Washington, DC serve different functions. Some, like New York Avenue, carry heavy truck and commuter traffic. Others have wide sidewalks that provide a safe and pleasant environment for pedestrians. Still others were once vital shopping streets or streetcar lines that today have lost their neighborhood-serving activities and are checkered by drive-through and auto-oriented uses. As the gateways to Washington, DC’s communities, the District’s corridors should once again become the centers of civic and economic life for surrounding neighborhoods and serve as vital transportation corridors. Major avenues will also serve as focus areas for future smart-city investments that support these goals through enhancements in safety, transit service, and public amenities. The challenges facing the District as it plans for and reinvests in its corridors include balancing the various transportation modes, providing diverse and accessible transit options for all users, and tailoring its transportation strategies to recognize the function of each major street and foster economic growth.

404.3 Transit and non-auto travel have become major travel modes in the District, yet these modes have little roadway space dedicated to their exclusive use. One of the key moveDC strategies to enhance the District’s multimodal system is to establish modal priorities on District streets. Per moveDC, every non-local street should prioritize pedestrians, accommodate driving and local deliveries, and support one of the following modes:

Protected bicycle facilities;

Dedicated high-capacity surface transit lane(s);

Dedicated freight routes; or

A combination of these modes in a simpler form.

Decisions on which modes will be prioritized on streets are illustrated in the moveDC plan and are based on network connectivity, land use, and travel demand.

404.4 Policy T-1.2.1: Major Thoroughfare Improvements

Beautify and stabilize gateways and major thoroughfares by implementing coordinated multimodal transportation, economic development, and urban design improvements.

404.5 Policy T-1.2.2: Targeted Investment

Target planning and public investment toward the specific corridors with the greatest potential to foster neighborhood improvements, create equitable outcomes that reduce barriers and transportation burdens, and enhance connectivity across Washington, DC and corridors that serve as gateways to the District, welcoming visitors, residents, and workers.

404.6 Policy T-1.2.3: Discouraging Auto-Oriented Uses

Discourage certain uses, like drive-through businesses or stores with large surface parking lots and minimize the number of curb cuts in new developments. Curb cuts and multiple vehicle access points break up the sidewalk, reduce pedestrian safety, and detract from pedestrian-oriented retail and residential areas.

404.7 Policy T-1.2.4: Providing Roadway Space for All Modes

Roadway space should be determined by the potential person-carrying capacity of the lane; modes with the ability to move the most people should be prioritized. These changes should be informed by the modal priorities identified in moveDC.

404.8 Action T-1.2.A: Crosstown Corridors

Implement the recommendations of the Crosstown Multimodal Transportation Study and the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study to improve mobility across town for all users of those corridors.

Please consult the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions on streetscape and design standards for corridors.

##### **10-A DCMR § 405** T-1.3 REGIONAL SMART GROWTH SOLUTIONS {#sec-10-a405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A405}

405.1 While this Transportation Element is focused on the District, transportation issues do not stop at jurisdictional boundaries. As the core of the Washington metropolitan region, the District has a high level of interest in transportation issues being addressed at a regional level. Consistently ranked among the most congested areas in the nation, and one with very high levels of auto-related air pollution, the Washington metropolitan region should work cooperatively to promote more environmentally responsible transportation. Continued strong regional action on expanding transit and smart-growth land use policies are critical for both the transportation system and the environment.

405.2 In 2014, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) released its Regional Transportation Priorities Plan, examining the impacts of projected regional growth between 2010 and 2040 on the metropolitan transportation system—and exploring alternatives to reduce future congestion. The study found that daily vehicle miles traveled in the region are projected to grow by 25 percent by 2040, while freeway and arterial lane miles are projected to grow by only seven percent. As a result, many transportation facilities will be congested. The key finding of the MWCOG study is that long-term increases in congestion can be reduced by adjusting local land use plans to better match the transportation system, shifting jobs to the east side of the region and encouraging housing closer to the region’s job centers.

405.3 A regional strategy of promoting infill, mixed-use, and transit-oriented development in urbanized areas is needed to encourage transportation efficiency both in the District and the region. A robust and meaningful dialogue that involves federal, state, and local leaders is absolutely essential. This dialogue should focus on improving the jobs/housing balance, investing in transit, and limiting sprawl on the region’s edge. Among other things, the District should establish direct avenues of communication with the planning, zoning, transportation, and economic development agencies of immediately surrounding jurisdictions.

405.4 Existing trip patterns reflect the District’s role as the region’s major employment destination. When moveDC was adopted in 2016, approximately 67 percent of persons working in the District commuted from the suburbs. Of the daily trips to and from the District, 66 percent are driven, 24 percent are taken on transit, and 10 percent are pedestrians or cyclists. Daily trips to and from the District can be seen in Figure 4.2.

405.5 Approximately 35 percent of the District’s residents commute to suburban destinations, with many of these trips going to large regional activity centers, such as Tysons and Rosslyn, Virginia, and Silver Spring and Bethesda, Maryland. The majority of District residents work within the District, with a significant portion of those jobs in the downtown core. Within the District, 39 percent of daily trips are driven; 33 percent are taken on transit; and 28 percent are taken on foot, by bike, or on personal mobility devices.

405.6 Figure 4.2 2040 Daily Person Trip Flows for Regional Trips

405.7 Policy T-1.3.1: Transit-Accessible Employment

Support more efficient use of the region’s transit infrastructure with land use strategies that encourage employment locations near underused transit stations. Work closely with the federal government and suburban jurisdictions to support transit-oriented and transit-accessible employment throughout the region. This would expand the use of major transit investments such as Metrorail. Encourage approaches that improve transit access to jobs for low-income residents.

405.8 Policy T-1.3.2: Reverse Commuting

Utilize data on the travel patterns of District workers as the basis for programs to improve transit service, particularly programs that increase reverse commuting options for District workers employed in major suburban employment centers.

405.9 Policy T-1.3.3: Regional Transportation Planning Initiatives

Advocate for large-scale regional transportation planning initiatives that involve local, regional, state, and federal governments. Such initiatives are essential given the long lead times and high expense of increasing regional transportation capacity.

405.10 Action T-1.3.A: Regional Jobs/Housing Balance

Continue the efforts to promote infill, mixed-use, housing, particularly affordable housing, and transit-oriented development at the regional level, design transportation systems that connect District residents to local jobs, and provide opportunities for non-resident workers to also live in Washington, DC.

405.11 Action T-1.3.B: Regional Transportation Infrastructure Study

Actively participate in efforts by MWCOG and other regional organizations that address long-term transportation infrastructure needs in greater Washington, DC. in—Participate in the preparation of the 30-year Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan, which takes a broad-based look at these needs, taking into account expected growth patterns and emerging technologies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 406** T-1.4 PLACEMAKING IN PUBLIC SPACE {#sec-10-a406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A406}

406.1 In addition to the transportation function of streets, associated features—such as medians, curbsides, edges, and sidewalks—provide opportunities to make the District more active and livable. Some corridors have more space than is needed for transportation. This excess space may be found on wide avenues or in triangular spaces where the grid is intersected by diagonal streets. Currently, there are hundreds of small non-transportation areas of land that exist within the public right-of-way, offering opportunities to establish spaces for cultural presentation and exchange in the District.

406.2 Policy T-1.4.1: Street Design for Placemaking

Design streets, sidewalks, and transportation infrastructure—such as bike racks and other public places in the right-of-way—to support public life, in addition to their transportation functions. This includes incorporating seating, plantings, and the design of spaces for gathering, lingering, and engaging in commerce and social or cultural activities.

406.3 Policy T-1.4.2: Cultural Use of Public Space

Support social, cultural, and commercial activities in public spaces through permitting and other government functions. Reduce permitting and other barriers to cultural use of streets and the adjoining public right-of-way.

406.4 Action T-1.4.A: Develop a Placemaking in Public Space Program

Develop a placemaking in public space program within DDOT. DDOT should encourage and actively promote opportunities for enhancement in ineffective and under-used spaces District-wide. Any enhancements within the public realm should prioritize the safety and functionality of the space and carefully consider the impacts of the change to the space prior to any modifications being made.

Please consult the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions on placemaking in public space, and the Environmental Protection Element for guidance on tree canopy and green infrastructure.

406.5 Action T-1.4.B: Tree Planting and Removal

Develop further guidance on tree planting and removal.

##### **10-A DCMR § 407** T-2 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION CHOICES {#sec-10-a407 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A407}

407.1 As of 2017, the District has one of the most balanced transportation systems in the country. Of the 50 largest cities in the U.S., the District has the highest percentage of residents who walk or bike to work and ranks fourth following New York, Boston, and San Francisco in the percentage who take public transportation. Approximately 25 percent of the District’s households have no automobile. Access, mobility and mode use differ across the District and should be considered by race and income: the average commute times in the District are the highest in Wards 7 and 8, and more residents in these wards drive to work than any other ward, despite low access to cars. Low income Metrobus riders comprise 48 percent of the District’s bus ridership, compared with 18 percent of rail ridership, attributed in part to cost. Providing transportation choices that are more efficient and environmentally friendly than driving—such as walking, bicycling, commuter rail, passenger rail, and public transit—is a key goal of the Comprehensive Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 408** T-2.1 TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY {#sec-10-a408 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A408}

408.1 The District and the surrounding region are served by the second largest rail transit system and the sixth largest bus network in the United States. The bus and rail systems are operated by WMATA, which provides service throughout the Washington metropolitan region.

408.2 WMATA was created in 1967 by an interstate compact to plan, develop, build, finance, and operate a balanced regional transportation system in the national capital area. Construction of the planned 103-mile Metrorail system began in 1969 and was largely funded by the federal government. The first phase of Metrorail began operation in 1976 and was completed in early 2001. In 2004, three new stations opened—two extended the Blue Line east of the Beltway and the first infill station (NoMa-Gallaudet U) opened on the Red Line. With the opening of the first phase of the Silver Line in 2014, the system now totals 117 miles, 38.3 miles of which are located within the District itself. Close to half of the stations on the system—40 of 91—are located in the District. The Metrorail system is shown in Map 4.1. While much of the District is within a half mile of a station, some areas—such as Georgetown, the New York Avenue corridor, and Bolling Air Force Base—are not.

408.3 As the core of the region and the hub of the Metrorail system, much of WMATA’s transit usage centers in the District. In 2016, the total average weekday boardings at all Metrorail stations was 639,000. Nearly 57percent of these boardings occurred at District stations.

408.4 Downtown station platforms are often congested in the peak period. The District and WMATA continue to coordinate on opportunities to relieve overcrowding and improve safety through short- and long-term design modifications of platforms and station access points.

408.5 The capacity of the core of the Metrorail system—in particular the Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines—is constrained because various lines share tracks. WMATA will continue to work with partner jurisdictions to advance capacity solutions, such as moving to eight-car trains and expanding core stations to accommodate more passengers. Long-term solutions to core capacity constraints are needed and should be considered, including the potential for new stations and lines in the District.

408.6 Because of the very high cost of building entirely new Metrorail subway lines within Washington, DC, the District is proposing better connections, to and among, the various spokes of the Metrorail system, with investments in surface transit. These improvements include limited-stop bus service and dedicated transit lanes, streetcars, and improvements to local bus service through the use of new technologies, including, real-time bus arrival information and transit signal priority. In addition, the District is working with WMATA to make more efficient use of existing infrastructure through measures such as increasing train lengths from six cars to eight cars. The increased train length would add about one-third more capacity to each train, greatly helping to alleviate congestion problems on some lines in the system. This technique does not require any changes to railroad or station infrastructure but does require the power delivery infrastructure to be upgraded. The District and other jurisdictions are currently working toward upgrading the power system to support eight-car trains and working to procure new rail cars.

408.7 Map 4.1: Metrorail System

408.8 WMATA also operates the Metrobus regional bus service. The buses run approximately 160,020 miles on an average weekday, making 422,000 trips. Approximately 55 percent of these trips are within the District. Metrobus operates 171 lines and 270 routes on 1,184 miles of roadway throughout the metropolitan area. Within the District, Metrobus operates 71 bus lines and 105 routes on 261 miles of roadway, or 22 percent of the roadway system. Average weekday ridership on these District-based lines ranges from about 200 persons to over 19,000 persons. Some of the high-volume bus corridors include Wisconsin/Pennsylvania Avenue (routes 30N, 30S, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37), 14th Street NW (routes 52, 53, 54, 59), 16th Street NW (S1, S2, S4, S9), and Georgia Avenue—7th Street (routes 70, 74, 79).

408.9 WMATA faces complex and unique funding and budgetary challenges to maintain and operate the transit system. Research shows that over half of the total capital spending for other transit systems in other cities comes from dedicated sources of one kind or another. However, until recently, WMATA received no funding from such sources A historic funding agreement for WMATA was reached in May 2018, with the District, Maryland, and Virginia officially agreeing to $500 million in annual dedicated funding for Metro’s capital program. The Dedicated Funding for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Emergency Act of 2018 commits the District to $178.5 million per year in capital funding through fiscal year 2059, as part of the WMATA Dedicated Funding Fund. This agreement creates the first stable funding source for WMATA since its creation in 1967.

408.10 The Washington Metrorail Safety Commission met for the first time in February 2018. The commission was established through an interstate compact and requires funding from the District, Maryland, Virginia, and the federal government. As an independent legal entity, the commission is empowered to review, approve, oversee, and enforce the safety plan of the Metrorail system. The commission is responsible for publishing an annual safety report and submitting it to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and publishing an annual report of operations (detailing its programs, operations, and finances) and an annual independent audit of its finances.

408.11 WMATA now has a stable, reliable, and dedicated source of capital funding. The District will continue to actively collaborate with jurisdictions throughout the region and with the federal government to encourage the success of the WMATA Dedicated Funding Fund.

408.12 The District is served by many regional bus carriers in addition to Metrobus. In Maryland, these include Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) Commuter Bus, Dillon, Eyre, and Keller Transportation. In Virginia, these include Quick’s, Martz National Coach, Loudoun County Commuter Bus, Fairfax Connector, and Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC) OmniRide. Some private bus services also provide circulation within the District for schools, hospitals, universities, and other areas or attractions. The District is also served by regional commuter rail ( found in the next section).

408.13 In addition to the regional WMATA bus service, the District began the DC Circulator service in July 2005. Circulator, a District-operated service that connects people to business, culture, and entertainment throughout Washington, DC, has grown to have six routes, providing more than 16,000 trips on the average weekday.

408.14 The District is working to increase transit options for intra-District trips. These options will include a variety of transit technologies, including neighborhood circulators, streetcars, limited-stop bus service, and Capital Bikeshare. The intra- District system is designed to be cohesive, supplement and complement existing Metro services, and support District land use objectives.

408.15 Map 4.2 illustrates the High-Capacity Transit (HCT) Corridors recommended in WMATA's Priority Corridor Network (PCN) Plan and the eight-mile streetcar corridor currently moving through planning and implementation. Further analysis will be necessary on each corridor to specify the mode and operational characteristics.

408.16 Phase 1 of the DC Streetcar began service in 2016, connecting Oklahoma Avenue/Benning Road NE to Union Station. Plans for extending the line east to Benning Road Metrorail station are underway.

408.17 As of 2019, other ongoing transit improvement initiatives include:

K Street Transitway: The transitway will provide two travel lanes for exclusive use by buses between 21st Street NW and 12th Street NW.

Circulator: The Transit Development Plan for the DC Circulator is being updated with a focus on the performance of the six current routes. Projects are also underway for the replacement of more than half of the bus fleet as well as acquisition of a site for a maintenance and storage facility.

16th Street NW Bus Lanes: The design phase is underway for a suite of bus improvements on the 16th Street NW corridor, which provides more than 20,000 bus trips each weekday. Improvements include peak-period, peak-direction bus lanes; transit signal priority; real-time passenger information displays; off-board fare collection; and operational changes, such as additional limited-stop service and route simplification.

408.18 Policy T-2.1.1: Transit Accessibility

Work with transit providers to develop transit service that is fast, frequent, and reliable and that is accessible to the District’s residents, workers, and visitors, including during late-night hours. Pursue strategies that make transit safe, equitable, secure, comfortable, accessible, and affordable.

408.19 Policy T-2.1.2: Surface Transit Improvements

Enhance surface transit service by improving scheduling and reliability, providing timed transfers, reducing travel time, providing relief for overcrowding, increasing frequency and service hours, and improving both local access and crosstown connections. Key strategies in support of this policy may include roadway priority treatments, including dedicated transit lanes and transit signal priority, proof-of-payment systems, and larger vehicles capable of carrying more riders.

408.20 Policy T-2.1.3: WMATA Funding

Support the continuation of the WMATA Dedicated Funding Fund, which provides the District’s share of the regional dedicated, reliable capital funding for Metro, and work with Virginia and Maryland to ensure the funding continues beyond fiscal year 2059.

408.21 Policy T-2.1.4: Maintenance of Transit Facilities

Facilitate coordination among WMATA, DDOT, and the Department of Public Works (DPW) to program and prioritize safety and state-of-good-repair investments for WMATA-owned, District-owned, and other transportation infrastructure and facilities.

408.22 Map 4.2: Proposed High-Capacity Transit Corridors

408.23 Policy T-2.1.5: District Streetcar System

Expand transit options for District residents by developing a streetcar line. Create a streetcar line that will connect neighborhoods and key destinations, and create walkable, amenity-rich, and diverse communities along the streetcar route. Explore various value-capture strategies to obtain private and other financial support for the construction and ongoing operation of streetcars.

408.24 Policy T-2.1.6: First- and Last-Mile Connections

The District should advance the planning and implementation processes to consider last-mile travel between major transit or commercial nodes to and from nearby residential areas.

408.25 Policy T-2.1.7: Water Taxis

Support privately funded ventures to provide water taxis and support facilities on the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers to serve close-in areas around the District as well as longer-distance routes from points south, such as Indian Head on the east side of the Potomac and Woodbridge to the south.

408.26 Action T-2.1.A: New High-Capacity Transit Corridors

Develop transportation and land use plans to construct a network of new premium transit infrastructure, including priority bus corridors to provide travel options, better connect the District, improve surface-level public transportation, and stimulate economic development. As needed, replace existing travel and parking lanes along select major corridors with new transit services—such as limited-stop bus service, dedicated bus lanes, and transit signal priority—to improve mobility within Washington, DC.

408.27 Action T-2.1.B: Eight-Car Trains

Increase Metrorail train lengths from six cars to eight cars when justified by demand to meet service guidelines and passenger levels.

408.28 Action T-2.1.C: Circulator Buses

In addition to the current DC Circulator bus routes, consider implementing Circulator routes in other areas of the District that will support all-day, high-frequency transit service. Modified, expanded, or new routes should be designed in collaboration with WMATA to strengthen the District's bus network and provide appropriate levels of service to meet the demands of each corridor. The Circulator will continue to connect residents, workers, and visitors to commercial centers and visitor attractions.

408.29 Action T-2.1.D: Bus Stop Improvements

Improve key bus stop locations through such actions as:

Extending bus stop curbs to facilitate reentry into the traffic stream;

Moving bus stops to the far side of signalized or signed intersections where feasible;

Adding bus stop amenities, such as user-friendly, real-time transit schedule information, benches, shade, and shelters;

Improving access to bus stops via well-lit, accessible sidewalks and street crossings; and

Using global positioning system (GPS) and other technologies to inform bus riders who are waiting for buses when the next bus will arrive.

408.30 Action T-2.1.E: College Student Metro Passes

Continue to explore potential partnerships between WMATA and local colleges and universities, similar to the University Pass partnership with American University, to provide Metro passes to college students. As part of this program, improve connections between campuses and Metrorail stations during both on-and off-peak hours.

408.31 Action T-2.1.F: Transit Amenities

Seek opportunities to dedicate space in the right-of-way for surface transit amenities, such as bus stops, signage, shelters, passenger information, and offboard fare collection. Follow best practices in bus-stop siting (most often on the far side of an intersection) yet evaluate each case separately. Consider opportunities for enhanced stops and amenities with large-scale developments and redevelopments.

408.32 Action T-2.1.G: Performance Measures

Develop, apply, and report on transit performance measures to identify strengths, deficiencies, and potential improvements and to support the development of new and innovative facilities and programs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 409** T-2.2 MAKING MULTIMODAL CONNECTIONS {#sec-10-a409 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A409}

409.1 Multimodal connections refer to the links between different modes of travel, such as Metrorail, buses, bicycles, and private cars. These connections can be improved by expanding Metrorail stations to allow for more effective bus and streetcar transfers. Similarly, better pedestrian amenities, increased bicycle parking, more Capital Bikeshare stations, and more visible parking for carshare vehicles at Metrorail stations can enhance connections.

409.2 Intercity and commuter rail and bus connections are also critical to creating an efficient multimodal transportation system. Amtrak regularly runs trains to and from Union Station, providing service along the Northeast Corridor, as well as to and from points west and south. The District ranks second in Amtrak station passenger volume, after New York City. The District is currently served by two commuter rail systems—Maryland Area Regional Commuter Rail (MARC), which provides service from Maryland, and the Virginia Rail Expressway (VRE), which provides service from Virginia. These systems provide up to 37 million trips annually to and from Union Station. MARC also provides daily service to Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (BWI), including on weekends. Commuter ridership has increased substantially during recent years, and continued growth of both systems is expected. Union Station is also served by intercity bus providers, including Greyhound, Bolt Bus, and Megabus.

409.3 Union Station is a vital national, regional, and local transportation hub and cultural destination. It handles 37 million visitors (including passengers) annually—substantially more passengers served than any of the region’s three airports, which each serve between 20 and 22 million passengers annually. The Union Station Metrorail station is the busiest in the system and provides connections for travelers to the rest of the District and region.

409.4 The expansion of the intercity bus networks, improvement of two commuter rail services, and increased intercity bus capacity, along with Metrorail and Metrobus service, will increase accessibility and enhance regional transportation options. Several key facilities on the rail system need improvements to accommodate future ridership and enable intermodal transfers. Increased capacity at Union Station and L’Enfant Plaza is also needed to accommodate commuter rail passenger traffic for MARC and VRE riders, respectively. Paratransit providers, taxis, and TNCs may also provide enhanced mobility for persons with disabilities and older adults. The continued growth of wheelchair-accessible taxicabs will be important for serving this group.

409.5 Taxis and for-hire vehicle services constitute another important component of the District’s multimodal transportation system. They provide an alternative and convenient means of travel throughout the District.

409.6 Policy T-2.2.1: Multimodal Connections

Create more direct connections between the various transit modes. This change is consistent with the federal requirement to plan and implement intermodal transportation systems. Make transit centers into locations of multimodal activity, with welcoming paths for users of all modes and supportive infrastructure, including wide sidewalks, marked crosswalks, and bicycle parking and storage.

409.7 Policy T-2.2.2: Connecting District Neighborhoods

Improve connections among District neighborhoods by upgrading transit, auto, pedestrian, and bike connections, and by removing, ameliorating, mitigating, or minimizing existing physical barriers, such as railroads and highways. Recognize where transportation infrastructure has separated communities, particularly low-income residents and communities of color, and encourage strategies that rebuild connections. However, no freeway or highway removal shall be undertaken prior to the completion of an adequate and feasible alternative traffic plan and that plan’s approval by the District government.

409.8 Policy T-2.2.3: Airport Connections

Work with other local governments in the Washington metropolitan region to maintain intermodal transportation services that provide more efficient and convenient connections between the District and the Reagan Washington National (DCA), BWI, and Washington Dulles International (IAD) airports.

409.9 Policy T-2.2.4: Union Station Expansion

Ensure that expansion and modernization of Union Station supports its role as a major, intermodal, transit-focused transportation center. Changes to Union Station should improve intermodal connections and amenities; facilitate connections with local transportation infrastructure with an emphasis on transit, pedestrian and bicycle mobility; enhance integration with adjacent neighborhoods; minimize private and for-hire vehicle trips; reduce on-site parking; and provide a continued high quality of life for District residents and visitors.

409.10 Policy T-2.2.5: Commuter and Intercity Rail

Support the expansion of commuter and intercity rail by investing in existing infrastructure and facilities, supporting emerging transportation technologies that encourage faster travel on the Northeast Corridor and enhancing the rail south of the District.

409.11 Policy T-2.26: Taxi and For-Hire Vehicle Enhancements

Promote and incentivize upgrades to the District’s taxi fleet, including conversion to hybrid or electric vehicles (EVs), installation of time and distance meters, improvements in tracking and dispatching, and implementation of accessible vehicles. Particular attention should be given to improving taxi and for-hire vehicle service to underserved communities. Incorporate TNCs into the District’s mobility planning, with an emphasis on shared vehicles.

409.12 Policy T-2.2.7: TNCs

Monitor the impacts of TNCs on the District’s transportation network, encourage companies to reach underserved areas of Washington, DC and incentivize shared rides. TNCs should not increase overall vehicular traffic volumes or cause significant mode shifts from public transit or zero-emission transportation options. Increase efforts to ensure TNC driver compliance with applicable traffic laws, particularly bike lane safety regulations and other Vision Zero policies.

409.13 Action T-2.2.A: Intermodal Centers

Support the role of Washington Union Station as an intermodal hub with regional importance. Identify other locations with the potential to serve as intermodal hubs within the District.

409.14 Action T-2.2.B: Pedestrian Connections

Work in concert with WMATA to undertake pedestrian capacity and connection improvements at transit stations and stops and at major transfer facilities to enhance efficiency, operations, and pedestrian safety, comfort, and flow.

409.15 Action T-2.2.C: Bicycle and Carpool Parking

Increase investment in bicycle parking and provide more visible parking for carsharing operations at Metrorail stations, key transit stops, and future streetcar stations.

409.16 Action T-2.2.D: Commuter Rail and Bus Connections

Support the projects and initiatives identified in the State Rail Plan developed by DDOT, which calls for increased investment in the District’s rail network. This will include investments at both Union Station and L'Enfant Plaza station to increase capacity for passengers and trains and improve circulation. This investment will accommodate growth for intercity rail and commuter rail traffic and could accommodate future through-running rail service by MARC or VRE. Exploration of an additional infill rail station could further leverage the District’s rail system. In addition, support continued investment in commuter bus service and in Metrorail feeder bus service throughout the region.

409.17 Action T-2.2.E: Transit Connections

Promote crosstown transit services and new transit routes that connect neighborhoods to one another and to transit stations and stops.

##### **10-A DCMR § 410** T-2.3 BICYCLE ACCESS, FACILITIES, AND SAFETY {#sec-10-a410 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A410}

410.1 Bicycling has long been a part of the transportation mix in the District. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, bicyclists, pedestrians, buggies, and streetcars all shared District streets. The District’s interest in bicycling as an alternative to motorized transportation grew in the 1970s in response to the energy crisis, and the first District Bicycle Plan was adopted in 1976.

410.2 The use of bicycles for transportation and recreation is increasing within the District. Between 2000 and 2017, bicycle commuting grew significantly, by 514 percent, from a 1.2 percent share to a 4.5 percent share of all District-based work trips. Continued increases in bicycling as a percent of work trips is desired.

410.3 As of 2017, the District has 75 miles of bike lanes, nine miles of cycle track, 60 miles of bike paths, 100 miles of bicycle routes, and 300 Capital Bikeshare stations. The District is also working to improve bicycle connections through parks and green spaces. Map 4.3 shows Washington, DC’s bicycle trail network.

410.4 While existing conditions provide a firm foundation for bicycling, many parts of Washington, DC could be more bicycle-friendly. Some parts of the District have no bicycle facilities at all, and many workplaces and other destinations have no facilities for storing or locking bicycles, showering, or changing.

410.5 Safety is another big concern. There were 660 crashes involving bicycles in 2016. Close to one-third of all fatalities from motor vehicle crashes in the District were pedestrians or bicyclists, compared to about 20 percent nationally and 27 percent for other large urban areas.

410.6 Map 4.3: Bicycle Routes and Trails

410.7 In 2014, DDOT estimated the bicycle LOS on all 1,171 miles of District streets. DDOT evaluated roadway lane and shoulder width, speed limit, pavement condition, and on-street parking data. The analysis found that about 46 percent of the study network received below-average bicycle LOS grades, a 23 percent improvement from 2003, when 70 percent of the network was below average. The recently completed Bicycle Element of moveDC includes many recommendations to improve bicycle facilities and infrastructure and should be consulted for more detail. When all requirements of the Bicycle Element of moveDC are fully implemented in 2040, the percentage of below-average streets will drop to 32 percent.

Please refer to the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element for additional policies and actions related to bicycle and pedestrian trails.

410.8 DDOT has established a Capital Bikeshare station expansion policy that balances stations by location type. The DDOT development plan breaks the District down into three market areas: High Ridership, High Revenue, and Accessibility. Stations located in each of these three areas are expected to have different ridership characteristics and revenue-generating potential. The expansion policy will help the District diversify the program’s ridership base and use Capital Bikeshare to connect residents to new opportunities.

410.9 Policy T-2.3.1: Better Integration of Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning

Integrate bicycle and pedestrian planning and safety considerations more fully into the planning and design of District roads, transit facilities, public buildings, and parks such that residents of each of the District’s wards have access to high-quality bicycling and pedestrian facilities.

410.10 Policy T-2.3.2: Bicycle Network

Provide and maintain a safe, direct, and comprehensive bicycle network connecting neighborhoods, employment locations, public facilities, transit stations, parks, and other key destinations. Eliminate system gaps to provide continuous bicycle facilities. Increase the amount of protected bike lanes, wayfinding signage, and Capital Bikeshare stations.

410.11 Policy T-2.3.3: Bicycle Safety

Increase bicycle safety through continued expansion of protected bike lanes (cycle tracks) and other separated facilities, traffic-calming measures, provision of public bicycle parking, enforcement of regulations requiring private bicycle parking, and improved bicycle access where barriers to bicycle travel now exist.

410.12 Policy T-2.3.4: Capital Bikeshare Expansion

Continue the expansion of Capital Bikeshare stations throughout the District to develop a complete bicycle-sharing network and encourage bicycling. Expansion of the system should balance service provisions, system costs, public input, and revenue-generation concerns. The cost of a Capital Bikeshare membership or the technology used to become a member should not be a barrier to using the system.

410.13 Policy T-2.3.5: Capital Bikeshare Access

Continue to increase utility of the system for users by locating stations so that 65 percent of residents and 90 percent of employees are within a quarter mile of a Capital Bikeshare station. Expand user access to destinations, including jobs and services; promote retail and entertainment access; and expand access to residential neighborhoods to encourage annual ridership increases.

410.14 Policy T-2.3.6: Dockless Programs

Dockless bike-share, scooter and other mobility systems should supplement and be compatible with the multimodal and accessibility priorities of the District through the permitting of private vendor-provided services. These systems should complement existing mobility services in the District, including Capital Bikeshare, Metrorail, Metrobus, and the DC Circulator.

410.15 Action T-2.3.A: Capital Bikeshare Community Partners

Continue investment in the Community Partners Program to reach unemployed persons, underemployed persons, and persons experiencing homelessness with subsidized Capital Bikeshare memberships to increase access to transportation.

410.16 Action T-2.3.B: Bicycle Facilities

Wherever feasible, require large, new commercial and residential buildings to be designed with features such as secure bicycle parking and lockers, bike racks, shower facilities, and other amenities that accommodate bicycle users. Residential buildings with eight or more units shall comply with regulations that require secure bicycle parking spaces.

410.17 Action T-2.3.C: moveDC Bicycle Element

Implement the recommendations of the Vision Zero DC Action Plan and the Bicycle Element of moveDC to:

Build more and better bicycle facilities;

Enact more bicycle-friendly policies; and

Provide more bicycle-related education, promotion, and enforcement.

410.18 Action T-2.3.D: Performance Measures

Develop, apply, and report on walking and bicycle transportation performance measures to identify strengths, deficiencies, and potential improvements and to support the development of new and innovative facilities and programs.

410.19 Action T-2.3.E: Dockless Sharing Programs

Monitor dockless programs closely so that public benefits outweigh any negative impacts to the public right-of-way, equity of service, or the ability of the Capital Bikeshare system to provide cost-effective and equitable service. Work with providers to promote equitable access to the increased mobility options these dockless programs provide.

##### **10-A DCMR § 411** T-2.4 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, FACILITIES, AND SAFETY {#sec-10-a411 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A411}

411.1 The District’s population density, interconnected grid of streets, wide sidewalks, and renowned park system have long contributed to a favorable environment for walking. In 2017 approximately 47,624 District residents (12.7 percent of Washington, DC’s labor force) walked to work. DDOT works to develop and maintain a cohesive, sustainable transportation system that is safe, affordable, and convenient, while preserving and enhancing the natural, environmental, and cultural resources of the District. Whenever DDOT substantially paves, repaves, resurfaces, or engages in construction of a roadway, bridge, or tunnel, it will bring that facility into compliance with the most current accessible guidelines.

411.2 The District has more than 1,800 miles of sidewalks. However, there are still approximately 100 miles of District streets without sidewalks and a backlog of sidewalks needing repair. When a street is fully reconstructed or when a curb and gutter are installed or rebuilt, DDOT is required to install a sidewalk on at least one side of the street if none are present.

411.3 Improvements to pedestrian facilities can enhance the quality of the walking and public transit environments, and foster greater use of both modes. Improvements should focus on reductions in the number and severity of pedestrian-vehicle conflict points, clarified pedestrian routing, widened sidewalks, and improved aesthetic features, such as landscaping.

411.4 Encouraging walking will bring many benefits to the District. It will provide convenient and affordable transportation options, reduce vehicular travel and related pollution, and improve the health and fitness of District residents.

411.5 Policy T-2.4.1: Pedestrian Network

Develop, maintain, and improve pedestrian facilities. Improve the District’s sidewalk system to form a safe and accessible network that links residents across Washington, DC.

411.6 Policy T-2.4.2: Pedestrian Safety

Improve safety and security at key pedestrian nodes throughout the District. Use a variety of techniques to improve pedestrian safety, including textured or clearly marked and raised pedestrian crossings, pedestrian-actuated signal push buttons, high-intensity activated crosswalk pedestrian signals, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, accessible pedestrian signal hardware, leading pedestrian interval timing, and pedestrian countdown signals.

See also Action T-1.1.A on developing multimodal transportation measures of effectiveness, and the Educational Facilities Element for recommendations on the Safe Routes to School program.

411.7 Policy T-2.4.3: Traffic Calming

Continue to address traffic-related safety issues through carefully considered traffic-calming measures. Expedite processes for implementing traffic calming measures at locations and corridors identified as having the highest number of incidents involving bicyclists and pedestrians.

411.8 Policy T-2.4.4: Sidewalk Obstructions

Locate sidewalk cafes and other intrusions into the sidewalk so that they do not present impediments to safe and efficient pedestrian passage. Maintain sidewalk surfaces and elevations so that persons with disabilities or older adult pedestrians can safely use them.

411.9 Action T-2.4.A: Pedestrian Signal Timings

Review timing on pedestrian signals to ensure that adequate time is provided for crossing, in particular for locations with a large older adult population.

411.10 Action T-2.4.B: Sidewalks

Install sidewalks on streets throughout the District to improve pedestrian safety, access, and connectivity. Continue to monitor the sidewalk network for needed improvements. Consult with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and community organizations as plans for sidewalk construction are developed. Coordinate with the National Park Service (NPS) to complete local sidewalk networks that overlap with NPS land. All sidewalks shall be constructed in conformance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines.

411.11 Action T-2.4.C: Innovative Technologies for Pedestrian Movement

Explore the use of innovative technology to improve pedestrian movement and safety for all users, such as personal transportation systems and enhanced sidewalk materials.

411.12 Action T-2.4.D: Pedestrian Access on Bridges and Underpasses

Ensure that the redesign and/or reconstruction of bridges, particularly those crossing the Anacostia River, includes improved provisions for pedestrians, including wider sidewalks, adequate separation between vehicle traffic and sidewalks, guardrails, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and easy grade transitions. Maintain sidewalk segments under and over rail tracks and provide adequate lighting in these locations.

411.13 Action T-2.4.E: Pedestrian Master Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Pedestrian Master Plan, the Vision Zero Action Plan, and moveDC Pedestrian Element to improve accessibility, connectivity, and safety for pedestrians throughout the District.

411.14 Action T-2.4.F: Pedestrian and Bike Events

Support events in public spaces and streets that encourage bicycling and walking.

##### **10-A DCMR § 412** T-2.5 ROADWAY SYSTEM AND AUTO MOVEMENT {#sec-10-a412 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A412}

412.1 The District’s roadway system consists of 1,171 miles of roadway, 241 vehicular and pedestrian bridges, and approximately 7,774 intersections. Approximately 22 percent of these intersections are signalized.

412.2 The roadways in the District are categorized by function, ranging from interstates and other freeways, which carry the largest volumes of motor vehicle traffic, to local streets, which provide the highest level of access to land uses. Map 4.4 shows the existing roadway system based on a Functional Classification System described in Figure 4.3.

412.3 Map 4.4: Roadway System by Functional Classification

412.4 Increases in funding for street maintenance since the mid-1990s have allowed the District to continually improve the condition of its roadway pavement. The District continually monitors and rates the condition of its roadways and bridges.

412.5 Figure 4.3: Existing Roadway System Functional Classification

Road Type

Description

Freeways and Expressways

These roadways, which comprise 54 miles or approximately five percent of the total roadway miles in the District, are controlled access facilities. Access is via interchange ramps and these roadways typically do not provide direct access to adjacent land uses

Principal Arterials

These roadways, comprising 92 miles or approximately eight percent of the District’s roadway system, typically serve major activity centers and serve longer trip lengths than the roadways types listed below. The freeways and principal arterials the overall roadway system. Freeways and principal arterials typically carry between 40 and 60 percent of the city’s total traffic volumes.

Minor Arterials

Minor arterials account for 173 miles, approximately 15 percent of the total roadway system. These roadways serve short to medium length trips, with a greater emphasis on mobility than direct access. In a typical network, minor arterials make up 15 to 25 percent of the mileage and carry 15 to 40 percent of total traffic.

Collectors

The role of collectors is to move traffic from local streets to the arterials. Collectors will often intersect with arterials at signalized intersections. Local roads will intersect collectors at stop signs. Collectors make up 152 miles, or 13 percent, of the District’s roadway system.

Local Roads

These roads typically make up the majority of the transportation network as measured by road miles. They carry between 10 and 30 percent of all traffic. The primary role of local roads is to provide access to adjacent land uses, with ideally a very limited role in terms of traffic mobility. Approximately 60 percent, or 682 miles, of the District’s roadway system is classified local.

412.6 Traffic congestion on the District’s roadway network occurs primarily on the radial principal arterial roadways. Map 4.5 illustrates motor vehicle traffic volumes on major streets and highways. The flow of motor vehicle traffic is greatly influenced by north-south movements along the I-95 corridor feeding into I-295 and I-395. These highways carry the heaviest daily motor vehicle traffic volumes in the District, with an average of approximately 168,000 daily trips on I-395 and 108,000 on I-295 in 2017. In addition, the limited number of crossings over the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers generates higher volumes of motor vehicle traffic at these gateways than their counterparts in the northern portion of the District.

412.7 Examples of heavy volumes in 2017 from the south include 38,000 daily motor vehicle trips across the Anacostia River on the Pennsylvania Avenue Bridge, 52,000 motor vehicle trips across the Potomac on the Francis Scott Key Bridge, 94,000 motor vehicle trips across the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge, and 241,000 motor vehicle trips across the 14th Street Bridge and I-395 bridge complex, also over the Potomac. These volumes can be contrasted with volumes coming into the District from the north and northeast, which include 29,000 daily motor vehicle trips on Connecticut Avenue, 21,000 motor vehicle trips on Massachusetts Avenue, 24,000 daily motor vehicle trips on Georgia Avenue, 33,000 daily motor vehicle trips on 16th Street NW, 48,000 daily motor vehicle trips on North Capitol Street, and 132,000 daily motor vehicle trips on New York Avenue.

412.7a Text Box: The Concept of Induced Demand

Research shows that urban traffic congestion tends to maintain a self-limiting equilibrium: vehicle traffic volumes increase to fill available capacity until congestion limits further growth. Any time a consumer makes a travel decision based on congestion (“Should I run that errand now? No, I’ll wait until later when traffic will be lighter.”) they contribute to this self-limiting equilibrium. Travel that would not occur if roads were congested but that would occur if roads become less congested is called induced travel demand. Increasing road capacity, or reducing vehicle use by a small group, creates additional road space that is filled with induced demand.

412.8 Map 4.5: Existing District Traffic Volumes, 2017

412.9 As Washington, DC is a densely developed District with a historic built environment, the District does not foresee making significant investments in road widening to accommodate more motor vehicles. Instead, the District will continue to manage existing roadway resources and provide for viable transportation choices throughout Washington, DC.

412.10 As part of moveDC, an analysis of the transportation impacts of anticipated 20- year land use and transportation changes was conducted. The analysis projected that if the recommendations in moveDC are implemented, there will be a 39 percent increase in the total number of transit trips by 2040, a 16 percent increase in the total number of motor vehicle trips, and a 52 percent increase in nonmotorized trips (walk and bike). Motor vehicle congestion will increase on several corridors. The analysis concluded that new TDM measures, bike and pedestrian improvements, and transit improvements will be needed to keep the system functioning adequately.

412.11 Policy T-2.5.1: Creating Multimodal Corridors

Transform District arterials into multimodal corridors that incorporate and balance a variety of mode choices, including bus, streetcar, bicycle, pedestrian, and automobiles.

412.12 Policy T-2.5.2: Managing Roadway Capacity

Manage the capacity of principal arterials within existing limits rather than increasing roadway capacity to meet induced demand for travel by car (see text box entitled The Concept of Induced Demand). Prioritize improvements based on their multimodal person-carrying capacity. Increase auto capacity on roadways only if needed to improve the safety of all travelers, improve connectivity of the multimodal transportation network, or improve targeted connections to regional roadways.

412.13 Policy T-2.5.3: Road and Bridge Maintenance

Maintain the road and bridge system to keep it operating safely and efficiently and to maximize its useful life.

412.14 Policy T-2.5.4: Traffic Management

Establish traffic management strategies that prioritize the safety of pedestrian over vehicular traffic; separate local traffic from commuter or through-traffic; and reduce the intrusion of trucks, commuter traffic, and cut-through traffic on residential streets. Prioritize public transit solutions, including bus lanes and signal priority, to reduce commuter traffic.

412.15 Policy T-2.5.5: Natural Landscaping

Work with other District and federal agencies to identify, plant, and manage natural landscaping areas along highways, traffic circles, bike paths, and sidewalks.

412.16 Action T-2.5.A: Maintenance Funds

Provide sufficient funding sources to maintain and repair the District’s system of sidewalks, streets, and alleys, including its street lights and traffic control systems, bridges, street trees, and other streetscape improvements.

412.17 Action T-2.5.B: Signal Timing Adjustments

Regularly evaluate the need for adjustments to traffic signal timing to prioritize pedestrians, surface transit, and bicyclists.

412.18 Action T-2.5.C: Update the Functional Classification System

Continue to update the Functional Classification System on a two-year cycle. The Functional Classification System is a tool developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and used by DDOT to help describe and generally assign the vehicular transportation purpose of a street within the street network.

##### **10-A DCMR § 413** T-2.6 ADDRESSING ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL RESIDENTS {#sec-10-a413 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A413}

413.1 Multimodal transportation options are critical for populations who cannot drive or do not have access to a car. Access to transportation is essential for residents across the income spectrum, older adults who may need transportation to a medical appointment, and persons with a disability who need to go to work. Without alternatives to cars, a significant portion of the population may be unable to lead independent lives.

413.2 Policy T-2.6.1: Transportation Access

Address the transportation needs of all District residents, including those with special physical requirements and trip needs, such as access to medical centers or wellness centers.

413.3 Policy T-2.6.2: Transit Needs

Establish, expand, or continue assistance for transit-dependent groups in the District, including older adults, students, school-age children, and persons whose situations require special services, including those experiencing homelessness.

413.4 Action T-2.6.A: Public Improvements

Invest in public improvements, such as curb inclines, aimed at increasing pedestrian mobility, particularly for older adults and persons with disabilities.

413.5 Action T-2.6.B: Shuttle Services

Through public services, private services, or public-private partnerships, supplement basic public transit services with shuttle and minibuses to provide service for transit-dependent groups, including older adults, people with disabilities, school-age children, and residents in areas that cannot viably be served by conventional buses.

413.6 Action T-2.6.C: Transportation Access and Service

Conduct an analysis of the impacts transportation access and service has on underserved and low-income communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 414** T-3 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM EFFICIENCY AND MANAGEMENT {#sec-10-a414 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A414}

414.1 With the costs of providing new transportation facilities on the rise, the District must constantly look for ways to reduce travel demand and more effectively use its existing and future transportation systems. This section of the element addresses Transportation Demand Management TDM, curbside management and parking, truck and motor coach movement, and travel information.

##### **10-A DCMR § 415** T-3.1 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT {#sec-10-a415 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A415}

415.1 TDM refers to a series of transportation strategies that are designed to maximize the people-moving capability of the transportation system by increasing the number of persons in a vehicle, increasing transit ridership, or influencing the time of (or need to) travel. To accomplish such changes, TDM programs rely on incentives or disincentives to make shifts in travel behavior more attractive. The TDM Strategic Plan includes strategies to increase the non-Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) rate and to streamline TDM in the project review process. It provides, supports, and promotes programs and strategies aimed at reducing the number of car trips and miles driven (for work and non-work purposes) to increase the efficiency of the transportation system.

415.2 The primary purpose of TDM is to reduce the number of motor vehicles using the road system while providing a variety of mobility options to those who wish to travel. Typical TDM programs include:

Carpooling and vanpooling, employee shuttles, and improvements that encourage bicycling and walking;

Financial incentives, such as preferential parking for ride sharers, parking cash-outs, and transit subsidies;

Congestion avoidance strategies, such as compressed work weeks, flexible work schedules, and telecommuting in circumstances where workplace productivity is not impaired; and

Education and outreach regarding which transportation options are available, how to use transit, safety tips for bicycling, and how to join a carpool or vanpool.

415.3 TDM strategies are particularly useful during peak period travel times, when demand is the greatest. The Washington, DC metropolitan region is a leader in developing and implementing such strategies. Some of the regional TDM strategies already in place include telework centers, vanpool programs, guaranteed ride home programs, and transit incentive programs.

415.4 In 2013, the federal government employed approximately 437,000 people in the National Capital Region. As the region’s largest employer, the federal government has a strong interest in improving the quality of transportation services and infrastructure. It is in a unique position to provide leadership in TDM programs that can accommodate the travel needs of its workforce while setting the standard for the region as a whole. Its mandatory regional transit subsidy program is an effective form of TDM: in 2012, 42 percent of peak period Metrorail riders were federal employees.

415.5 The District supports all these initiatives and also has many of its own TDM measures. For instance, it is helping to educate the public about various shared mobility options in the District, including point-to-point and traditional carsharing services. The District’s ultimate goal is to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). To incentivize the use of shared cars and encourage the private sector to expand carsharing programs, the District has designated strategic curbside parking spaces for these vehicles, accompanied by educational brochures to help explain this service to the public.

415.6 Roadway pricing is another strategy to manage transportation demand. Research indicates that 75 to 80 percent or more of the costs of driving are external costs, such as noise and air pollution. Over the long term, recovering these costs will serve to level the playing field for all modes of travel. The region’s motorists and residents currently pay the full cost of transportation through a variety of indirect means, including their time and health. Making these costs more apparent to motorists will ultimately help shift travel both in the District and throughout the region to modes that are most efficient in terms of lowest overall costs. The District is investigating how to implement roadway pricing, particularly strategies targeting those drivers who cut through the District with neither a starting nor an ending point within District boundaries.

415.7 New technologies are making roadway pricing more feasible and economical. The range of roadway pricing approaches includes a congestion pricing cordon (used most notably in London and Singapore), which involves motorists being charged via electronically read debit cards for entering the central portion of the District. Other options include measuring miles traveled on particular roads (using electronic means) and assessing per-mile charges based on such variables as wear-and-tear on the roadway system, air and noise pollution, and imposition of congestion, among others. Pricing strategies can also vary depending on the time of day, the level of congestion, and other parameters. In evaluating new technologies and approaches to encourage use of TDM and reduce vehicle miles travelled, it is important to use disaggregated data that identifies the mode use, ability, and access for communities of color and residents of all abilities and income levels. This can be used to consider appropriate, equitable TDM measures, minimize barriers to entry (such as price or access to technology) and encourage adoption of TDM.

415.8 moveDC has a tiered strategy for future implementation of managed lanes and a congestion pricing cordon for downtown. It identifies key facilities where managed lanes are appropriate entering the District, including:

I-66 on the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge;

I-295 between the District line and the 11th Street Bridge;

I-395 on the 14th Street Bridge;

I-395/I-695 between the 11th and 14th Street Bridges;

Canal Road between the Chain Bridge and the Whitehurst Freeway; and

New York Avenue between I-395 and the District line.

415.9 The District Mobility Project leverages transportation data for multiple modes (walking, bicycling, taking transit, and driving) to inform DDOT’s short- and long-term investment strategies. It builds on national advances in transportation system performance management to track District-wide trends in congestion and travel-time reliability, among other key system performance metrics. By highlighting areas with high congestion, low reliability, and poor accessibility, the District Mobility Project shows where DDOT will target near-term investments to improve multimodal mobility.

415.10 Policy T-3.1.1: TDM Programs

415.11 Policy T-3.1.2: Regional TDM Efforts

Continue to pursue TDM strategies at the regional level and work with regional and federal partners to promote a coordinated, integrated transportation system. These strategies include setting commuter benefits program participation rates for employers, developing corridor-level TDM plans to educate the public on DDOT and regional lanes initiatives (i.e., bus only, high-occupancy toll, high-occupancy vehicle, and road diets), and adopting emerging technologies to promote carpooling.

415.12 Policy T-3.1.3: Carsharing

Encourage the expansion of carsharing services as an alternative to private vehicle ownership by removing barriers to access private carsharing systems.

415.13 Policy T-3.1.4: Special Event TDM

Encourage event organizers to provide transportation amenities for large events. These measures can include the TDM initiatives developed through the hospitality and tourism program to promote the use of transit options to hotels, lodging providers, District-wide events, and museums through advocacy and outreach in hopes of influencing event attendees.

415.14 Action T-3.1.A: TDM Strategies

Develop strategies and requirements that reduce rush hour traffic by promoting flextime, carpooling, and transit use where consistent with maintaining workplace productivity, to reduce vehicular trips particularly during peak travel periods. Identify TDM measures and plans as vital conditions for large development approval. Transportation Management Plans should identify quantifiable reductions in motor vehicle trips and commit to measures to achieve those reductions. Encourage the federal and District governments to explore the creation of a staggered workday, where appropriate, to reduce congestion, and implement TDM initiatives through a pilot program that focuses on the District government and public schools. Assist employers in the District with implementation of TDM programs at their worksites, to reduce drive-alone commute trips. Through outreach and education, inform developers and District residents of available transportation alternatives and the benefits these opportunities provide.

415.15 Action T-3.1.B: Roadway Pricing and Management

The recommendations in moveDC should be explored and implemented, where feasible, in three phases:

Phase 1: Continuously monitor direct and external roadway costs to gain a more accurate estimate of the true cost of driving for motorists;

Phase 2: Develop a system to identify those who drive entirely through the District without stopping (i.e., those who are not living in, working in, or visiting Washington, DC), as well as a mechanism to charge these motorists for the external costs that they are imposing on the District’s transportation system; and

Phase 3: Continuously monitor state-of-the-art roadway pricing techniques and technologies, and work with neighboring jurisdictions to implement roadway pricing programs that better transfer the full costs of driving to motorists. This could include higher costs for heavier and higher-emission vehicles.

415.16 Action T-3.1.C: Private Shuttle Services

Develop a database of private shuttle services and coordinate with shuttle operators to help reduce the number of single-occupant trips. Encourage shuttle operators to provide real-time transit data, and create a layer in goDCgo’s interactive map to show all shuttles. Motivate companies to implement a shuttle service.

415.17 Action T-3.1.D: Transit Ridership Programs

Support employers in implementing the DC Commuter Benefits Law. Continue to support employer-sponsored transit ridership programs, such as those under the federal Transit Benefits Program, which stipulates that, pursuant to federal legislation, public and private employers may subsidize employee travel by mass transit each month. Continue to support employer-sponsored bicycle commuter benefit programs for public and private employers.

415.18 Action T-4.1.E: Implement the TDM Strategic Plan

Provide, support, and promote programs and strategies aimed at reducing the number of car trips and miles driven (for work and non-work purposes), to increase the efficiency of the transportation system. Smart-city technologies promise to enhance and transform TDM as more data becomes available. TDM practitioners such as goDCgo should determine platforms for delivering practical travel and routing information to improve mobility.

415.19 Action T-4.1.F: Analytic Tools to Measure Performance

Plan and implement the development of advanced analytic tools to measure the performance of the transportation network in support of the District Mobility Project.

##### **10-A DCMR § 416** T-3.2 CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT AND PARKING {#sec-10-a416 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A416}

416.1 The public curbside, the space along the street between travel lanes and sidewalk, is limited real estate. Within this space, many essential activities of urban life occur: buses pull in and out, delivering thousands of passengers a day; residents and visitors come and go; and shoppers and diners arrive and depart. It is an active place, the use and management of which affects adjacent businesses and local neighborhoods. Demands on the public curbside space are diverse and come from residents, workers, visitors, patrons, deliverers, and travelers of all means and modes. The needs and desires for curbside use are not uniform throughout the District. In some areas, competition for curbside space is fierce, while in other areas, demand is comparatively light. As new vehicle technologies develop and become commercially available, the District will explore ways to receive parking data from them, enhancing the District’s parking management system. DDOT’s District Mobility Project includes a tool to visualize multimodal transportation system performance.

416.2 DDOT manages 1,392 miles of public curbside. Curbside space is generally available for anyone to use, at least for short durations, except in areas with curbside restrictions due to traffic safety and specific, reserved uses, such as residential permit parking, commercial loading zones, diplomatic parking, motorcycle parking, metered parking, motor coach parking, and valet staging zones. The District does not own or operate off-street garages and lots for public use.

416.3 Policy T-3.2.1: Parking Duration in Commercial Areas

Using pricing, time limits, and curbside regulations, encourage motorists to use public curbside parking for short-term needs, and promote curbside turnover and use while pushing longer-term parking needs to private, off-street parking facilities.

416.4 Policy T-3.2.2: Employing Innovations in Parking

Consider and implement new, asset-light technologies and approaches to increase the efficiency, management, and customer use of curb space, while minimizing barriers to entry such as price or lack of access to technology. These include pay-by-cell parking metering, digitizing the curbside management permit distribution system, and multimodal dynamic demand-based parking pricing.

416.5 Policy T-3.2.3: Repurposing Parking

Consider the potential reuse of parking facilities at the outset of their design to future-proof them. These uses could include housing, office, retail, and/or other non-vehicle-storage-related uses. Future-proofing considerations could include the design and configuration of ramps, column spacing, ceiling heights, natural light exposure, ventilation, and elevators in ways that could support other uses.

416.6 Action T-3.2.A: Short-Term Parking

Continue to work with existing private parking facilities to encourage and provide incentives to convert a portion of the spaces now designated for all-day commuter parking to shorter-term parking to meet the demand for retail, entertainment, and mid-day parking.

416.7 Action T-3.2.B: Carshare Parking

Continue to provide strategically placed and well-defined curbside parking for carshare vehicles, particularly near Metrorail stations, major transit nodes, and major employment destinations, and in medium- and high-density neighborhoods.

416.8 Action T-3.2.C: Curbside Management Techniques

Revise curbside management and on-street parking policies to:

Adjust parking pricing to reflect the demand for, and value of, curb space;

Adjust the boundaries for residential parking zones;

Establish parking policies that respond to the different parking needs of different types of areas;

Expand the times and days for meter parking enforcement in commercial areas;

Promote management of parking facilities that serve multiple uses (e.g., commuters, shoppers, recreation, entertainment, churches, special events );

Improve the flexibility and management of parking through mid-block meters, provided that such meters are reasonably spaced and located to accommodate persons with disabilities;

Preserve, manage, and increase alley space or similar off-street loading space;

Increase enforcement of parking limits, double-parking, bike lane obstruction, and other curbside violations, including graduated fines for repeat offenses and towing for violations on key designated arterials; and

Explore increasing curbside access for EV supply equipment.

416.9 Action T-3.2.D: Unbundle Parking Cost

Find ways to unbundle the cost of parking. For residential units, this means allowing those purchasing or renting property to opt out of buying or renting parking spaces. Unbundling should be required for District-owned or subsidized development and encouraged for other developments. Employers should provide a parking cash-out option, allowing employees who are offered subsidized parking the choice of taking the cash equivalent if they use other travel modes. Further measures to reduce housing costs associated with off-street parking requirements, including waived or reduced parking requirements in the vicinity of Metrorail stations and along major transit corridors, should be pursued. These efforts should be coupled with programs to better manage residential street parking in neighborhoods of high parking demand, including adjustments to the costs of residential parking permits.

416.10 Action T-3.2.E: Manage Off-Street Parking Supply

Continue to waive or reduce parking requirements in the vicinity of Metrorail stations and along major transit corridors, as implemented during the recent revision of the zoning regulations. Explore further reductions in requirements as the demand for parking is reduced through changes in market preferences, technological innovation, and the provision of alternatives to car ownership. Update the Mayor’s Parking Taskforce Report with more recent parking data, and monitor parking supply on an ongoing basis.

416.11 Action T-3.2.F: Encourage Shared-Use Parking

Collaborate with private, off-street parking facilities to encourage shared-use parking arrangements with nearby adjacent uses to maximize the use of off-street parking facilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 417** T-3.3 GOODS MOVEMENT {#sec-10-a417 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A417}

417.1 The District is a dense urban environment with a diverse mixture of land uses that place significant demand on the District’s transportation infrastructure. Washington, DC’s role as an employment center for the region creates a high volume of commuter traffic in peak hours, while the consumer-driven economy generates significant demand for freight movement.

417.2 The District has experienced a substantial population increase and sustained economic development over the past decade, generating a growing demand for freight activity and increasing pressure on the District’s transportation network. In May 2013, DDOT initiated the first District Freight Plan to outline freight strategies and recommendations for the District to support economic growth while maintaining livability and addressing community needs and concerns. Research for the District Freight Plan found that in 2011, the District moved 16.8 billion tons, worth $21.7 billion, of domestic goods to and from the District. District freight shipments are expected to grow 75 percent in terms of tons from 2011 to 2040, and 159 percent during that same period in terms of value. The majority of the truck traffic in the District has an origin or a destination in the District.

417.3 Trucks are critical for the District’s economy to function. The District is a net consumer, rather than producer, of goods. By weight and value, more freight comes into the District than leaves the District. However, in terms of the average value per ton, freight leaving the District has a higher value ($2,571/ton) than freight coming into the District ($1,269/ton). Nearly 99 percent of goods destined for the District arrive by truck. Many businesses in the District rely heavily or solely on truck service to receive and/or ship freight. In doing so, they generate freight-related economic activity as well. Truck access is often instrumental to major business location decisions, as feasible options for alternative modes are limited.

417.4 If trucks did not accommodate demand, very few shippers could use other modes—such as rail, water, air, or pipeline—to transport freight. Moreover, the use of other modes would likely entail higher transport costs due to longer transport distances, price, logistics, and accessibility, which could increase overall demand for all users of other modes. The long-term result could be a migration of businesses that can move away from the District to other locations with better truck accessibility and modal options. Truck-based freight deliveries create jobs; 129,500 jobs in the District can be traced back to organizations that ship and/or receive freight via truck in Washington, DC.

417.5 While trucks are not the main cause of congestion, they are a contributor. Their size and operating characteristics, including being slower to accelerate and to stop, make them less nimble in traffic. In addition, the District has limited curbside loading space, a limited number of alleys (and many of these are too narrow to facilitate access by larger vehicles), and inconsistent availability of onsite loading docks. These factors often result in trucks loading and unloading curbside, creating congestion and mobility issues in the roadway, bike lanes, and sidewalks.

417.6 District law sets a maximum weight for trucks by axle group to protect infrastructure. Overweight trucks have a significant negative impact on bridge and roadway pavement life. To assess whether and ensure that the potential effects of overweight vehicles are accounted for, DDOT conducts additional inspections of structures and bridges. Depending on the outcomes of inspections, bridge and structure improvements may be programmed ahead of or outside of normal maintenance cycles, and/or DDOT may put special weight and use restrictions of a structure in place.

417.7 Construction-related truck traffic continues to be a concern for District residents. These vehicles frequently have to travel through residential neighborhoods to get to and from construction sites, creating air pollution, noise, and vibration on these streets. Passenger vehicles are also heavy users of these same routes, leading to congestion for both passenger vehicles and trucks.

417.8 Although the District’s freight rail network is small in terms of rail infrastructure mileage and the amount of freight currently originating and terminating in the District, it plays a key role in the regional freight network and local and regional rail passenger operations. Over 90 intercity or commuter passenger rail trains operate on the CSX network daily.

417.9 The District does not own any railroads but is served by two Class I and one Class III (switching or terminal) railroads, including CSX’s major north-south freight rail line. CSX and Norfolk Southern own, operate, and maintain nearly seven miles of freight rail line and right-of-way in the District and carried approximately 370,000 carloads of freight in 2012. The two freight rail yards located in the District are Washington Terminal Rail Yard, which is adjacent to Union Station, and the Benning Rail Yard.

417.10 Ongoing improvements to the rail freight network will further enhance the importance of the District’s network by providing a key to the double-stack intermodal container freight route from the East Coast to Midwest markets. Although these improvements will not likely result in the District becoming an intermodal hub, they will enhance the operational capabilities of both rail freight and passenger operations by removing existing bottlenecks and clearance restrictions, and they will possibly expand rail service to District markets by reducing rail transportation costs. These actions would not only benefit existing or potential rail users, but also result in a reduction of the number of trucks traveling through the region, creating safety and environmental benefits for the area.

417.11 Continued support for the freight rail projects within the State Rail Plan is needed. The Virginia Avenue Tunnel is a major endeavor for the freight rail network. The project was expanded to include two tracks; this will increase the clearance, allowing for double-stack intermodal trains that can accommodate high-capacity containers. Construction began in 2015 and was completed in 2018. Additional opportunities presented by the presence of freight rail in the District should be explored, including the potential for an intermodal or transload facility.

417.12 Policy T-3.3.1: Balancing Goods Delivery Needs

Balance the need for goods delivery with concerns about roadway congestion, hazardous materials exposure, quality of life, and security. Rail and road freight and construction routing should consider and minimize impacts to adjacent neighborhoods, with recognition that many routes historically have impacted communities of color and low-income residents.

417.13 Policy T-3.3.2: Freight Safety

Continue to work with the federal government and the rail owners and operators to protect the District’s residents and workforce by working to eliminate the rail shipment of hazardous materials through the District. Continually evaluate truck crash data and address issues as identified.

417.14 Policy T-3.3.3: Rail and Waterways as an Alternative to Trucking

Encourage the use of rail for long-distance movement of cargo and continue to expand goods movement strategies to better manage truck traffic within the District. Preserve and enhance rail infrastructure throughout Washington, DC and preserve existing maritime freight infrastructure.

417.15 Policy T-3.3.4: Truck Management

Manage truck circulation in the District to balance access and mobility of all users. Goods movement needs to be incorporated into transportation planning to balance the need for fostering economic growth and development with managing congestion, air quality, and safety, which will minimize negative impacts on residential streets.

417.16 Policy T-3.3.5: Enhance Freight Routing

Enhance freight routing and preserve key District-wide freight routes. Consider establishing a freight corridor traffic signalization program, install weight-in-motion sensors at key locations, further enhance dynamic truck routing, implement truck route signage, improve data collection on truck movements, and conduct a location-aware device-based study of truck movements in the District.

417.17 Policy T-3.3.6: Oversized and Overweight Trucks

Manage construction and oversize and overweight vehicles in Washington, DC to promote the safety of all users. Fees for oversized and overweight trucks should be assessed to ensure they are offsetting their impact to the District, and construction vehicle permits should be enforced.

417.18 Policy T-3.3.7: Truck Routing and Parking

Enhance truck route enforcement to encourage the use of appropriate routes, which will minimize travel on local roads. Delivery vehicles should park in suitable locations for loading and unloading and should not block travel lanes, transit stops, crosswalks, or bike lanes.

417.19 Action T-3.3.A: Enhance the Loading Zone Program

Enhance the loading zone program with policies and programs including automated and more targeted enforcement, complete user data collection, data evaluation to inform enforcement and future program decisions, and dynamic loading zone pricing. Provide freight zones on streets in office districts, and expanded curbside space available for loading.

417.20 Action T-3.3.B: Freight Trip Generation Study

Complete the freight trip generation study and develop an off-peak delivery program.

417.21 Action T-3.3.C: Implement Last-Mile Delivery/Pickup

Develop a strategy to allow for the implementation of last-mile delivery/pickup using bikes and other small mobility devices.

417.22 Action T-3.3.D: Improve Truck Safety

Implement a truck safety campaign aimed at pedestrian, cyclists, and truck drivers that focuses on the need to share the road and identifies potential truck conflict locations with bike lanes, transit stops, and streetcars.

417.23 Action T-3.3.E: Address Personal Goods Delivery Devices

Develop policies to address small goods delivery through autonomous devices on sidewalks to promote the safety of pedestrians on sidewalks as these services are deployed.

417.24 Action T-3.3.F: Freight Advisory Committee

Establish a freight advisory committee to provide advice on policies related to the movement of goods in the District. This group could help communicate truck information to elected officials and the public.

##### **10-A DCMR § 418** T-3.4 TRAVELER INFORMATION {#sec-10-a418 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A418}

418.1 Traveler information plays a key role in transportation system efficiency, and new technologies provide an increasing number of options for providing timely information to travelers across all modes. A state-of-the-art traveler information system can enhance transportation quality, safety, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency.

418.2 For visitors, wayfinding signage—that is, signage that helps travelers reach their destinations—is one of the most important components of the District’s transportation infrastructure. Much of the existing wayfinding signage in the District is effective and appropriate for motorists, but gaps exist in the network of signs. High-quality and carefully designed wayfinding signs for pedestrians can also help orient visitors, transit riders, and others, so they can easily find their intended destinations.

418.3 Policy T-3.4.1: Traveler Information Systems

Promote user-friendly, accurate, and timely traveler information systems for highways and transit—such as variable message signs, GPS traffic information, and real-time bus arrival information—to improve traffic flow and customer satisfaction.

418.4 Action T-3.4.A: Transit Directional Signs

Establish a joint District, WMATA, and private sector task force to improve and augment pedestrian directional signs and system maps for transit riders, especially at transit station exits and at various locations throughout the District.

418.5 Action T-3.4.B: Regional Efforts

Through a regionally coordinated effort, continue to explore and implement travel information options, from the provision of printed and electronic maps and internet-based information to motor coach operators, travel agents, and trucking companies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 419** T-3.5 MOTOR COACH OPERATIONS {#sec-10-a419 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A419}

419.1 The District receives approximately 21-25 million visitors to the National Mall each year. These visitors arrive by different transportation means, including personal occupancy vehicles, airplanes, rail, and motor coaches. Motor coaches are the third most used form of transportation by visitors. As many as 1,100 buses per day bring visitors to the National Mall, accounting for over 200,000 motor coaches and eight million visitors annually. This volume makes parking for motor coaches a challenge and creates pollution from idling vehicles. Due to the limited supply of curbside space, only a limited number of areas are available for motor coaches to load and unload passengers or park. In addition, motor coaches are expected to follow the District’s three-minute anti-idling law and obey curbside and traffic restrictions. As a result, motor coaches tend to stop or park on neighborhood streets and circle the blocks near the visitor loading areas to avoid exceeding the limits on idling times. Many tour bus operators remain in the District only long enough to take visitors to major attractions but then leave, resulting in loss of revenues as visitors shop, dine, and spend the night in suburban jurisdictions. There is a need to identify clearly defined parking areas and loading zones for motor coaches.

##### **10-A DCMR § 420** T-3.6 SHUTTLE BUS AND SIGHTSEEING OPERATIONS {#sec-10-a420 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A420}

420.1 Shuttle bus operators transport employees and organizational members across multiple sites or destinations. Examples include universities that provide shuttle service for students between buildings or different campuses and hospitals that provide shuttle service from hospital campuses to Metrorail or Metrobus stations.

420.2 There are many shuttle bus service providers. Some are owned by the organization that uses the service, while others may be contracted to provide service to an organization. Since shuttle buses serve different areas. Some may be required to have a permit if they are operating on a public street, and others may not need them if they are operating on private property. This difference creates challenges for curbside management, as some shuttle services use the public curbside without a bus stop permit and others with permits may double-park to load and unload passengers if the permitted loading zone is blocked.

420.3 Sightseeing operators are similar to shuttle buses in that they provide scheduled service. However, sightseeing operators focus on visitors and serve major attractions, including the National Mall. These routes are traditionally hop on/hop off. Multiple sightseeing operators share stops around the National Mall, where they are supposed to spend no longer than 15 minutes at the curbside for loading and unloading. However, some may stage and layover in the permitted space due to a lack of parking options in areas around the main attractions. This causes other sightseeing providers to load and unload in the street or circle the block until the space becomes available.

##### **10-A DCMR § 421** T-3.7 COMMUTER BUS OPERATIONS {#sec-10-a421 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A421}

421.1 Commuter buses provide bus service for workers traveling from Virginia and Maryland into the District. The providers of commuter bus operations include MTA, PRTC, Loudoun County, and Martz.

421.2 Commuter bus service is focused on the morning and afternoon rush hour peak times. Commuter buses operate on a set schedule and require mid-day parking, bus staging, and layovers for routes. However, given the high demand at the curbside, finding parking is a challenge for commuter bus operators, leading many to find illegal staging and parking on residential streets. Due to these constraints, some operators make the less economically viable decision of sending their buses back to the home jurisdiction during mid-day and return empty buses to pick up riders during afternoon service.

##### **10-A DCMR § 422** T-3.8 INTERCITY BUS OPERATIONS {#sec-10-a422 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A422}

422.1 Intercity bus operators provide service for the District to and from New York City, Philadelphia, Richmond, and other locations. Intercity buses operate from the early morning to the late evening, with staging times in between. Many intercity buses are centrally located at the transportation hub, Union Station. The list of specific companies includes Greyhound, Bolt Bus, and Megabus. However, some intercity buses still operate at the curbside in highly congested areas. This presents a challenge as conflicts with other uses at the curbside arise. Passenger safety is a concern at these locations. Business and building owners also have concerns due to buses blocking highly trafficked curb areas while waiting to disembark on their next trip.

422.2 Policy T-3.8.1: Motor Coach Facilities

Develop carefully planned parking areas, loading zones, and dedicated routes for motor coaches to prevent motor coach parking in residential neighborhoods. Enforce and apply fines and penalties when motor coach parking and route regulations are violated.

422.3 Policy T-3.8.2: Commuter Bus Facilities

Develop a commuter bus off-street parking facility plan that identifies solutions to the challenge of limited curbside space and eliminates parking in residential neighborhoods.

422.4 Policy T-3.8.3: Intercity Bus Relocation

Develop a plan for intercity buses to operate at off-street locations, and restrict the permits for intercity bus on-street locations. Enforce and implement fines when intercity bus on-street regulations are violated.

422.5 Action T-3.8.A: Motor Coach Management Initiative

Implement the recommendations of the DDOT Tour Bus Management Initiative, prepared to ameliorate long-standing problems associated with motor coach parking, roaming, and idling around the District’s major visitor attractions.

422.6 Action T-3.8.B: Manage Layover and Staging Zones

Maximize the efficiency of existing layover and staging zones. Coordinate with WMATA and District agencies to identify areas of shared use for on-street and off-street layover and staging zones.

422.7 Action T-3.8.C: Shuttle and Sightseeing Bus Staging

Develop carefully planned staging zones for shuttle and sightseeing buses to prevent them from double-parking or circling the block, which adds to congestion. Enforce and apply fines and penalties when sightseeing and shuttle bus permit regulations are violated.

422.8 Action T-3.8.D: Motor Coach Off-Street Parking Initiative

Coordinate with District and federal agencies and stakeholders to create a plan to build an off-street bus parking facility for short-term, long-term, and staging needs of all motor coaches.

422.9 Action T-3.8.E: Consolidate Intercity Buses at Union Station

Coordinate with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Railway Administration (FRA), Amtrak and the Union Station Redevelopment Corporation to promote the consolidation of intercity buses in the transportation hub expansion plan. Explore termination of the lease agreement with the Union Station Redevelopment Corporation for bus parking at the Crummell School site in Ivy City to allow for other uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 423** T-4 SAFETY, SECURITY, AND RESILIENCY {#sec-10-a423 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A423}

423.1 Transportation has always played an important role in Washington, DC’s security by providing a means of evacuation, as well as routes for emergency and relief service; and by connecting residents to critical services and essential workers to their job sites. The District must continue to plan for and safeguard its transportation system, protecting its value as a major component of Washington, DC’s urban infrastructure and economy. Transportation safety is also critical not only in the sense of preparing for and responding to major incidents, but also in protecting the lives of residents, workers, and visitors as they travel around the District. All users of the transportation system should have safe access in the District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 424** T-4.1 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, TRANSPORTATION, AND SECURITY {#sec-10-a424 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A424}

424.1 In light of terrorist attacks, public health emergencies, and major weather events, every major American city has embarked on emergency preparedness and traveler information systems designed to inform citizens how to respond in the event of an emergency. As the nation’s capital, the District considers emergency preparedness a critically important issue.

424.2 Should the District face an emergency situation, the transportation system provides the critical means to evacuate residents, workers, and visitors; to support the movement of emergency service response teams; and/or to connect residents to critical services and essential workers to their job sites. Depending on the nature of an incident, persons may need to rely on car, train, bus, bike, and/or walking. It is essential that the District maintain and plan for a well-functioning, coordinated system that can adapt to the needs of an incident. Given the District’s reliance on the regional transportation network in the event of an evacuation, close coordination with partners in Maryland and Virginia and at WMATA would also be needed to respond to the event.

424.3 DDOT is the lead District agency for all regional and federal emergency transportation coordination and activities that affect the District. Another key agency is the Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency (HSEMA), which partners with District agencies, businesses, and communities to help plan for the management of an emergency event. There is also increasing coordination among regional departments of transportation, the federal government, and other agencies, primarily through MWCOG.

424.4 The region has identified 25 corridors radiating from Downtown Washington, DC as emergency event/evacuation routes. Each of the routes extends to the Capital Beltway (I-495) and beyond. Customized roadway signs allow for easy identification of direction; outbound signs direct motorists to I-495 in Maryland and Virginia, and inbound signs show images of monuments. Evacuation routes are also identified by street name signs, which include the red and white District flag.

424.5 If directions are given to evacuate the Central Business District, Pennsylvania Avenue NW, between Rock Creek Park and the U.S. Capitol, serves as the dividing line for routes. None of the evacuation routes cross each other, and no vehicles would be permitted to cross Pennsylvania Avenue. Traffic signals would be timed to move traffic away from the incident area. In addition, police officers would be present at critical intersections on the evacuation routes within the District to expedite the flow of traffic and prevent bottlenecks. Bike trails could also be used by cyclists or pedestrians in the event of an evacuation.

424.6 Although the District is more equipped now than it has been in the past to respond to emergencies, additional planning is needed to better prepare the region’s transportation systems to respond to and rapidly recover from disruptions. The District should not only continue to plan for evacuations at the local level and provide the necessary information to the public, it should also improve coordination with its regional partners and take advantage of new technologies and federal support in preparing for the transportation needs resulting from a wide range of potential emergencies.

424.7 As home to the largest concentration of federal agencies and facilities in the country, the District and the federal governments should continue to coordinate extensively to address the District’s security and mobility needs. Over the past decade, several of the District’s streets have been closed by the federal government to protect the White House and the U.S. Capitol. These street closures have disrupted mobility for pedestrians and vehicles, requiring extensive re-routing of Metrobus and vehicular travel through downtown and Capitol Hill. This has led to delays for residents, workers, visitors, and emergency service providers.

Please refer to the Community Services and Facilities Element for additional policies and actions related to emergency preparedness, and to the Urban Design Element for policies on security and design.

424.8 Policy T-4.1.1: Balancing Security Measures and Desires for an Open District

Balance and mitigate security requirements against daily mobility, efficiency, and quality of life concerns of District residents and visitors, and the potential for negative economic, environmental, and historic impacts. The trade-offs associated with potential street closures or changes to transportation access should be adequately assessed.

424.9 Policy T-4.1.2: Coordination with the Federal Government

Work closely with federal agencies to find alternative security solutions and to avoid street closings to the greatest extent possible.

424.10 Policy T-4.1.3: Providing Redundancies

Provide alternate routes and modes of travel, or redundancies, across the District to promote the security of District residents and visitors and reduce the effects on non-routine incidents.

424.11 Policy T-4.1.4: Accommodating Evacuation Needs

Ensure evacuation planning and implementation considers and addresses issues of race, poverty, disability, and age.

424.12 Action T-4.1.A: Pennsylvania Avenue Closure

Work with federal agency partners to implement the Presidents Park South project along E Street NW near the White House to provide an excellent public space as well as a key east-west bicycle and pedestrian connection. Use the security requirements for closing the street to vehicles to create a space for bicycles and pedestrians.

424.13 Action T-4.1.B: Coordination with the Federal Government

Continue to work with the federal government to assess the impacts of security measures on the quality of life of District residents and businesses.

424.14 Action T-4.1.C: Emergency Evacuation Plan

Continue to refine an emergency evacuation plan that not only describes evacuation procedures and routes, but also defines the modes of transportation to use in the event that certain modes, such as the Metrorail system, become unavailable. Increase public education and awareness of local emergency management plans and make information on evacuation routes and procedures more accessible and understandable to residents, employees, and visitors.

##### **10-A DCMR § 425** T-4.2 SAFETY FOR ALL TRAVELERS {#sec-10-a425 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A425}

425.1 The District is committed to a Vision Zero philosophy, with the goal of eliminating fatalities and serious injuries from the transportation network. Under Vision Zero, the network will be designed and operated to support the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, while also taking into account that travelers inevitably make mistakes resulting in crashes. However, there is no need to accept that those crashes will inevitably lead to fatalities. The number of deaths and serious injuries on the District’s transportation network has been steadily decreasing for many years, even as the District’s population grew. In 1995, the District suffered 62 traffic fatalities. In 2005, there were 49, and by 2014, there were 26 traffic fatalities. Unfortunately, the number of fatalities has been increasing in recent years. In 2016, there were 28 traffic fatalities in the District, and in 2017, there were 30 fatalities. This loss of life on District streets is unacceptable.

425.2 Policy T-4.2.1: Vision Zero

Incorporate the disciplines of engineering, evaluation, law enforcement, and education to achieve the District’s goal of zero transportation-related deaths and serious injuries by 2024.

425.3 Action T-4.2.A: Vision Zero Action Plan

Implement the strategies recommended in the District’s Vision Zero Action Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 426** T-4.3 RAIL SAFETY {#sec-10-a426 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A426}

426.1 The D.C. Council enacted the Rail Safety and Security Amendment Act of 2016, establishing an Emergency Response and Rail Safety Division. In addition to carrying out emergency response activities, this division would coordinate with the FRA and other federal and state agencies as appropriate to carry out inspection, investigation, enforcement, and surveillance activities for railroads operating in the District. The act also transferred the functions of the State Safety Oversight (SSO) agency, which oversees the safety of the DC Streetcar, from the District’s Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department (FEMS) to the Emergency Response and Rail Safety Division. The act established a Railroad Advisory Board to provide consultation to the Mayor, D.C. Council, and District agencies on matters pertaining to the investigation and surveillance of federal railroad safety laws. 426.1

426.2 Policy T-4.3.1: Coordination with the Federal Government

The District will work closely with the FRA to obtain the necessary certifications and approvals for the District to be accepted into the FRA’s State Safety Participation Program (SSPP), to guide matters relating to the safety of railroad operations in the District. The District will also work with the FTA to maintain the necessary certifications of an SSO regarding the oversight of the DC Streetcar.

##### **10-A DCMR § 427** T-4.4 CLIMATE RESILIENCY {#sec-10-a427 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A427}

427.1 Climate change will have serious impacts on transportation infrastructure as temperatures rise, precipitation rates increase, and sea levels rise. These changes will cause transportation infrastructure to flood more frequently, roads to buckle, rails to bend and warp, and an increased maintenance burden in the District for transportation facilities. These impacts require special consideration in the planning, design, and maintenance of transportation infrastructure. The District has experienced several extreme weather events in recent years, which have caused extensive disruption to the District’s transportation system.

427.2 Policy T-4.4.1: DDOT Climate Change Adaptation Plan

Continue to implement and update the DDOT Climate Change Adaptation Plan so that the District’s transportation network will withstand future climate conditions. DDOT’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan provides the foundation to better understand, anticipate, and prepare transportation assets for changing future conditions.

427.3 Policy T-4.4.2: Climate-Adaptive and Resilient Transportation Improvements

Promote the integration of climate-adaptive, resilient design, and operational and maintenance protocols for transportation systems serving the District.

427.4 Policy T-4.4.3: Mitigation Measures for Flood-Prone Transportation Facilities

Develop, prioritize, and implement flood mitigation measures for existing flood-prone transportation facilities based on vulnerability assessments and consideration of extreme precipitation events and sea level rise.

427.5 Action T-4.4.A: Climate Adaptation Guidelines for Transportation Projects

Develop and implement climate adaptation guidelines while designing transportation projects. The guidelines may include evaluating the effectiveness of stormwater management, urban heat island mitigation, and other technical components to better buffer transportation infrastructure from the impacts of climate change.

427.6 Action T-4.4.B: Research Resilient Transportation Design Best Practices

Research and leverage existing best practices from other metropolitan transportation departments as DDOT continues to make future adjustments to its design parameters that incorporate hazard mitigation and climate change adaptation. Consider updating design standards to account for projected extreme temperatures and precipitation.

427.7 Action T-4.4.C: Climate-Ready Evacuation Routes

Identify alternate evacuation routes for roads and bridges identified as vulnerable to flooding and/or sea level rise.

##### **10-A DCMR § 428** T-5 TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION {#sec-10-a428 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A428}

428.1 New transportation technologies have the potential to dramatically change the way people move in cities. As new technologies develop, they will impact people’s transportation decisions, possibly increasing the accessibility of different areas of the District. This change in access will have economic and land use impacts, as areas previously disconnected from the public transportation system are made more accessible. Transportation technology’s effect on the District can be seen through two examples. The first is the historic streetcar systems that operated between 1862 and 1962. The system reinforced and extended the original L’Enfant Plan street grid and supported linear forms of commercial development. The second example features the change in land use patterns with the introduction of Metrorail, which has supported nodal patterns of development and, in some cases, shifted the centers of gravity of neighborhoods subtly away from the former linear corridors.

428.2 It is important to leverage new technologies that support the vision of an inclusive District and to enhance safety, mobility, access, and equity in the District for residents, workers, and visitors. New technologies must also be considered through a racial equity lens, recognizing that historically, transportation innovations were connected to displacement and disconnection in communities of color. Consider differences and barriers in how technologies may be adopted by various groups.

##### **10-A DCMR § 429** T-5.1 AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES {#sec-10-a429 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A429}

429.1 AVs have the potential to significantly impact transportation and land use patterns over the next 10 to 30 years. These impacts need to be understood to ensure they are well managed, to avoid unintended disruptions, and to provide benefits for District residents, visitors, and workers.

429.1a Text Box: Autonomous Vehicles (AVs)

With AV technology, vehicles need varying levels of driver engagement to safely navigate a roadway. A scale system has been created by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to understand the sophistication of the technology and the necessary level of driver engagement.

Level 0 – No Automation: Zero autonomy; the driver performs all driving tasks.

Level 1 – Driver Assistance: Vehicle is controlled by the driver, but some driving assistance features may be included in the vehicle design.

Level 2 – Partial Automation: Vehicle has combined automated functions, such as acceleration and steering, but the driver must remain engaged with the driving task and monitor the environment at all times.

Level 3 – Conditional Automation: Driver is a necessity but is not required to monitor the environment. The driver must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times, with notice.

Level 4 – High Automation: The vehicle is capable of performing all driving functions under certain conditions. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.

Level 5 – Full Automation: The vehicle is capable of performing all driving functions under all conditions. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.

429.2 The District of Columbia Autonomous Vehicle Act of 2012 authorized operation of AVs on District roadways. While these vehicles are allowed to operate on District roadways, it remains important for the District to continue to support the transportation policies laid out in existing municipal guidance, with the goal of maintaining equitable access to transportation and mobility within the District. moveDC recommends that the District serve as an urban test bed for AVs through policy and legal support. In addition, the Vision Zero Action Plan calls for the evaluation of ways to improve safety through data integration among AVs, District-wide traffic signals, and other infrastructure.

429.3 AVs have the potential to improve safety, efficiency, and mobility and to potentially reduce the need for on- and off-street parking. AVs raise several important issues about the future of transportation, including:

Potential impact on VMT;

Future demand for curbside access;

Distance and frequency of trips made;

Character of future transit ridership; and

Nature of future mobility, including for persons with disabilities.

429.4 The degree to which AVs are personally owned or are operated as fleet vehicles will have major ramifications for the transportation system. Sharing AVs for trips has the potential to increase the efficiency of the transportation network, while a system that allows increases in vehicle trips that serve only one—or zero—passengers could greatly exacerbate congestion.

429.5 As the proliferation of autonomous vehicles increases and the underlying technology becomes more sophisticated, understanding the intended and unintended impacts of automation on land use, transportation patterns, safety, racial equity, environmental sustainability, cybersecurity, and the regional and national economy will be critical to avoiding negative impacts to District residents. The District also has an opportunity to harness the potential positive impacts of autonomous vehicles through a transparent, adaptable, and comprehensive policy approach.

429.6 Policy T-5.1.1: AVs and Safety

Autonomous vehicles operating within the District should account for human error and unpredictability to support the Vision Zero goal of reducing, and ultimately eliminating, serious injuries and fatalities. Use street design principles and speed limitations to promote the safety of all roadway users, with a particular focus on the most vulnerable users.

429.7 Policy T-5.1.2: Shared-Use AVs

Incentivize the shared use of AVs. The District currently hosts many shared-use services, such as public transit, informal carpooling, carsharing, ride hailing, and bikeshare. Shared AVs should complement and integrate with these existing services.

429.8 Policy T-5.1.3: Traffic Congestion and VMT

Minimize future increases in VMT and congestion created by AVs.

429.9 Policy T-5.1.4: Equitable Access

Adoption of autonomous vehicles in the District should be equitable. Autonomous vehicle fleet services should be made accessible and available to all users throughout the District.

429.10 Policy T-5.1.5: Person Throughput

Continue to monitor the person-carrying capacity of vehicle lanes and prioritize modes that carry the most people per lane mile. As AVs begin to operate on District roadways, travel lanes may face increased pressure. AVs should complement and not displace other sustainable and healthy modes of transportation, such as walking and cycling.

429.11 Policy T-5.1.6: AV Impacts

Monitor, evaluate, and address, as appropriate, the short- and long-term effects that AVs may have on mobility and transportation networks; infrastructure, including the electrical grid, roadways, and data networks; goods movement; economic development; the design of the built environment; and configuration of land uses.

429.12 Action T-5.1.A: AV Working Group

The Autonomous Vehicle Working Group—an interagency working group comprised of agencies focused on transportation, rights of persons with disabilities, environmental issues, and public safety—should continue to meet and monitor AVs and their impact on the District. The group should work to develop policy and regulatory guidance to ensure AVs enhance the District by improving safety, efficiency, equity, and sustainability while minimizing negative impacts on residents, workers, and visitors.

429.13 Action T-5.1.B: Continued Research

Examine and monitor the latest research on AVs to inform policy development. Review publications from universities, think tanks, foundations, and other jurisdictions to better understand the potential implications in the District. Research should be comprehensive and focus on direct impacts on the transportation network and the indirect impacts on land use, as well as economic and job market disruption, public revenue, environmental sustainability, and social and racial equity.

429.14 Action T-5.1.C: Data Sharing

Encourage AV manufacturers and operators to share data to support responsive research efforts and inform public policy making. Data sharing will need to have a level of accuracy and detail for specific research needs and respect the privacy of individuals.

429.15 Action T-5.1.D: Enhance Access to Transit

Explore strategies to make autonomous vehicles complement rather than replace existing transit service, such as through dedicated curbside access, transit alternatives for seniors and people with disabilities, and shared mobility solutions to provide first-mile/last-mile connections.

429.16 Action T-5.1.E: Parking and Curbside Access

Monitor the shifts that AVs will create in the use of parking facilities and curbside lanes. Explore regulatory and technological tools for dynamically adapting to these shifts in usage, to allow for and incentivize more efficient and productive uses of these urban spaces.

##### **10-A DCMR § 430** T-5.2 ELECTRIC VEHICLES {#sec-10-a430 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A430}

430.1 EVs have the potential to minimize the negative environmental impacts associated with current internal combustion engine vehicles. EVs create fewer emissions, including fewer greenhouse gas emissions, which make them an important part of achieving the region’s air quality goals. They are also quieter than traditional vehicles.

430.2 Charging infrastructure is an important component in the success of EV deployment. The production of electricity that serves the District has fewer greenhouse emissions than traditional combustion engines.

430.3 Policy T-5.2.1: Deployment of EVs

Support the deployment of EVs in place of traditional gasoline-powered vehicles to help the District achieve its sustainability goals.

430.4 Policy T-5.2.2: Charging Infrastructure

Encourage early deployment of EV charging stations at no charge in appropriate, publicly accessible locations across the District to serve existing neighborhoods. Consider the integration of EV charging stations in new and existing residential and commercial developments. Consideration should also be given to locations where EV charging stations can be retrofitted into parking garages. As EVs become more popular, there will be increased demand for on-street charging stations, which will need to be balanced with other curbside needs and uses.

430.5 Policy T-5.2.3: EV Transit

Require the use of EVs for the DC Circulator, WMATA buses, and, if available, trucks used by DPW. The implementation of a fully electric fleet will reduce tailpipe emissions and reduce noise pollution in neighborhoods. WMATA must develop a timeline for bus fleet conversion to EVs that enables the District to meet its greenhouse emission reduction targets and promotes environmental justice by reducing diesel emissions in predominantly Black and Brown neighborhoods.

430.6 Action T-5.2.A: Expand Charging Infrastructure

Install publicly accessible electric charging stations throughout the District to expand EV infrastructure and lead the market, in keeping with demand for and encouraging the conversion to EVs.

430.7 Action T-5.2.B: EV Supply Equipment

Encourage the siting of EV supply equipment in curbside public space, multi-dwelling unit garages, commercial facilities and residential areas, where appropriate.

### **10-A5** HOUSING ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 500** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A500}

500.1 The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan describes the importance of housing to neighborhood quality in Washington, DC and the importance of providing housing opportunities for all segments of the population throughout Washington, DC.

500.2 The critical housing issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Ensuring housing affordability across all incomes and household sizes;

Furthering fair housing opportunities, especially in high-cost areas;

Fostering housing production to improve affordability;

Preserving existing affordable housing;

Promoting more housing proximate to transit and linking new housing to transit;

Restoring or demolishing vacant or underused properties;

Conserving existing housing stock;

Maintaining healthy homes for residents;

Promoting homeownership;

Ending homelessness; and

Providing housing integrated with supportive services for older adults, vulnerable populations, and residents with disabilities.

500.3 In 2006, the Comprehensive Plan identified most of these issues. The District has implemented many actions in response, including:

Funding the Housing Production Trust Fund (HPTF) with $100 million per year for affordable housing;

Applying Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) requirements to a variety of residential uses, including new market rate buildings, row house conversions, penthouse habitable space, and the prioritizing proffers of additional affordable housing through Planned Unit Developments (PUDs);

Requiring District-owned land sold for housing to include 20 to 30 percent of the units as affordable;

Launching the Housing Preservation Trust Fund and leveraging private sector dollars to preserve expiring affordability;

Reviewing and comprehensively updating the zoning regulations to encourage accessory dwelling units, reduce parking requirements, and encourage residential development;

Encouraging the overall production of housing, particularly in the Central Washington Planning Area, that has resulted in twice the annual rate of production as before the Comprehensive Plan was adopted; and

Moving families experiencing homelessness out of DC General Hospital and into short-term family housing units across the District.

500.4 However, as Washington, DC remains attractive to and retains higher-income households, rising demand and competition has and will put upward pressure on rents and a greater number of lower-income households will experience greater pressure from rising housing costs, leading to residents leaving or bearing a housing burden. Thus, greater public action is needed to fulfill the vision of an inclusive District.

500.5 Housing in the District must also be understood through a racial equity lens. Forty-nine percent of white households are owner-occupied, while only 35 percent of Black and 30 percent of Latino households are owner occupied, and the median value of Black-owned homes is less than that of white homeowners. Black and Hispanic households have the greatest rent burdens, at 35 and 39 percent. These gaps are a result of historic, systemic practices such as redlining, racial covenants, and predatory lending that limited access to housing, restricted wealth building opportunities for communities of color, and created highly segregated development patterns. Even while the District has grown in population, the District’s low-income residents have experienced displacement pressures. Of adults experiencing homelessness, 86 percent are Black, while only 47 percent of District residents are Black. While this element often uses income to describe groups and provides overall averages, it is critical to disaggregate data to understand housing considerations experienced by different race, age, and gender groups, and to consider and implement housing policies and actions in this racial equity context to address historic gaps and current challenges.

500.6a Housing issues affect every facet of the Comprehensive Plan. They influence land use and density decisions, shape infrastructure and community service needs, determine transportation demand, and even drive employment strategies for District residents. At the most basic level, it is the availability of safe, decent, affordable housing across all neighborhoods that will determine whether the District’s vision for an inclusive District will be realized. The type of housing constructed or preserved, the cost of that housing, and where it is built will influence whether the District can attract and retain families with children, maintain neighborhood diversity, improve health and educational outcomes, and provide economic opportunity for all.

500.6b Section 224 of the Framework Element of the Comprehensive Plan explains the relationship between the Comprehensive Plan, including the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Generalized Policy Map (GPM), and zoning. By District Code, the “Zoning maps and regulations, and amendments thereto, shall not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan . . .” The Zoning Commission considers the text, policies, and maps in reviewing zoning designations. Section 227 in the Framework Element includes the definitions for the categories used on the Future Land Use Map, such as Low Density Commercial or Medium Density Residential. These categories are not zoning but are used by the Zoning Commission in reviewing various zoning requests. Each land use category definition identifies a representative zoning district appropriate to this designation, and states that other zoning districts may apply. The Comprehensive Plan policies and FLUM play an important role in guiding future growth, including housing.

500.7a Text Box: What is the Difference Between Housing Affordability and Affordable Housing?

Housing affordability is a broad measure of whether or not housing is affordable to a range of households. Households that pay more than 30 percent of their income on housing are considered to be burdened by housing costs, while those who pay more than 50 percent are severely burdened. Therefore, housing affordability is the extent to which a broad range of households pay less than 30 percent of their income on housing. An important part of affordability are neighborhood assets that help keep transportation costs low, such as reducing the need for car ownership and use.

500.7b Broad affordability is a function of the overall market supply being able to meet rising demand. New supply can improve affordability by letting new residents move to Washington, DC without taking an existing unit, and by allowing existing residents to trade up, thereby freeing up an existing unit for someone else to occupy. For instance, 40 percent of new units become occupied by households moving from outside the District, while 51 percent are occupied by households moving from within the District, and the remainder are households mixed with both District and non-District residents.

500.7c Affordable housing in the Comprehensive Plan is defined as housing in which occupancy is limited to households earning 80 percent or less of the median family income (MFI) of an area as annually determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (References to deeply affordable housing throughout this element refer to units available to households earning 40 percent or less of the MFI.) HUD standards are used by many federal programs that fund affordable housing. The price of this housing is maintained at a level below what the free market would demand using restrictive deeds and covenants and financed by grants, mortgage subsidies, vouchers, tax credits, or through land use tools. The maximum monthly cost to a household of affordable housing is limited to 30 percent of the targeted household’s income limit (which varies according to the number of people in the household). Different affordable housing programs are benchmarked, or targeted, to specific levels of median family income (MFI). Affordable housing developments often set prices near or at the top of their targets, while eligibility is open to households across their range of income targets. This can lead to residents of affordable housing having monthly housing costs that, although subsidized, are higher than 30 percent of their actual income. Public housing, vouchers, and a few small federal programs are exceptions in which each household’s monthly housing cost is based on their specific income.

The benchmarked, or targeted, incomes for the Washington metropolitan area in 2017 are shown in Figure 5.1 below. The figure shows the major programs for affordable housing and the incomes eligible for each. In 2017, the MFI for a family of four was $110,300. For the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, the terms extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate- income correspond to up to 30 percent, 50 percent, 80 percent, and 120 percent of the MFI, respectively.

It is important to note that use of a regional MFI skews high for the District. In 2017, for example, the actual median household income, rather than MFI adjusted by family size, was $82,372 in the District and $99,669 for the DC metropolitan area. Affordability in the District is further skewed given the District’s comparatively higher market rate housing costs. The 2017 median value for homes in the District is $607,00 compared to $424,000 for the metropolitan area. Further, the regional MFI does not disaggregate and consider information by race, an important consideration given the income gap for communities of color in the District, with the MFI for Black households in the District less than the MFI for White households. The 2017 median income for Black families in the District is $51,114 (less than 50 percent of the MFI), while it is $190,957 for white families in the District. Proportionately, this means that more Black families are likely to fall within the extremely low and very low-income categories, as shown in Figure 1, below. Fewer Black households will be able to afford housing in the low- or moderate-income categories.

500.7d Example: If a single mother of two earned $15.50 per hour, her annual income would be approximately $32,200 and fall within the extremely low-income category. If she spends 30 percent of her income on housing, she could afford to pay only $886 per month on housing. Finding decent housing or any housing at this price range is a challenge in Washington, DC.

500.7e By contrast, market rate housing is defined as housing with rents or sales prices that are allowed to change with market conditions, including increased demand. Some market rate housing may be naturally occurring affordable housing that moderate and some low-income households can afford. However, the supply of naturally occurring affordable units can be unstable due to potential pressure from both sides. With too little demand, decreasing rents are insufficient to cover maintenance and the units fall into a state of disrepair and become vacant and underused. With too much demand, the units are rehabbed into higher cost units. Rent-controlled apartments are counted as market rate units because there are no occupancy restrictions. The District’s rent control law stipulates that, under usual circumstances, rents on market rate apartments built prior to 1975 may rise only as fast as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for older adults and tenants with disabilities and the CPI plus two percent for everyone else.

500.7f ** Regional MFI is used rather than the District’s median income because it is the federal government benchmark commonly used to qualify for funding subsidies.

500.8 Figure 5.1 Sample of Housing Programs, 2017 Income Limits and Main Household Targets

500.9 Washington, DC’s housing stock is varied in type and size, with developments since 2006 shifting the makeup of the District’s housing. Figure 5.2 shows the number of units by type, year built, size, and vacancy rate and how these have changed over 17 years. The figure shows that owner/renter rates have fluctuated. In addition, Figure 5.2 shows that, despite a modest increase in the number of detached/attached single-family homes, which represent 75 percent of large units (three or more bedrooms), a shift toward multi-family units has been consistent. The shift is also visible in Figure 5.3 New Housing Units Authorized: 2000-2017. Washington, DC’s housing stock is becoming both older and newer as pre-1939 buildings are being preserved and remodeled to have more units while post-World War II buildings are more often torn down and the sites redeveloped to add new, modern apartment buildings. Of the 281,000 occupied housing units in 2017, 42 percent were owner-occupied, and 58 percent were renter occupied. Thirty-seven percent of the housing units in the District are single-family units, and over 34 percent of the housing stock was built before 1940.

500.10 Housing Element Figure 5.2: District’s Housing Stock, 2000, 2010, and 2017

500.11 Since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2006, the increase in housing demand and costs has been ongoing, driven by a national recession and recovery, demographic shifts, low interest rates, regional economic growth, falling crime rates, renewed confidence in District government, and improvements in public services. Rising costs have accelerated since the recovery began in 2010, with the median sales price of single-family homes increasing 7.3 percent per year, condominiums increasing 2.8 percent per year, and average rents increasing 2.9 percent per year between 2000 and 2017. Part of the increase is attributable to declining interest rates, which went from eight percent to below four percent between 2000 and 2017. Declining interest rates enabled a 37 percent increase in home buying purchasing power and contributed to rising prices. The increase in demand has propelled an increase in housing costs, affecting both renters and homeowners but raising homeowners’ value. With higher prices came greater down payment and mortgage requirements, making it more difficult for renters to transition to homeownership. Given income and wealth disparities, and a higher percentage of renter households, housing affordability is increasingly difficult for communities of color.

500.12 The increase in demand has also resulted in a significant increase in the production of housing that has only accelerated since the recession ended in 2009. Figure 5.3 shows the recent trends in housing units issued permits. The figure shows that average annual production of housing for the years after the national recession is more than double (4,483 units per year from 2011-2017) than average production in the District prior to the recession (1,991 units per year from 2002-2007). There is evidence that this new production has slowed the rising costs of renting or owning multi-family units.

500.13 Figure 5.3: New Housing Units Authorized: 2000-2017

**History**
- *Source: U.S. Census, DC Office of Planning (OP) 500.14 Even more dramatic has been the volatility of single-family home values. Between 2000 and 2005, the median sales price for a single-family home in the District rose 174 percent, from $178,250 to $489,000. However, prices then dropped 23 percent in just two years between 2007 and 2009 due to the national financial collapse, causing many homeowners to lose equity in their most important investment. Prices since 2010 have started to rise rapidly again at about 7.3 percent per year. Condominiums and cooperatives—once considered starter homes for first-time buyers—have also increased, but more modestly as production expanded the competitive supply. Figure 5.4 shows that the median sales price of condominiums rose sharply from $138,000 in 2000 to $377,950 in 2005. Condominium prices then stayed mostly flat until 2010, when they started to rise at an average rate of 2.8 percent per year. 500.15 As prices have risen, the percentage of residents able to comfortably afford the median priced home or apartment has dropped. In 2001, 34 percent of the District’s for-sale housing would have been affordable to a family supported by a full-time schoolteacher. By 2004, that figure had dropped to just 16 percent. By 2017, the percentage of homes in the District that a full-time schoolteacher could afford had partially recovered to 19 percent. This was due to a variety of factors, including higher wages, decreasing interest rates, the drop in values after 2007, and the increasing availability of condominiums that are less expensive than single-family homes. Nevertheless, the tightening availability of moderately priced housing is hindering the District’s ability to retain and attract moderate-income households. 500.16 Figure 5.4 shows the change in housing value and purchasing power from 2000 to 2017. The figure illustrates how median sales prices of single-family and cooperative/condominium homes have changed in relation to changes in the purchasing power of married-couple families and non-family households. It shows that sales prices of single-family homes, while volatile, have tracked the purchasing power of married-couple families, whose incomes grew 3.9 percent per year since 2006, but whose purchasing power increased 7.0 percent per year as interest rates decreased. Over the same time, married couples in the District grew by over 14,600 new households, or just under half of all new households since 2006. 500.17 Figure 5.4: DC Median Sales Prices and Purchasing Power by Household Type: 2000-2017*
- *Source: U.S. Census American Communities Survey (ACS) 2017, Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors (GCAAR), Freddie Mac, OP 500.18 Rents have also risen, making it more difficult for many to afford to live in the District. Between 2006 and 2017, at 3.4 percent per year, rents in Washington, DC rose faster than the MFI of the region, which grew by only 1.8 percent per year. Much of the increase in rents was due to new amenity-rich buildings that attracted higher income households to the District. However, even rents in buildings built prior to 2006 rose at a rate of 2.7 percent per year. As a result, between 2006 and 2017, nearly 18,300 fewer affordable units were available to households earning equal to or less than 60 percent of the MFI (See Figure 5.10 Change in Supply of Rental Units by Affordability). There are many reasons in addition to rising rents for the overall reduction in the number of lower cost units, including demolition of older buildings and conversion to condominiums. 500.19 The rising costs have continued a crisis of affordability, particularly for the District’s lowest-income residents. Over 20 percent (56,700) of all households in 2017 were severely burdened by housing costs, and another 16 percent (44,600) of households were burdened. Residents must set aside a growing share of their earnings for housing and utilities, leaving less disposable income for health care, transportation, food, other basic needs, and the ability to set aside savings to prepare for the future. The greatest share of burdened and severely burdened households are the 39,500 rental households earning less than 30 percent of the MFI. The market has also become more segmented, with dwindling housing choices for working families and the middle class in general. Expanded housing options for lower- and middle-income households have become limited, and the opportunity for many residents to build individual wealth through homeownership has become more difficult. Racial representation differs across income groups, and communities of color are disproportionately impacted by increasing housing costs and diminishing supply of affordable options. The District’s Black and Hispanic households experience higher levels of rent burden that increase the likelihood of displacement. 500.20 For existing residents who were already homeowners, the price fluctuations represented a source of wealth as their homes appreciated in value but also a source of risk as some lost significant equity in their family’s single largest investment, which could help them put their kids through college or retire in relative comfort. The strength of the District’s housing market has also created opportunities to solve some of the very problems it is creating. The recent boom has raised real estate values, incomes, and sales, generating millions of dollars in new revenues for housing programs through deed and recordation taxes dedicated to the District’s HPTF. The pending availability of several large sites for redevelopment creates housing construction opportunities that did not exist five or 10 years ago. 500.21 The IZ Program, which requires most new residential buildings of 10 units or more to set aside between eight and 12.5 percent of the project toward affordable units, has now delivered almost 600 affordable units as of Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, with another 800 expected over the next several years, at a pace of close to 200 affordable units per year. The program is particularly beneficial for two reasons. First, it retains the affordable units for the life of the project; second, it produces units in high-amenity, high-cost neighborhoods, where land prices make it very expensive to financially subsidize affordable housing. An expanded IZ program that would encourage additional affordable housing and extend program applicability is under consideration. 500.22 Housing is a regional market that provides a wide array of choices that vary by location, size, building type and age, accessibility, and other factors. The difficulty in expanding the supply of moderately priced housing across the region will continue to create a market dynamic where higher-income households drive the cost of housing. Housing costs within the District are among the highest in the region and reflect the premium placed on being close to the region’s core. Allowing all District residents to have the choice to secure housing in their communities is a growing challenge as redevelopment and highly competitive offerings are readily available in surrounding jurisdictions. 500.23 Moderating the cost of housing and expanding opportunities will require a regional effort. It will take sustained multi-jurisdictional coordination and partnerships, such as an analysis of the regional impediments to fair housing and other approaches, to increase the supply of housing and better meet demand at all incomes. For instance, it will be difficult to improve affordability in the District, even though the pace of Washington, DC’s housing production doubled after the recession, when production across the rest of the region is down 38 percent. 500.24 While housing is a regional market, it is also a very personal choice tied to family, community, and the unique identity shared by residents living in Washington, DC. The fact that many residents place a priority on maintaining their identity as Washingtonians partially explains why 71 percent of the District’s residents moving within the region stay within Washington, DC. The rate of retention is actually the highest for extremely low-income households, with 77 percent staying in the District. This is due in part to Washington DC’s investment in public transit and affordable housing, keeping housing and transportation costs low relative to the rest of the region. However, the same migration data suggests that lower-income households tend to move to Wards 7 and 8, where 90 percent of residents are Black. Migration data must also be considered in the context of race. In addition, the District is experiencing difficulty in retaining moderate-income households earning between 80 and 100 percent of the MFI, with only 60 percent of them choosing to stay in Washington, DC. 500.25 On a neighborhood level, the recent boom in housing demand has challenged the District’s ability to enable lower-income residents to stay in their neighborhood and grow inclusive and racially and economically diverse communities. Approximately 60 percent of those moving to Wards 7 and 8 are very low-income households, while only 17 percent of those moving to Ward 3 are very low-income. The District is increasing the rate of developing new and preserving existing affordable housing, with approximately 1,700 affordable units delivered per year since 2015. While some of this production is occurring in the very neighborhoods where such housing is already concentrated, changes in the way investment decisions are being made, such as preferences for projects in high-cost areas are shifting production to higher-cost neighborhoods, where there is less affordable housing. A housing needs assessment conducted by the Urban Institute for the District in 2015 suggests that more affordable housing is needed District-wide, especially in high-cost areas and for those households earning less than 30 percent of the MFI. 500.26 Map 5.1 illustrates the location of affordable housing projects in the District, overlaid on a map that characterizes neighborhoods by an index of housing costs versus neighborhoods that are Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP), as defined by HUD. With the exception of a few projects, there is very little affordable housing built in neighborhoods with high housing costs. If left unchecked, these patterns will continue to concentrate lower-income residents in some neighborhoods and find them scarce in others. 500.27 Map 5.1: Affordable Housing Projects by Neighborhood Index of Housing Costs and R/ECAP*
- *Source: DHCD, HUD, HousingInsights.org 500.28 While the market for housing has been robust since 2010, there is no guarantee this trend will continue indefinitely. The lessons from the financial mortgage collapse of 2007 suggest that softer demand due to rising interest rates or other risks could test the resiliency of Washington, DC’s housing market. Measures to increase affordable housing must be mindful to account for market dynamics and the burden placed on the private sector so that forward momentum can be sustained. This may require additional bold steps by District government, such as the recent increased allocation of funding in 2015 to the HPTF from deed recordation and transfer taxes and other sources. 500.29 One of the critical issues facing Washington, DC is how to retain and create more housing units that are large enough for families with children. In 2006, 21 percent of District households were composed of families with children. By 2017, households with children had fallen to below 20 percent because they experience difficulty finding units they can afford. This percentage is substantially lower than the 33 percent rate for the region and 31 percent rate for the nation. However, other cities, such as San Francisco, New York, and Boston, also experienced declines in the percentage of households with children since 2006. 500.30 Family households with children need larger housing units with more bedrooms. Of the existing housing stock, only 34 percent of the units have three bedrooms or more, which is a slight decline from 2006, when 35 percent of units had three or more bedrooms. Eighty-nine percent of recent new construction has been apartments, of which only two percent had three or more bedrooms. Of new condominium units built since 2006, less than 10 percent had three or more bedrooms. Because the vast majority of Washington, DC’s capacity for growth is in multi-family development, the District will need to look to apartment buildings to add larger family-sized units. 500.31 Many residents of Washington, DC have a strong desire to stay, whether they have recently moved here or their family has lived in Washington, DC for multiple generations. As touched upon in the Framework Element, Washington, DC experienced a tremendous increase in the number of younger adults between the ages of 20 and 39 years since 2006. This has led to an increase in children between the ages 0 and 14 years, and young adults are finding their housing needs change as they start new families. The increase in young children is an early indication of their parents’ desire and intention to stay in Washington, DC. At the same time, the District is also expecting an increase in older residents. A broad retention strategy is needed for these new and existing families and the overlapping housing needs of older adults to maintain the health and equity of the District. 500.32 The availability of single-family housing and housing with more rooms are two factors that are positively correlated with retaining family households. other factors are also important, including affordability, crime, childcare, parks, and school quality. 500.33 Who is moving in and out of the District? Figure 5.5 shows the demographics of migration in and out of the District. It shows that, in 2017, nine percent (65,522) of the District’s population moved into Washington, DC that year. Out-movers during the same year numbered 60,873. During the same period, in-movers were less likely than out-movers to be families with children, Black, or homeowners and more likely to be low-income. While this tells a District-wide story, within various neighborhoods affordability issues are reshaping neighborhood demographics; for example, neighborhoods in Southwest Washington have seen extensive new development that attracted younger, more affluent, and whiter residents, while losing both residents of color and lower-income residents. 500.34 Figure 5.5: Migration in and out of the District, 2017*
- *Source: U.S. Census ACS 2017, OP 500.35 Overall, key indicators suggest that demand for housing will remain strong in the District. However, it is important to recognize that events, such as the 2020 public health emergency, may change this outlook. Still, indicators including the historically strong employment market, improving schools, and a walkable urban lifestyle that is attractive to a new generation of residents will likely continue to drive housing demand. The increase in young children (zero-14 years) is an early indication of their parents’ desire and intention to stay in the District. Retaining new and existing families is important to Washington, DC’s vibrancy and health. 500.36 In order to meet this demand, it will be critical to continue, and support, the overall production of both market rate and affordable housing. Without new development and an increased supply of these units, rising costs caused by these demand pressures will increasingly restrict the types of households who can afford to live in Washington, DC. New production will take the pressure off the existing housing supply and allow it to serve a greater range of household incomes. 500.38 This Housing Element seeks to address the challenges of rising costs and other housing needs through its policies and actions focused on the production of new market rate and affordable housing and the preservation of existing affordable housing. It is organized into four major sections. The first addresses housing production, including both market rate and affordable housing. The second addresses housing preservation, focusing particularly on anti-displacement strategies and housing maintenance. The third section addresses homeownership and fair housing laws. The final section covers the needs of those experiencing homelessness, persons with disabilities, older adults, and others who are not adequately served by the private market.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 500 Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors, OP. CoStar.com OP analysis of changes in interest rates and American Community Survey (ACS) changes in median incomes. Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors, OP. OP analysis of BLS Occupational Wage Data, Interest Rates, and RBI stats Sales Data for 2016 Purchasing power is defined as 25 percent of gross monthly income toward principal and interest on a 30-year mortgage at the average interest rate for that year, plus a 10 percent down payment. CoStar.com U.S. Census ACS 2017 PUM data, OP. U.S. Census Survey of Building Permits, OP. U.S. Census ACS 2012-2016 PUM data, OP. U.S. Census ACS 2012-2016 PUM data, OP. DMPED OP analysis of U.S. Census Survey of Building Permits and CoStar data OP analysis of Office of Tax and Revenue Computer Aided Mass Appraisal (CAMA) data*

##### **10-A DCMR § 501** HOUSING GOAL {#sec-10-a501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A501}

501.1 The overarching goal for housing is to provide a safe, decent, healthy, and affordable housing supply for current and future residents in all of Washington, DC's neighborhoods by maintaining and developing housing for all incomes and household types. The overall goal for the District of Columbia is that a minimum of one third of all housing produced should be affordable to lower-income households. The short-term goal is to produce 36,000 residential units, 12,000 of which are affordable, between 2019 and 2025.

##### **10-A DCMR § 502** H-1 HOMES FOR AN INCLUSIVE CITY {#sec-10-a502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A502}

502.1 This section of the Housing Element addresses housing production, both for market rate and affordable units.

502.2 Washington, DC must sustain a high rate of housing production to meet current and projected needs through 2025 and remain economically vibrant. Over the next 15 years, through 2035, the District’s housing stock is forecast to increase from a base of about 310,000 units in 2015 to 397,000 units in 2035. Between 2015 and 2020, 23,000 additional units are expected to be built, based on projects that are now under construction, soon to break ground, or by conversion to smaller units. Mayor's Order 2019-036 initiated the goal to accelerate the rate of housing production between 2019 and 2025 to achieve 36,000 new units, 12,000 of which are affordable, which will be needed by 2025 to improve affordability and the long-term balance between demand and supply. This is equivalent to 5,100 additional units per year. This is higher than the rate of production experienced during 2010-2015, and demand pressures suggest there is a need for even more. However, the District issued permits for an average of 4,483 units of new construction per year after recovering from the national recession, indicating this target of 5,100 units per year is not out of reach. Figure 5.6 illustrates the goal for both total and income-restricted affordable units per Figure 5.4 and how the goal would extend through 2030 and 2050. These goals provide measurable benchmarks that will require public, non-profit, and private sector action to achieve. Prioritizing affordable housing production is critical to reducing existing disparities in access to housing, particularly for communities of color.

502.3 Figure 5.6 Total Residential and Affordable Unit Goals: 2018-2050

**History**
- *Source: OP, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development (DMPED) 502.4 As noted in the Land Use and Framework Elements, Washington, DC already has the land resources to meet this demand. But land alone is not enough to ensure the production of housing, and housing production alone does not guarantee that a portion of the new units will be affordable to all households. The approach needs to vary with the characteristics of the site and surrounding conditions. For instance, infill housing development in Neighborhood Conservation Areas typically has infrastructure but can be constrained by lot sizes and is dependent on surrounding market strength. Redevelopment of ground floor uses along the District’s Main Street mixed-use corridors is often delayed until market demand drives housing prices high enough to overcome the return provided by the existing uses. Neighborhood Enhancement Areas need not only comprehensive infrastructure investment but also catalytic projects to demonstrate the viability of further private sector investment. Finally, large sites with significant capacity need major infrastructure investment to knit them into their surrounding neighborhoods. 502.5 A multi-pronged strategy is needed to facilitate production, address regulatory and administrative constraints, and deliver a substantial number of the new units that are affordable to District residents, particularly to moderate and lower income residents. Potential regulatory strategies to maximize housing production might include regulatory relief, such as flexibility with zoning height and expedited entitlement review and permitting. Financing strategies might include tax credits and abatements and other financing tools. The 2006 Comprehensive Housing Strategy established many of the basic tenets of this strategy. Additional information is provided in the text box titled The Comprehensive Housing Strategy on the following page. 502.6 Participation from private sector investors is critical to achieving Washington, DC’s housing goal and presents several challenges as they pursue investment opportunities. Some locations remain underused within the permitted density for a variety of reasons. In some locations, existing ground floor uses produce a sufficiently high return that discourages and delays redevelopment. In other locations, the increased construction costs needed for taller building types sometimes lead investors to use lower density, less expensive methods that underuse a site’s potential development capacity. Finally, development of new supply tends to slow down as soon as supply starts to meet demand, and the pace of absorption and revenue growth slows or declines below investors’ expectations. These are economic realities that all cities face. 502.6a Text Box: The Comprehensive Housing Strategy The housing policies of the Comprehensive Plan were introduced in 2003, when the D.C. Council passed the Comprehensive Housing Strategy Act, creating a task force charged with developing recommendations on the housing needs of current and future residents of the District. It included strategies for preserving and creating mixed-income neighborhoods; assessing the quality, availability, and affordability of rental housing; creating homeownership opportunities; preventing displacement; assessing housing for persons with disabilities; promoting moderate-income housing; and increasing the District’s population by 100,000 residents. 502.6b The 2006 task force report, Homes for an Inclusive City, presented seven recommendations for improving housing affordability and growing the population. Foremost among these was the production of 55,000 new housing units, including 19,000 affordable units, and the preservation of at least 30,000 existing affordable units. The report includes strategies to increase the homeownership rate, provide direct assistance to 14,600 low-income renter households, and include affordable housing in the new neighborhoods to be developed during the next 15 years. 502.6c Subsequent task forces have built upon the original strategies found in Homes for an Inclusive City and developed additional policies found in the Bridges to Opportunity and Housing Preservation Strike Force final reports. These efforts focused on strategies and initiatives such as providing wraparound supportive social service contracts into affordable housing investments. In addition, the District submitted to HUD the 2016-2021 Five-Year Consolidated Plan, which includes data analysis, resident participation, and the development of an implementation program on how the District would expend funds from federal programs, including Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership. 502.6d Many of the original strategies in Homes for an Inclusive City were carried forward into the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. The policies from the subsequent task force are included and built upon in the amended Comprehensive Plan. This is an important step toward their implementation and will move the District one step closer to achieving its housing goals.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 502 OP Round 9.0 COG Forecast and analysis of OCTO’s Master Address Repository*

##### **10-A DCMR § 503** H-1.1 EXPANDING HOUSING SUPPLY {#sec-10-a503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A503}

503.1 Expanding the housing supply is a key part of the District’s vision to create vibrant neighborhoods. Along with improved transportation and shopping, better neighborhood schools and parks, preservation of historic resources, and improved design and identity, the production of market rate and affordable housing is essential to the future of the neighborhoods. It is also a key to improving the District’s fiscal health. The District will work to facilitate housing construction and rehabilitation through its planning, building, zoning, permitting, inspection, and taxation programs, recognizing and responding to the needs of all segments of the community to achieve an adequate and diverse housing supply. The first step toward meeting this goal is to ensure that an adequate supply of appropriately zoned land is available to meet expected housing needs. Public investment in high-quality public infrastructure, including transportation, public space, schools, and libraries, is also critical to ensuring that all neighborhoods provide a high degree of access to opportunity. Regulatory processes should encourage, not discourage, the creation of new housing.

503.2 The supply of housing should grow sufficiently to slow rising costs of market rate rental and for-sale housing. Expanding supply alone will not fulfill all of Washington, DC’s housing needs at lower income levels, but it is one important element of the strategy to ensure unmet demand at higher price points does not further hasten the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing.

503.3 Policy H-1.1.1: Private Sector Support

Encourage or require the private sector to provide both new market rate and affordable housing to meet the needs of present and future District residents at locations consistent with District land use policies and objectives.

503.4 Policy H-1.1.2: Production Incentives

Provide suitable regulatory, tax, and financing incentives to meet housing production goals, prioritizing affordable housing production in support of the targets in Policy H-1.2.2. These incentives should continue to include zoning regulations that permit greater building area for commercial projects that include housing than for those that do not, and relaxation of height and density limits near transit. Strongly encourage incentives and strategies that result in the production of more deeply affordable housing, such as the use of income averaging across a range of affordable housing income levels.

503.5 Policy H-1.1.3: Balanced Growth

Strongly encourage the development of new housing, including affordable housing, on surplus, vacant, and underused land in all parts of Washington, DC. Ensure that a sufficient supply of land is planned and zoned to enable the District to meet its long-term housing needs, including the need for low- and moderate-density single-family homes, as well as the need for higher-density housing.

503.6 Policy H-1.1.4: Mixed-Use Development

Promote moderate to high-density, mixed-use development that includes affordable housing on commercially zoned land, particularly in neighborhood commercial centers, along Main Street mixed-use corridors and high-capacity surface transit corridors, and around Metrorail stations.

503.7 Policy H-1.1.5: Housing Quality

Require the design of affordable and accessible housing to meet or exceed the high-quality architectural standards achieved by market-rate housing. Such housing should be built with high-quality materials and systems that minimize long-term operation, repair, and capital replacement costs. Regardless of its affordability level, new or renovated housing should be indistinguishable from market rate housing in its exterior appearance, should be generally compatible with the design character of the surrounding neighborhood, and should address the need for open space and recreational amenities.

503.8 Policy H-1.1.6: Housing in Central Washington

Absorb a substantial component of the demand for new high-density housing in the Central Washington Planning Area and along the Anacostia River. Through regulation and incentives, encourage affordable housing production. Absorbing the demand for higher-density housing within these areas is an effective way to meet housing demands, maximize infrastructure and proximity to jobs, create mixed-use areas, and minimize the cost pressure on existing residential neighborhoods throughout the District. Market rate and affordable mixed-income, higher-density downtown housing also provides the opportunity to create vibrant street life and to support the restaurants, retail, entertainment, and other amenities in the heart of Washington, DC.

See the Land Use, Urban Design, and Area Elements for related policies.

503.9 Policy H-1.1.7: Large Sites

Accommodate a significant share of the District’s projected housing demand in new neighborhoods developed on large sites. Prioritize housing, particularly affordable housing preserved for long-term affordability. These neighborhoods should include or have access to well-planned retail, public schools, attractive parks, open space and recreation, as well as needed supportive services for older adults and persons with disabilities and enable resilient, innovative neighborhood-level energy systems. The new neighborhoods should include a variety of housing types, including housing for families, older adults, and other needed types, serving a diverse population and a variety of income levels.

503.10 Policy H-1.1.8: Production of Housing in High-Cost Areas

Encourage development of both market rate and affordable housing in high-cost areas of the District, making these areas more inclusive. Develop new, innovative tools and techniques that support affordable housing in these areas. Doing so increases costs per unit but provides greater benefits in terms of access to opportunity and outcomes.

See also the Land Use Element policies on transit-oriented and mixed-use development.

503.11 Policy H-1.1.9: Housing for Families

Encourage and prioritize the development of family-sized units and/or family-sized housing options which generally have three or more bedrooms, in areas proximate to transit, employment centers, schools, public facilities, and recreation to ensure that the District’s most well-resourced locations remain accessible to families, particularly in areas that received increased residential density as a result of underlying changes to the Future Land Use Map. Family-sized units and/or family-sized housing options include housing typologies that can accommodate households of three or more persons and may include a variety of housing types including townhomes, fourplexes and multi-family buildings. To address the mismatch between meeting the needs of larger households and the financial feasibility of developing family-sized housing, support family-sized housing options through production incentives and requirements that address market rate challenges for private development that may include zoning, subsidies or tax strategies, or direct subsidy and regulatory requirements for publicly owned sites.

503.12 Action H-1.1.A: Annual Housing Reports and Monitoring Efforts

Develop an annual State of the District Housing Report, which improves the quality of information on which to make housing policy decisions. Include information on current conditions, trends and needs, such as the availability and affordability of units by income, tenure, building type, number of bedrooms, and production patterns and capacity by Planning Area and other characteristics. Include information on the demand for, housing for low-, very low-, and extremely low-income households. Assess the availability of housing for Black communities and other communities of color, seniors, families, people with disabilities, and vulnerable communities. The report should also include a framework for evaluating progress toward measurable goals. Create a Housing Oversight Board composed of residents representing different incomes and household types, and for profit and nonprofit developers, that would review this report and provide an assessment each year on the effectiveness and outcomes of the District’s housing programs.

503.13 Action H.1.1.B: Regional Planning for Expanding the Supply of Housing

Pursue intergovernmental agreements and initiatives with the jurisdictions of the metropolitan region that expand the housing supply and broaden affordability throughout the region, and that do not leave the responsibility solely to any one jurisdiction.

503.14 Action H.1.1.C: Research New Ways to Expand Housing

Continue research to expand market rate and affordable housing opportunities in Washington, DC, such as expanding existing zoning tools and requirements and evaluating housing concepts that emphasize permanent affordability, such as social housing and community land trusts. Consider a broad range of options to address housing constraints, which could include updating the Height Act of 1910 (a federal law) outside of the L’Enfant Plan area, if it can promote housing production.

503.15 Action H-1.1.D: Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice

Complete the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing to advance fair housing, more equitably distribute housing, and take steps to address identified impediments and remedy residential exclusion, described in more detail in Section 514.

##### **10-A DCMR § 504** H-1.2 ENSURING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY {#sec-10-a504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A504}

504.1 Washington, DC faces numerous affordable housing challenges. It has both a greater share of the region’s low-income residents and the region’s most rapid decline in the availability of housing to serve these residents. In 2005, the median income for a family of four for the region was $89,300, but it was just $55,750 in the District. Census data indicates that by 2017 the gap had narrowed by almost half. In fact, between 2005 and 2017, the share of the District’s households earning below the regional median income declined from about 75 percent to 52 percent of households. Due to a growing number of higher-income households being attracted to Washington, DC, housing prices in the District are increasing at a faster rate than almost any jurisdiction in the metropolitan area. The share of District renters who paid more than 30 percent of their incomes for housing jumped from 39 percent in 2000 to 46 percent in 2004. In 2017, the estimated share of households paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing had fallen to 36 percent of all households. Similarly, the share paying more than 50 percent of their incomes declined from 23 percent in 2004 to 20 percent by 2017. Data suggests this is not due to improving affordability but rather the in-migration of higher-income households and the out-migration of lower-income households. Further, outcomes must be reviewed by race, considering the previously noted lower incomes and higher rent burdens faced by Black and Hispanic households.

504.2 In Washington, DC and across the nation, home prices have fluctuated dramatically since 2006. Prices in the District peaked in April 2007, soon after the adoption of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. While the collapse of the national mortgage markets did not affect Washington, DC as badly as some parts of the country, many neighborhoods did suffer from high foreclosure rates and severe decline in values, and these neighborhoods are in areas with predominantly Black and Hispanic populations. Among the hardest hit neighborhoods were those along Eastern and Southern Avenues in the Upper Northeast, Far Northeast and Southeast, and the Far Southeast and Southwest Planning Areas, such as Washington Highlands, North Michigan Park, Bellevue, and Capitol View. In addition to the national mortgage collapse, the problems were exacerbated by limited access to competitive mortgages, and predatory subprime lending, which was disproportionately directed at low income and Black and Hispanic households. By 2017, single-family home values in some of these neighborhoods, especially those in Wards 7 and 8, were finally exceeding their previous peaks achieved in 2007. However, condominiums are still experiencing declining values in some neighborhoods, stemming from failing homeowner associations, maintenance, and other problems.

504.3 Single-family home values elsewhere in the District have more than just recovered. Values have gone up most rapidly in the moderately priced neighborhoods to the north and east of downtown. Neighborhoods such as Trinidad, LeDroit Park and Bloomingdale recovered rapidly and experienced annualized sales price increases of from eight to almost 11 percent a year between 2009 and 2017. Price increases in high-cost neighborhoods west of Rock Creek Park were less dramatic, but they also experienced the least decline as a result of the mortgage crisis. As a result, they continue to be out of reach for most District residents.

504.4 Economic forecasts suggest that many of the jobs that will be created in the District during the next 10 years will not provide the compensation needed to pay for housing in Washington, DC. Occupations that pay the lowest third of wages are expected to represent 45 percent of the job growth. For example, some of the District’s fastest growing occupations are expected to be home health and personal care aides, which pay an annual wage of $ 29,000. For a single wage earner, this would qualify them for the deepest level of subsidy to rent a one-bedroom apartment, with almost no chance to purchase a condominium or single-family home. Even a two-income household with such salaries would be unable to afford market-rate homeownership. As the gap widens, there may be several consequences. Residents may work unreasonably long hours or multiple jobs, double up in overcrowded apartments and houses, live in unsafe or substandard housing, or give up living in the District altogether, enduring long commutes into Washington, DC each day. Black and Hispanic residents are more heavily represented in these job categories and earn lower incomes, as noted earlier. This points to worsening racial inequality in housing access and affordability, displacing residents who would otherwise choose to remain in the District.

504.5 The District has been working to preserve the affordability of existing housing opportunities for lower-income residents and to ensure that a substantial share of the housing built in the next 20 years is affordable for them. The District’s HPTF is now the largest per capita source of locally dedicated funding for affordable housing of any city in the country. An array of financial and regulatory tools and programs already are in place, some linked to federal housing programs, some created by District government, and others originating through partnerships with the private and nonprofit sectors (see Figure 5.7 for a list of the major housing programs in the District).

504.6 The District also has been pursuing legislative and regulatory measures that require affordable housing in new development. In addition to IZ, a 2013 District law requires District properties sold for residential development to provide 20 to 30 percent of the units as affordable depending on proximity to transit. The law targets a range of extremely low-income to moderate-income households, and long-term commitments to maintain affordability which depend on the tenure of the project. For many years, Washington, DC has also had a policy requiring developers seeking commercial density bonuses to provide affordable housing or pay into the HPTF. The previous Comprehensive Plans created the foundation for these actions, which is carried forward in this Element.

504.7 More deeply affordable housing production and preservation is needed to advance racial equity in housing because of the racial income gap. As shown in Figure 5.8, the proposed allocation of new affordable units should be 40 percent available to extremely low-income households, and 30 percent allocated each for low- and very low-income households. These targets would prioritize production and preservation of housing affordable to more of the District’s residents of color. Achieving these targets requires actions from the public, non-profit, and private sector. Statutory and regulatory measures, including zoning, are necessary but not sufficient to produce very-low- and extremely-low-income rental housing and ownership opportunities for a range of households. Budgetary decisions at the federal and District levels are also essential to enable the continued operation of quality housing for these income levels. Resource choices also must be made between new housing production and preserving or restoring affordable housing stock. And, while the District has set ambitious goals to increase both market rate and affordable housing production, affordable housing production is lagging, requiring renewed assessment of how to effectively allocate and use limited resources. To advance racial equity in housing, an effective allocation of resources is needed for housing preservation and production targeted to very-low and extremely-low-income households.

504.8 Policy H-1.2.1: Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Production as a Civic Priority

The production and preservation of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households is a major civic priority, to be supported through public programs that stimulate affordable housing production and rehabilitation throughout all District neighborhoods.

504.9 Policy H-1.2.2: Production Targets

Consistent with the Comprehensive Housing Strategy, work toward a goal that one-third of the new housing built in Washington, DC from 2018 to 2030, or approximately 20,000 units, should be affordable to persons earning 80 percent or less of the area-wide MFI. In aggregate, the supply of affordable units shall serve low-income households in proportions roughly equivalent to the proportions shown in Figure 5.8: 30 percent at 60 to 80 percent MFI, 30 percent at 30 to 60 percent MFI, and 40 percent at below 30 percent MFI. Set future housing production targets for market rate and affordable housing based on where gaps in supply by income occur and to reflect District goals. These targets shall acknowledge and address racial income disparities, including racially adjusted MFIs, in the District, use racially disaggregated data, and evaluate actual production of market rate and affordable housing at moderate, low, very-low, and extremely-low income levels.

504.10 Policy H-1.2.3: Affordable and Mixed-Income Housing

Focus investment strategies and affordable housing programs to distribute mixed-income housing more equitably across the entire District by developing goals and tools for affordable housing and establishing a minimum percent affordable by Planning Area to create housing options in high-cost areas, avoid further concentrations of affordable housing, and meet fair housing requirements.

504.11 Figure 5.7 Major Housing Programs in the District

**History**
- *Source: 2019 DC Office of Planning 504.12 Policy H-1.2.4: Housing Affordability on Publicly Owned Sites Require that 20 to 30 percent of the housing units built on publicly owned sites disposed of for housing, co-located with local public facilities, or sites being transferred from federal to District jurisdiction, are reserved for a range of affordable housing with long-term commitments to maintain affordability, seeking to maximize production of extremely low- and very low-income for rental units, and very low- and low-income households for ownership units and family-sized units. Prioritize the provision of affordable housing in areas of high housing costs. Explore strategies at these redeveloping sites to enable seniors in the surrounding community to have opportunities to age in place, and to provide housing opportunities for residents at risk of displacement in the surrounding community. Consider Universal Design and visitability. 504.13 Policy H-1.2.5: Moderate-Income Housing In addition to programs targeting persons of very low and extremely low incomes, develop and implement programs that meet the housing needs of those earning moderate incomes with wages insufficient to afford market rate housing in the District. 504.14 Policy H-1.2.6: Build Nonprofit Sector Capacity Actively involve and coordinate with the nonprofit sector, including faith-based institutions, to meet affordable housing needs, including housing construction and housing service delivery. Partner with the nonprofit sector so that public funding can be used to leverage the creation of affordable units and to expand access to housing through counseling, education, tenant rights services, and increased awareness of funding opportunities. Faith-based institutions represent a significant opportunity for the development of affordable housing and community facilities in Washington, DC and the provision of affordable housing and care of those in need is within their charitable missions. Faith-based institutions own nearly 6 million square feet of vacant land in the District and an estimated 4 million square feet of land with improvements. Much of the land owned by these institutions is in residential neighborhoods, adjacent to commercial corridors and have some type of residential zoning that limits them to low density development. These institutions may need technical support but have expressed their interest and commitment and can be willing partners in providing space for affordable housing. 504.15 Policy H-1.2.7: Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing Provide zoning incentives, such as through the PUD process, to developers proposing to build affordable housing substantially beyond any underlying requirement. Exceeding targets for affordable housing can refer to exceeding the quantity or depth of affordability otherwise required. The affordable housing proffered shall be considered a high priority public benefit for the purposes of granting density bonuses, especially when the proposal expands the inclusiveness of high-cost areas by adding affordable housing. When density bonuses are granted, flexibility in development standards should be considered to minimize impacts on contributing features and the design character of the neighborhood. 504.16 Policy H-1.2.8: District Housing Finance Agency (DCHFA) Support the DCHFA’s activities to finance new construction and rehabilitation of affordable rental and owner units, including vacant and abandoned units. 504.17 Policy H-1.2.9: Advancing Diversity and Equity of Planning Areas Proactively plan and facilitate affordable housing opportunities and make targeted investments that increase demographic diversity and equity across Washington, DC. Achieve a minimum of 15 percent affordable units within each Planning Area by 2050. Provide protected classes (see H-3.2 Housing Access) with a fair opportunity to live in a choice of homes and neighborhoods, including their current homes and neighborhoods. 504.18 Policy H-1.2.10: Redevelopment of Existing Subsidized and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing Prioritize, encourage, and incentivize build-first, one-for-one, on-site, and in-kind replacement of affordable units, including larger family-sized units. In addition, encourage and incentivize relocation and right of return plans when projects redeveloping affordable housing seek additional density beyond that permitted by existing zoning. Work to identify and coordinate financial assistance to ensure long-term affordability, preferably permanent or for the life of the project, when projects meet these criteria. 504.19 Policy H-1.2.11: Inclusive Mixed-Income Neighborhoods Support mixed-income housing by encouraging affordable housing in high-cost areas and market rate housing in low-income areas. Identify and implement measures that build in long-term affordability, preferably permanent or for the life of the project, to minimize displacement and achieve a balance of housing opportunities across the District. 504.20 Figure 5.8: Targeted Distribution of New Affordable Units by Income Group 504.21 The 2006 Comprehensive Housing Strategy recommended that one-third of the units produced in the District in the next 15 years be targeted to persons earning 80 percent of the MFI or below. Figure 5.8 shows the proposed allocation of these units to low-, very low-, and extremely low-income groups. 504.21 504.21a Text Box: The District’s Commercial Linkage Requirement In 1998, the District adopted zoning provisions that linked the granting of bonus density in commercial development projects to requirements for affordable housing. The linkage recognized that the demand for housing in Washington, DC was driven in part by new commercial development and rising land values. The linkage provisions are currently triggered by: The approval of a discretionary and otherwise appropriate street or alley closing, which results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage by the D.C. Council; The provision of habitable, non-residential penthouse space; or The approval of a discretionary and otherwise appropriate zoning density increase, which results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage by the Zoning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment. 504.21a 504.21b In such cases, applicants are required to construct or rehabilitate housing that remains affordable to low-income households for at least 40 years, or pay into the District’s HPTF. If the applicant agrees to construct or rehabilitate affordable housing, the square footage of housing that must be built varies from 25 to 50 percent of the density increase being granted, depending on if the housing is provided on-site, off-site, or in a high housing cost area. Applicants can use any of a number of tools to build the housing, such as partnerships and joint ventures. If the applicant agrees to pay into the HPTF, the payment must equal at least half of the assessed value of the square footage of the density increase being granted, plus the square footage of any preexisting housing demolished as a result of the non-residential development. Additional provisions relating to the timing and valuation of the improvements apply. 504.21c The linkage requirements include several exemptions, such as projects that are already subject to housing, retail, arts, or historic preservation requirements; projects approved prior to 1994; and projects located in enhanced/new neighborhood or enhanced/new multi-neighborhood centers. The Zoning Commission also has the authority to grant exemptions from this requirement based on certain findings relating to Comprehensive Plan consistency. 504.22 Action H-1.2.A: Commercial Linkage Assessment Review the District’s existing commercial linkage requirements to improve the effectiveness of this program and assess its impacts, advantages, and disadvantages, such as how and when linkage fees are paid. Based on findings, adjust the linkage requirements as needed. 504.23 Action H-1.2.B: New Revenue Sources Continue to identify and tap new sources of revenue for programs such as the HPTF to produce affordable housing and keep rental and owned housing affordable. These new sources should add to the portion of the deed and recordation taxes dedicated to the HPTF, such as the feasibility of earmarking a portion of residential property tax revenue increases for the fund. 504.24 Action H-1.2.C: Property Acquisition and Disposition Division Program Continue the District’s Property Acquisition and Disposition Division (PADD) Program, which acquires property and provides for long-term leaseback or low-cost terms to private developers that produce affordable homeownership and rental housing. 504.25 Action H-1.2.D: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits Expand for-profit builders’ use of Low-Income Housing Tax Credits as one tool to provide new or rehabilitated affordable housing in the District. 504.26 Action H-1.2.E: Leveraging Inclusionary Zoning Review and consider expansion of the Inclusionary Zoning program as needed to encourage additional affordable housing production throughout the District. Examine and propose greater IZ requirements when zoning actions permit greater density or change in use. Factors supporting a greater requirement may include high-cost areas, proximity to transit stations or high-capacity surface transit corridors, and when increases in density or use changes from production, distribution, and repair (PDR) to residential or mixed-use. Consider requirements that potentially leverage financial subsidies, such as tax-exempt bonds. 504.27 Action H-1.2.F: Establish Affordability Goals by Area Element Establish measurable housing production goals by Planning Area through an analysis of best practices, housing conditions, impediments, unit and building typology, and forecasts of need. Include a minimum share of 15 percent affordable housing by 2050, along with recommendations for incentives and financing tools to create affordable housing opportunities to meet fair housing requirements, particularly in high housing cost areas. 504.28 Action H-1.2.G: Continuum of Housing Conduct a periodic review, at least every four years, of private development and federal and local housing programs in conjunction with a needs assessment to ensure that programs target the applicable gaps in the supply of housing by unit and building type, location, and affordability and include racial equity evaluations. 504.29 Action H-1.2.H: Priority of Affordable Housing Goals To advance racial equity in housing, prioritize public investment toward housing production and preservation serving very-low and extremely-low income households. Prioritize public investment in the new construction of, or conversion to, affordable housing in Planning Areas with high housing costs and few affordable housing options. Consider land use, zoning, and financial incentives where the supply of affordable units is below a minimum of 15 percent of all units within each area. 504.30 Action H-1.2.I: Land Trusts Support community land trusts (CLTs) in their ongoing efforts to produce, secure, and steward rental and ownership housing and commercial spaces that would remain affordable in perpetuity. Preventing the displacement of current and future low- and moderate-income District residents and businesses should be the focus of CLTs. 504.31 Action H-1.2.J: Affordable Housing and Nonprofit and Faith-Based Institutions District agencies should work collaboratively with nonprofits and the faith community to investigate zoning options to reduce procedural burdens and facilitate the development of affordable housing and community services on properties under their control, particularly sites in lower density neighborhoods.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 504 Zillow HVI 6/09-6/17 DOES Forecast and BLS Occupational Wage data*

##### **10-A DCMR § 505** H-1.3 DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES {#sec-10-a505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A505}

505.1 The housing stock in the District has varied in size and type over time. As Figure 5.9 shows, in 2000, about 44 percent of Washington, DC’s housing units consisted of studios and one-bedroom units. The percentage of small units declined to 38 percent, mostly through the loss of studios, before rebounding to 42 percent by 2017. In 2000, units with four or more bedrooms comprised just 11 percent of the total units. By 2017, this had risen slightly to just below 13 percent. Three-bedroom units have declined by almost two percent since 2006. Of all unit types, only two-bedroom units have consistently grown in number, increasing from 24 percent in 2000 to almost 26 percent in 2017.

505.2 Between 2011 and 2016, more than 90 percent of new housing in Washington, DC was multi-family housing. As this trend continues, the District faces the possibility of a less diverse housing stock. As Figure 5.3 shows, row house units represent a declining share of all housing. Therefore, the District will become more dependent on apartment buildings to provide family-sized units. The conversion of single-family row houses, which by right may include a second unit, into multi-unit buildings may be further eroding the supply of three- and four-bedroom units in the District. Going forward, there is limited opportunity for new subdivisions of large, detached homes to provide housing for more families.

505.3 Figure 5.9: Distribution of Housing by Number of Bedrooms in Washington, DC, 2000-2017

**History**
- *Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 2017, DC Office of Planning 505.4 The housing needs of District residents represent a wide spectrum. Students and young professionals may seek studios, small apartments, or shared housing. Young families may seek small condominiums, townhouses, or small homes in emerging neighborhoods. Families with children may seek homes with three or four bedrooms, a yard, and perhaps a rental unit for added income. Singles and couples with no children may seek single-family homes or apartments. The growing population of older adults may seek to remain in their existing homes or downsize to smaller houses or apartments nearby, while others will want or need retirement communities, assisted living, or congregate care facilities. Overall, larger units are more adaptable to changes in demand than smaller units given their ability to serve a wide range of households from individuals seeking to share housing, to new growing families, to multigenerational households. It is difficult to determine if these changing needs will compete with or complement each other. For example, will older, down-sizing residents naturally provide a turnover of larger units to young growing families, or will there be an overlap of competing needs? 505.5 Given the shortage of available land in areas with some of the highest housing costs, promoting accessory dwelling units is one way to provide housing options for persons at all income levels and support the transition from older to younger households. Large homes may easily accommodate what is commonly called an in-law suite on the top floor or lower level, or above a garage, in place of a garage, or in a separate unit out back. An accessory dwelling unit can accommodate a low- or moderate-income family, a student, or an older adult who is unable to continue to fulfill the full burdens of homeownership. The added rental income can help a younger household qualify to purchase the home. 505.6 An important part of growing inclusively is to develop and maintain, across neighborhoods and throughout the District, a diverse housing stock of all sizes and types that can fit the needs of the variety of households, including growing families, singles, couples, and aging residents who, in order to remain in their neighborhood may need to transition from living independently in their home to alternative housing. Recent housing production has not provided the diversity of housing types needed in the District. Market-driven development provided higher-end, multifamily units that attracted largely white, affluent, and smaller households. Ninety-one percent of new housing growth between 2006 and 2018 has been in multi-family buildings that add considerable supply but tend to have units that are smaller in size (see Figure 5.10) At their most extreme, market pressures may result in displacement as affordable large rental units are converted to upscale condos or apartments. More often, these pressures mean that families are having a harder time finding suitable housing in Washington, DC. This is supported by the 2017 vacancy rate which was 13 percent for studios and one-bedroom units, but just eight percent for units that were three bedrooms or larger.xvii Housing production that could serve families, seniors, and moderate- and low-income households has not kept pace. This disproportionately affects residents of color. 505.7 Figure 5.10: Housing Typology Transect 505.8 Policy H-1.3.1: Housing for Larger Households Increase the supply of larger family-sized housing units for both ownership and rental by encouraging new and retaining existing single-family homes, duplexes, row houses, and three- and four-bedroom market rate and affordable apartments across Washington, DC. The effort should focus on both affordability of the units and the unit and building design features that support families, as well as the opportunity to locate near neighborhood amenities, such as parks, transit, schools, and retail. 505.9 Policy H-1.3.2: Tenure Diversity Encourage the production of both renter- and owner-occupied housing, including housing that is affordable at low-income levels, throughout the District. 505.10 Policy H-1.3.3: Assisted Living and Skilled Nursing Promote the development of neighborhood-based assisted living, adult day services with dementia care, and skilled nursing facilities. Zoning and health regulations should be designed to promote an increase in supply, security, and affordability of housing for older adults. 505.11 Policy H-1.3.4: Cooperatives and Co-housing Encourage cooperatives, shared housing, and co-housing (housing with private bedrooms but shared kitchens and common areas) as a more affordable alternative to condominiums. Explore how these housing types might support multigenerational households. 505.12 Policy H-1.3.5: Student Housing Require colleges and universities to address the housing needs of their students and promote the use of such housing by their students. 505.13 Policy H-1.3.6: Single Room Occupancy Units Allow the development of single room occupancy (SRO) housing in appropriate zone districts. Please consult the Land Use Element for policies on row house conversions to multi-family units. 505.14 Action H-1.3.A: Create Tools for the Production and Retention of Larger Family-Sized Units in Multi-Family Housing Research land use tools and techniques, including development standards, to encourage the development of residential units that meet the needs of larger families, with a focus on financing affordable units in high-cost areas. 505.15 Action H-1.3.B: Technical Assistance for Condominiums and Cooperatives Develop technical assistance and innovative management models to assist in the long-term maintenance and sustainability of condominiums and cooperatives.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 505 xviii CoStar.com*

##### **10-A DCMR § 506** H-1.4 HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION {#sec-10-a506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A506}

506.1 Housing programs alone cannot create a livable, inclusive District. Linking housing programs to efforts to reduce poverty, improve schools, provide quality retail, and upgrade services, such as childcare and job training is an important part of attracting and retaining residents. Renovation of schools, libraries, health centers, parks and playgrounds, sidewalks and bike lanes, and other neighborhood amenities affect a community’s social opportunities and can influence housing choice. These actions will attract new supply to a wider range of underinvested areas and broaden Washington, DC’s affordability. Economic development initiatives can generate income and employment, which create the means to expand housing opportunities. These types of investments can help to affirmatively further fair housing choice across the District. Data on public safety, employment, income, education, and other variables can help guide investment to improve housing equity and the quality of life in all District neighborhoods.

506.2 Starting in 2000, the District targeted capital investments to several formerly underserved areas for economic and social recovery. Twelve areas were designated as Strategic Neighborhood Improvement Program (SNIP) areas, with accompanying investments in housing, schools, streetscape, parks, and other public facilities. One of the shared characteristics of these areas was the opportunity for infill development on scattered vacant and abandoned sites.

506.3 While SNIP is no longer active, its focused approach provided important lessons for neighborhood revitalization. For instance, total public investment in Columbia Heights included the Metro station, new and existing affordable housing, five new public spaces or recreation centers, and three new or totally remodeled public school facilities and targeted the reduction of vacant or underused properties. The Metro station is now the most heavily used outside of downtown. Home value appreciation since 2000 has been one of the highest in Washington, DC, and it has some of the highest market rate rents. The Columbia Heights neighborhood is also one of the most diverse neighborhoods, where approximately 18 percent of the housing supply is subsidized affordable rental housing; however, the area also experienced displacement of lower income Black and Latino residents.

506.4 Similar efforts have been made through the PADD Program, which acquires and disposes of vacant properties to private and non-profit developers through a land subsidy. The program requires that 30 percent of the new units created in each bundle of properties are sold to households at or below 60 percent of the MFI (see text box entitled Home Again/Property Acquisition and Disposition).

506.4a Text box: Home Again/Property Acquisition and Disposition

The Department of Housing and Community Development’s (DHCD) Home Again Initiative, which became PADD in 2008, was launched in January 2002 with the goal of creating homeownership opportunities for persons of all incomes. PADD is responsible for acquiring and disposing of vacant and abandoned properties in the District, as well as stabilization of the vacant properties it owns. Initially, the program focused on nine neighborhoods with a higher average of such vacant and abandoned properties: Columbia Heights, Ivy City/Trinidad, Near Northeast, Shaw/LeDroit Park, Rosedale, Deanwood, Marshall Heights, Anacostia, and Bellevue. PADD is working to dispose its current inventory. As it does, it should strategically acquire vacant buildings and land.

506.4a1 Text Box: The New Communities Initiative

New Communities Initiative (NCI) is a District-led initiative that has the potential to reduce crime, improve neighborhood schools and health services, and create economic opportunities for affordable housing residents. The initiative is a partnership between the District government and the private and nonprofit sectors to produce new housing, reduce violent crime, and create a healthy environment for families in some of Washington, DC’s most vulnerable neighborhoods.

506.4a2 NCI is using District local and capital funding sources, tax exempt bonds, low-income housing tax credits, federal funds, and private investment to create mixed-income housing opportunities in these areas. One-for-one replacement of older publicly assisted housing units with new affordable units is necessary to avoid displacement and the net loss of affordable units. In addition, the initiative attempts to use surrounding public and private parcels to build the replacement affordable housing first and minimize temporary displacement of residents from their neighborhood. Market rate and moderate-income housing units are included in each project to cross-subsidize the affordable units and create a mix of incomes and unit types in each project.

506.4a3 NCI seeks to advance many community development and housing goals, such as promoting affordable housing across all incomes and household sizes, furthering fair housing opportunities, and preserving affordable housing. NCI aims to eliminate substandard housing and provide public housing residents with affordable replacement housing in the new community as it is redeveloped.

506.4a4 Planning for the first new community (Northwest One) started in 2004. The first component, completed in 2011, was the new Walker Jones Elementary School, and the first three buildings of replacement housing were completed in 2011, 2013, and 2014. A major portion of the remaining project received predevelopment approvals in 2016. In the end, the Northwest One New Community Plan will replace more than 500 units of subsidized housing in this neighborhood with a total of 1,500 units of mixed-income housing.

506.4a5 Three additional communities (Barry Farm, Lincoln Heights/Richardson Dwellings, and Park Morton) were added and are in various stages of review and completion. Over the next 10 years, a total of 10 mixed-income developments will provide new community amenities, such as schools, libraries, and recreation centers in each neighborhood. When completed, the four projects within NCI will upgrade 1,500 affordable units within larger mixed-income communities totaling 5,000-6,000 new units.

506.4a6 In implementation, NCI projects have taken significantly longer than anticipated and not always aligned with the expectations of the affected communities or commitments of the initiative to redevelop communities with older public housing into mixed income neighborhoods while avoiding the displacement of residents and a net loss of affordable housing.

506.4a7 The first demolition for Northwest One began in 2008, while the anticipated completion of the last stage with over half of the affordable replacement units is set for 2023. While providing around 1500 units to replace the original 520 units, a third of which are affordable to low-income or extremely low-income households, respectively, and a third of which are market rate, the District was not able to meet its displacement goals and instead showed that its commitment to existing low-income residents must be stronger.

506.4a8 The District rescinded on the commitment to build first at Barry Farm and residents were moved for demolition that began in 2019. The build first commitment currently remains in place for Lincoln Heights/Richardson Dwellings and Park Morton. Although a 2014 evaluation found that building first would be costly and slow for Park Morton, the District is continuing to seek ways to avoid a full relocation of the community’s residents prior to rebuilding. The three projects have resulted in the relocation of nearly 1,000 households to temporary housing. This creates an imperative for the District to cultivate continued community connections for displaced residents and remove all obstacles to returning, such as tenant eligibility screening.

506.5 On a much larger scale, the District of Columbia Housing Authority (DCHA) has rebuilt entire communities through the federal HOPE VI Program, which is now called the Choice Neighborhoods Program, replacing deteriorating public affordable housing projects like the Frederick Douglass and Stanton Dwellings with new mixed-income neighborhoods like Henson Ridge. More recent sites within the Choice Neighborhoods program include Kenilworth/Parkside, which received local planning approval in 2016. Similar efforts have been proposed through NCI (see text box entitled The New Communities Initiative). HOPE VI redevelopments often resulted in the original residents moving to other communities and the new developments having fewer affordable units than the prior properties. The policies for Choice Neighborhoods and NCI place more emphasis on minimizing displacement, ensuring a right to return, and one-for-one replacement of affordable units, although the polices are not yet showing different results.

Federal funding, not only neighborhood revitalization efforts but also routine maintenance of public housing and other dedicated affordable housing, has fluctuated but remained far below the minimum needed for capital repairs and improvements for decades. This creates an increasingly difficult challenge for the District to meet the housing needs of extremely-low-income households. DCHA is working to repair or redevelop approximately 2,600 affordable housing units with immediate critical needs and establish a longer-term plan for the remaining capital needs within its portfolio of publicly assisted housing, as described in the August 2019 Working Draft of Our People, Our Portfolio, Our Plan. To support DCHA's 20-year Transformation Plan, the District can contribute resources to supplement federal shortfalls; enhance existing policies, tools, and programs for resident protection and engagement; and support the capacity of DCHA to use proven and emerging approaches for housing production, preservation, public housing operations, and other housing opportunities.

506.6 Policy H-1.4.1: Restoration of Vacant Housing

Target neighborhoods with a higher presence of vacant and abandoned buildings and make the restoration of vacant housing units a major government priority. Where restoration receives public funding, ensure that a substantial share of the renovated units are made available to persons with disabilities or are deeply affordable.

506.7 Policy H-1.4.2: Opportunities for Upward Mobility

Provide opportunities for residents of District-owned and District-assisted housing to achieve self-sufficiency and upward mobility. Specifically, explore mechanisms for residents of District-owned and District-assisted housing to become homeowners. At the same time, work to replace units purchased with new District-owned and District-assisted housing stock.

506.8 Policy H-1.4.3: Focusing Housing Investments

Direct housing improvement funds to neighborhoods with the greatest potential for sustained improvement, based on demographics, market forces, equity considerations that consider existing racial gaps in housing access and opportunity, historic and current barriers, the presence of neighborhood partners and anchor institutions, and similar factors.

506.9 Policy H-1.4.4: Public Housing Renovation

Public housing is a critical part of meeting the demand for affordable housing and preventing displacement. Continue efforts to transform underfunded public housing projects to create equitable mixed-income neighborhoods. An equitable mixed-income neighborhood is one in which residents describe the neighborhood as safe for them and responsive to their concerns and ideas. Inform and engage the affected community throughout the redevelopment process. Target such efforts to locations where private sector development interest can be leveraged to assist in the revitalization, and support community programs and services that assist with creating and maintaining equity. Redevelopment of public housing must achieve all applicable strategies listed in 510.4a.

506.10 Policy H-1.4.5: Scattered Site Acquisition

Encourage the acquisition of individual properties on scattered sites for use as affordable housing to deconcentrate poverty, provide more opportunities to low-income persons to attend long-standing high-performing schools in their neighborhoods, and promote and support the integration of low-income households into the community at large.

506.11 Policy H-1.4.6: Whole Neighborhood Approach

Ensure that planning and new construction of housing is accompanied by concurrent planning and programs to improve neighborhood services, schools, job training, childcare, services for older adults, food access, parks, libraries, community gardens, and open spaces, health care facilities, police and fire facilities, transportation, and emergency response capacity.

506.12 Action H-1.4.A: Renovation and Rehabilitation of Public Affordable Housing

Continue federal and local programs to rehabilitate and rebuild the District’s affordable housing units, including the Choice Neighborhood program, Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Program, capital and modernization programs, the CDBG Program, and the District-sponsored NCI.

506.13 Action H-1.4.B: Home Again Initiative/PADD

Continue support for PADD as a strategy for reducing neighborhood vacancies, restoring an important part of the District’s historic fabric, and providing mixed-income housing in neighborhoods with a significant presence of vacant or abandoned residential properties.

506.14 Action H-1.4.C: DCHA Improvements

Continue improving the operations of the District’s existing publicly assisted housing, Housing Choice Voucher, and Local Rent Supplement Programs, including the Family Self Sufficiency program, voucher homeownership, the use of submarket rents to increase use of vouchers in high-cost neighborhoods, and the RAD Program as needed for financing capital needs. Support residents’ aspirations and skill building, such as through coaching, resident hiring and workforce development programs.

506.15 Action H-1.4.D: Tax Abatement

Consider geographically targeted tax abatements and other financial incentives to encourage market rate housing with affordable housing that exceeds minimum IZ standards in areas where housing must compete with office space for land, similar to the former Downtown Tax Abatement Program. Abatements should consider the potential created by the conversion of existing office space to residential. The potential costs and benefits of tax abatements must be thoroughly analyzed as such programs are considered.

506.16 Action H-1.4.E: Additional Public Housing

Support DCHA’s planning goals for its public housing units by developing strategies to meet the needs of existing units and create additional units. Use subsidies from HUD under the public housing Annual Contributions Contract (ACC), RAD, and other sources. Identify methods to use DCHA and HUD programs and resources to acquire or develop additional publicly assisted housing dedicated to extremely-low-income households for the life of the building or in perpetuity.

506.17 Action H-1.4.F: Non-Housing Investment in Areas of Concentrated Poverty

Make non-housing neighborhood economic and community development investments and preserve existing subsidized affordable housing in R/ECAP (as defined by HUD) to improve neighborhood amenities and attract private sector investment to expand housing supply.

506.18 Action H-1.4.G: Co-Location of Housing with Public Facilities

As part of Facility Master Plans and the Capital Improvement Program, conduct a review of and maximize any opportunities to co-locate mixed-income, multi-family housing, emphasizing affordable housing, when there is a proposal for a new or substantially upgraded local public facility, particularly in high-cost areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 507** H-1.5 REDUCING BARRIERS TO PRODUCTION {#sec-10-a507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A507}

507.1 The development of housing may be hampered by both governmental and non-governmental constraints. Governmental constraints include lengthy delays in permit processing and plan approval; insufficient coordination among agencies and utilities; zoning regulations, which may not reflect contemporary housing trends; and even prohibitions on certain types of housing. Non-governmental constraints include the high cost of land and rising interest rates. Although much progress has been made, serious barriers still exist. Fear of these barriers, and their costs, keep some developers from undertaking projects in Washington, DC at all and some homeowners from registering their basement units or other rental uses of their property.

507.2 Policy H-1.5.1: Land and Building Regulations

Ensure the District’s land regulations, including its housing and building codes, zoning regulations, construction standards, and permitting fees, enable the production of housing for all income groups. Avoid regulations that make it prohibitively expensive or difficult to construct housing.

507.3 Policy H-1.5.2: Permitting Procedures

Minimize the cost and time associated with development processing while still addressing community and environmental concerns. Explore measures to improve the permitting process, provided that such measures are consistent with other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan.

507.4 Policy H-1.5.3: Modular Construction

Ensure that the District’s building and housing codes permit the appropriate use of modular and manufactured construction techniques, and other construction methods that may reduce housing costs without compromising building or design quality.

507.5 Policy H-1.5.4: Financial Incentives

Consider tax incentives, reduced permitting and infrastructure fees, underwriting land costs, and other financial measures to reduce the cost of affordable housing construction.

507.6 Action H-1.5.A: Smart Housing Codes

Update and modernize the District Housing Code to reflect the current trend toward smart housing codes, which are structured to encourage building rehabilitation and reuse of housing units built before modern building codes were enacted.

507.7 Action H-1.5.B: Data Management

Maintain electronic inventories of existing housing and potential development sites for the benefit of residents, developers, and policy makers. This information should be used to track housing development and promote better-informed choices regarding public investment and affordable housing development.

507.8 Action H-1.5.C: Reducing Cost of Public Financing

Coordinate and better leverage the resources of the District’s housing agencies to reduce the cost of financing. Use technology to expedite the processing and distribution of affordable housing funds, track and monitor applications for such funds, and improve operating procedures for District financing of affordable housing and housing services.

507.9 Action H-1.5.D: Support of Accessory Dwelling Units

Study whether recent zoning changes are sufficient to facilitate the creation of accessory dwelling units, or whether barriers to their creation still exist, and remove unnecessary obstacles to their creation. Incorporate racial equity considerations into the study. Investigate the benefits of financially supporting accessory dwelling units and design a pilot program to increase the number of affordable housing units through accessory dwelling units.

507.10 Action H-1.5.E: Remove Regulatory Obstacles

Continue to identify and review regulatory impediments to the production of market rate and affordable housing. Remove unnecessary and burdensome regulations and propose more efficient and effective alternatives for achieving important policy and regulatory goals.

##### **10-A DCMR § 508** H-1.6 SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCE {#sec-10-a508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A508}

508.1 Policies to promote resilient housing specifically address housing that can withstand potential physical and resulting economic shocks from major hazards and stresses. Such shocks can destabilize the housing market and threaten affordability especially for vulnerable residents. Affordability and sustainability policies can keep residents housed and safe. For example, energy and water efficiency reduces household expenses and deepens housing affordability for District residents. Inclusive housing enhances the community’s ability to respond, as one, to chronic stresses and unanticipated shocks. Combined resilient and inclusive housing provides residents with the financial capacity and social networks to absorb, recover from, and overcome current and future challenges facing the District.

508.2 While Washington, DC continues to incorporate the latest best practices into its building codes, there are additional opportunities to promote more sustainable and resilient housing. New construction and design techniques can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and buffer occupants from any harmful effects of future climate conditions or potential floods that will occur during the expected useful life of built structures. As important as building resilience into new housing, the District should also consider ways to strengthen resilience and increase the adaptive capacity of its older residential building stock, including in historic districts.

508.3 The benefits of creating safer and more sustainable housing for all residents go beyond reducing the risk to life and property from shocks or stresses. It decreases demands on emergency response, such as allowing people to shelter in place versus evacuating Washington, DC or going to public shelters during disaster events. It also decreases the potential for disruptive impacts on vital services, commerce, and the economy by reducing the number of vulnerable people who will end up being physically displaced by economic or other forces following such events.

508.4 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) fosters sustainability and resilience. Concentrated residential housing combined with a mix of other uses around Metro stations and high-capacity surface transit corridors reduces District residents’ reliance on automobiles, thereby reducing GHG emissions. It is also proven to reduce a household’s combined cost of housing and transportation. This can free up disposable income to increase the rate at which households save for future needs. Affordable housing near public transit can ensure that low-income households also receive these benefits. A 2011 study conducted for the District by the Center for Neighborhood Technology found that, on average, District households spent 26 percent less on transportation than the rest of the metropolitan area. It is important to consider this in the context of the differing transportation modes available to and used by lower income residents, as well as the potential benefits to them from TOD development. The reduction in transportation costs provides greater affordability for the typical household living in the District than one living farther out, where housing is less expensive but more dependent on automobiles. Finally, housing in pedestrian-friendly, transit-rich environments proved to be more resilient to the price fluctuations caused by the foreclosure financial crisis. This protected homeowner equity from significant damage.

508.5 Policy H-1.6.1: Resilient and Climate-Adaptive Housing

Incorporate current best practices for resilient, climate-adaptive design in the adoption and enforcement of the District’s building and housing construction codes. Base the codes on projected future climate or natural hazard conditions for the District informed by the best available data.

508.6 Policy H-1.6.2: Rehabilitation of Vulnerable Housing

Improve the structural resilience of existing housing units that are at risk from natural hazards through the promotion of mitigation techniques, such as building upgrades and elevating electrical or mechanical equipment above designated flood elevations.

508.7 Policy H-1.6.3: Permanent Post-Disaster Housing

Support households affected by large-scale disasters either by successfully retaining them in their homes and avoiding displacement or by returning them to safe, suitable, and affordable housing promptly through technical assistance and clear and comprehensive reconstruction guidelines. Include special emphasis on rebuilding homes in locations and according to standards that make them more resilient to future shocks and stresses.

508.8 Policy H-1.6.4: Retrofits for Sustainability

Use low-interest loans and other incentives to encourage retrofits that improve energy efficiency, reduce water use, and lower home heating and cooling costs, thereby reducing energy use, GHG emissions, and monthly housing expenditures.

508.9 Policy H-1.6.5: Net-Zero, Energy Efficient Housing

Encourage new housing units in the District to be net-zero energy and water efficient.

508.10 Action H-1.6.A: Monitoring and Updating Data to Support Recovery from 2020 Health Emergency

Monitor and update appropriate data to support 2020 public health emergency response and recovery efforts. Such data will include a wide range of housing factors and drivers, such as jobs, population, housing supply and demand. Collect data to support racial equity analyses and responses.

Please consult the Land Use, Transportation and Environment Element for additional policies and actions on sustainability, resilience, and transit-oriented development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 509** H-2 HOUSING PRESERVATION: RETAINING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES {#sec-10-a509 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A509}

509.1 Along with increasing housing and affordable housing supply, preservation of housing in the District is critical. This section focuses on two aspects of housing preservation: retaining affordable housing units specifically and retaining existing housing stock generally.

509.2 The affordability of the District has been declining over the past five years, even though funding for affordable units has increased. This has been due to a combination of both the expiration of federal subsidies and rising market rents and sales prices. Between 2006 and 2017, the number of rental units affordable to households earning less than 60 percent of the MFI decreased by close to 18,300 units. Figure 5.10 also shows that the number of rental units affordable to those earning more than 60 percent increased by approximately 44,800. Over the same period, the median sales prices of homes rose almost 7.3 percent per year, while condominiums rose 2.8 percent per year. Between 2006 and 2017, the area’s MFI rose by an average compounded rate of less than 1.8 percent a year. These changes have been especially hard on the District’s lowest-income residents, particularly renters who are older adults and those on fixed incomes. These impacts are likely experienced more broadly and deeply for communities of color, given the racial differences in median family income.

509.3 Figure 5.10 Change in Supply of Rental Units by Affordability: 2006-2017

**History**
- *Source: U.S. Census ACS PUMS, OP 509.4 An important part of housing preservation is the maintenance and modernization of existing housing stock and its components, such as heating and air conditioning systems. Almost 62 percent of the housing units in Washington, DC are in buildings that are over 55 years old, and many are over 100 years old. The rise in home prices has been accompanied by a rise in building material and labor costs, making it expensive for many owners to care for their properties. In some parts of the Washington, DC, lack of maintenance by absentee landlords may jeopardize the longevity of the housing stock and negatively affect neighborhood character. Maintenance and energy upgrades will continue to be an issue in the future as the existing housing stock grows older and construction, utility, and maintenance costs increase.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 509*

##### **10-A DCMR § 510** H-2.1 PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING {#sec-10-a510 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A510}

510.1 The Homes for an Inclusive City task force report stated that roughly 30,000 affordable and inexpensive market rate housing units throughout the District were at risk of being lost. This is more than 10 percent of the Washington, DC’s housing stock, and it is home to many of the District’s most vulnerable residents. To avoid displacement, the District will need to channel a greater share of the revenues being created by the strong housing market into new programs that preserve affordable units. This must be a priority in the District’s high-cost areas, as well as its lowest-income areas. Preserving affordable units in higher-income neighborhoods is especially important given the high cost of producing new units.

510.2 Many of the units that are at risk currently receive their funding through the federal Section 8 program. The program was initiated in 1974 and placed 20- to 40-year affordability contracts on apartment buildings. Thousands of these contracts are now expiring, with many of the units being converted to market rate rentals. Similarly, tax credit affordable housing projects, which largely started in the 1990s, are now expiring after 30 years of affordability requirements. The Preservation Strike Force Report estimated that, between 2016 and 2020, expiring subsidies will place approximately 13,700 units at risk. Many are located in developing neighborhoods, and there are few incentives for building owners to keep them affordable.

510.2a Text Box: Public-Private Affordable Housing Preservation Fund

The Public-Private Affordable Housing Preservation Fund proposed by the Preservation Strike Force and created in Fiscal Year 2017 is one important step to ensure the District does not lose expiring affordable housing. The innovative fund mixes both public and private dollars to provide rapid bridge acquisition and predevelopment financing. Capitalized in 2017 with $10 million of public financing and $30 million in initial capital from private partners, the fund could leverage a total of $80 million toward the preservation of expiring affordable housing.

510.3 Publicly subsidized affordable housing options had decreased by 2006, with the expiration of Section 8 contracts and other subsidies, and with the District moving forward with the demolition of 3,000 public housing units to make way for mixed-income projects at East Capitol Gateway, Ellen Wilson, Henson Ridge, Wheeler Creek, and Arthur Capper Carrollsburg. Among these, only Ellen Wilson and Capper Carrollsburg included one-for-one replacement units for each subsidized affordable removed.

510.3a Text Box: What Is Displacement?

Displacement is an issue that many residents and policy makers are concerned about and is a critical challenge when attempting to achieve an equitable District. But it is also not a clearly defined term; it often relates to observation of neighborhood change at a high level, as well as situations in which a household is forced to move from its residence at the individual level. For purposes of clarifying processes and use for the Comprehensive Plan, there are three forms of displacement: physical displacement as households must move when the properties they occupy are redeveloped, economic displacement as housing cost increases in the neighborhood force the household to find other housing options, and cultural displacement as residents lose a sense of belonging or shared identity in their neighborhood due to neighborhood change or growth. While these may relate, they each have different planning responses.

510.3b How Displacement Affects Washington, DC

Information about the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing units, illustrated in Figure 5.10, along with the decline of the number of lower-income, primarily Black households, which can be found in the Framework Element, indicates that Washington, DC has experienced significant displacement in many neighborhoods and across the District. National-level studies suggest that, by some measures, the District is the U.S. city most affected by both the increasing demand for housing from higher-income households and the decline in the number of lower-income households.

510.3c Between 2006 and 2017, Washington, DC experienced a decline of more than 15,600 households earning between 30 and 80 percent of the MFI; 9,250 households were homeowners, and 6,350 were rental households. Capitol Hill and other Northeast neighborhoods experienced the greatest decline, with a decrease of 5,950 households earning between 30 and 80 percent of the MFI. During this time, the data suggests there was a modest increase of extremely low-income households District-wide; most moved to Wards 7 and 8 and to Upper Northwest/Northeast, where many have ended up paying more than 50 percent of their income on housing.

510.3d Addressing Displacement in Washington, DC

Washington, DC has one of the strongest sets of anti-displacement programs in the country, which includes rent control, eviction protection, Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), District Opportunity to Purchase Act (DOPA), locally subsidized rents, tax assessment caps, and tax credits for low-income and older homeowners.

510.3e Yet, protecting all citizens, especially those who are most vulnerable, from the forces that lead to displacement clearly continues to be one of the greatest challenges to growing an equitable and inclusive District. The number of residents affected by physical displacement is relatively small on an annual basis and they can be provided assistance more easily than the significantly larger number and range of households facing economic displacement from rising housing costs caused mainly by a lack of supply. Minimizing the impacts of physical and economic displacement requires balancing the cost-effective approach of preserving mixed-income housing in some locations and expanding housing supply, particularly affordable housing, in others through new construction and redevelopment. Achieving such balance will require a greater understanding of neighborhood submarkets, a more sophisticated approach to the allocation of funding, and difficult discussions among community stakeholders regarding approaches to increasing density. Addressing the broader economic displacement goes well beyond the responsibility of any single development. The District must strengthen existing policies and develop new ones to counteract and mitigate physical and economic displacement.

510.3f The decline in the number of low-income homeowners, who are more insulated from rising housing costs, is an indication of cultural displacement. Older lower-income households face many life changes or may pass their property on to heirs, leading to a natural turnover in residents and new faces in the neighborhood. Those who stay, experience the loss of long-term friends, neighbors, and local businesses, and often are confronted by the ever-increasing lure from the economic gain of selling. Confronting this form of displacement will require greater neighbor-to-neighbor and broader civic engagement. Housing policy can serve to retain vulnerable residents but minimizing the impact of cultural displacement means maintaining community cultural institutions and businesses, creating civic spaces and events that cross cultural divides, and balancing different needs. The efforts should invite all to participate, interact, and grow a common experience and identity, encouraging new residents to respect the identity of the neighborhood they are joining. Information about focusing efforts in this direction can be found in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Those efforts, along with policies of the Housing Element, will help ensure that, as neighborhoods change and evolve, neighbors continue to see that there is a place for them in their community and to share in the benefits of living in Washington, DC.

510.3g Displacement is a District-wide issue. All residents have a stake in addressing it because it affects both current and future residents. Policies in the Comprehensive Plan, along with the District’s housing programs and initiatives, will bolster the manner in which all forms of displacement are addressed.

510.3h In addition to policies contained in the Housing Element, see also the Arts and Culture Element and refer to the Office of Planning’s Equity Crosswalk for policies and actions that address cultural displacement.

510.4 Looking to the future, Washington, DC will need to strengthen existing and add new programs to preserve its affordable stock, particularly its subsidized rental units. Rental housing comprises almost 60 percent of the housing stock and is the main housing option for those just entering the workforce and those without the initial resources to purchase a home. Low-income renters are already more likely to pay more than half of their incomes on housing than any other group. In 2006, a proposal for a District-sponsored rent subsidy program (similar to Section 8) called the Local Rent Supplement Program was implemented to offset the expiring federal subsidies and help other households who are cost-burdened. The proposal called for direct rental assistance to 14,600 extremely low-income renters. The program has been expanded over the past several years from 2,800 households to over 5,700 and a total cost of $100 million per year.

510.4a Text Box: Strategies for the Redevelopment of Existing Income-Restricted Affordable Housing

Many of Washington, DC’s affordable housing developments are aging past their functional lives. This means that, in addition to the affordability controls expiring, the structures and systems are sometimes in a state of disrepair, inefficient, and without modern amenities. Redevelopment or substantial rehabilitation to provide decent, safe housing and prevent displacement from lack of habitability is essential. Redevelopment, however, creates short- and long-term displacement risks. As the cost of housing rises, the need for income-restricted affordable units becomes even greater. Affordable housing properties may contain a layering of project-and tenant-based subsidies at the federal and local levels, as well as naturally occurring affordability. In many cases, many different types of subsidy may exist in one building, which presents a challenge in prescribing singular strategies to prevent displacement of low-income residents. Redevelopment or rehabilitation of income-restricted affordable housing should use the following strategies, ordered by priority, to minimize displacement, maximize the return of tenants to their community, and retain affordable housing:

Include tenants’ right of return to a replacement unit under the same tenancy qualifications. Provide a comprehensive relocation plan for tenants prior to redevelopment.

Implement one for one replacement of income-restricted affordable units at the same affordability levels, and for the unit sizes needed by existing residents. Replace family sized housing in a manner that meets tenants’ housing needs and the needs of households on the waiting list that are the hardest to house in the private market, including the preferences of multi-generational families.

When redeveloping the property, build replacement affordable units first prior to any off-site physical relocation from existing affordable units, or provide appropriate offsite affordable units as new permanent housing within the project neighborhood, if necessary due to site constraints.

Projects accepting tenant-based vouchers must accept tenant-based vouchers following redevelopment.

In addition to the strategies listed above, redevelopment of affordable housing should increase the capacity of housing overall, including new dedicated affordable and market-rate units in mixed-income communities.

510.5 Policy H-2.1.1: Redeveloping Existing Income-restricted Affordable Housing

Redevelopment of public housing must make every effort to achieve all strategies in 510.4a. Redevelopment of income-restricted affordable housing by other parties should implement as many of the strategies in 510.4a as possible. The availability and certainty of land use and financial and regulatory incentives to make the projects feasible are critical to achieve these strategies.

510.6 Policy H-2.1.2: Preserving Affordable Rental Housing

Recognize the importance of preserving rental housing affordability to the well-being of the District and the diversity of its neighborhoods. Undertake programs to preserve the supply of subsidized rental units and low-cost market rate units, with an emphasis on preserving affordable units in high-cost or rapidly changing neighborhoods, where the opportunity for new affordable units is limited.

510.7 Policy H-2.1.3: Expiring Federal Subsidies

Preserve 100 percent of expiring subsidies for affordable housing units, particularly those in Section 8-based projects and projects funded with low-income housing tax credits and tax-exempt bonds, wherever possible.

510.8 Policy H-2.1.4: Avoiding Displacement

Maintain programs to prevent long-term displacement resulting from the loss of rental housing units due to demolition or conversion, and minimize short-term displacement during major rehabilitation efforts, and the financial hardships created by rising rents on tenants and other shocks or stresses. Employ TOPA, DOPA, and other financial tools, such as the HPTF and the Preservation Fund. In addition, provide technical and counseling assistance to lower-income households and strengthen the rights of existing tenants to purchase rental units if they are being converted to ownership units.

510.9 Policy H-2.1.5: Conversion of At-Risk Rentals to Affordable Units

Support efforts to purchase affordable rental buildings that are at risk of being sold and converted to luxury apartments or condominiums to retain the units as affordable. Consider a variety of programs to own and manage these units, such as land banks, DOPA, TOPA, and sale to nonprofit housing organizations.

510.10 Policy H-2.1.6: Long-Term Affordability Restrictions

Ensure that affordable housing units that are created or preserved with public financing are protected by long-term affordability restrictions and are monitored to prevent their transfer to non-qualifying households. Except where precluded by program requirements, affordable units should remain affordable for as long as possible and align with the length and magnitude of the subsidy. For land disposition and affordable housing tied to zoning relief, affordability should last for the life of the building, with equity and asset buildup opportunities provided for ownership units.

510.11 Policy H-2.1.7: Rent Control

Maintain rent control as a tool for moderating the affordability of rental properties and protecting long-term residents, especially older adults, low-income households, and those with disabilities. In considering refinements to the rent control program, the District should be careful to determine whether the proposed changes improve effectiveness, fairness, and affordability without discouraging maintenance and preservation of rental housing units. Rent control should be primarily considered a tenant protection and anti-displacement tool, and therefore should not be utilized to define or assess progress toward income restricted affordable housing production and preservation goals.

510.12 Policy H-2.1.8: Direct Rental Assistance

Develop and fund programs that provide direct rental subsidies for extremely low-income households (earning less than 30 percent of MFI), including persons experiencing homelessness and families in need of permanent shelter or rapid rehousing. Continue support for federally funded rental assistance programs, including public housing, project-based Section 8, other project-based rental assistance, and the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

510.13 Policy H-2.1.9: Redevelopment of Affordable Housing

As dedicated affordable housing reaches the end of its functional life, support maintaining or expanding the quantity of dedicated affordable housing in the redevelopment of the site to the greatest extent feasible, in line with the District’s goals as identified in the Framework Element including those for racial equity and equitable development, and with all applicable redevelopment strategies as referenced in Policy H-2.1.1.

510.14 Action H-2.1.A: Rehabilitation Grants

Maintain a rehabilitation grant program for owners of small apartment buildings, linking the grants to income limits for future tenants. Such programs have been successful in preserving housing affordability.

510.15 Action H-2.1.B: Local Rent Supplement

Expand the Local Rent Supplement Program for both tenant and new project-based support targeted toward public and privately held extremely low-income housing and housing for formerly homeless individuals and families.

510.16 Action H-2.1.C: Purchase of Expiring Subsidized Housing and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing

Implement and use DOPA to acquire, preserve, and dedicate new affordable housing through a process that will maintain the properties with long-term affordability requirements.

510.17 Action H-2.1.D: Affordable Set-Asides in Condo Conversions

In a condo conversion, 20 percent of the units should be earmarked for qualifying low- and moderate-income households. In addition, condominium maintenance fees should be set proportionally to the unit price so that otherwise affordable units do not become out-of-reach because of high fees.

510.18 Action H-2.1.E: Housing Registry

Maintain a registry of affordable or accessible housing units in the District and a program to match these units with qualifying low-income households.

510.19 Action H-2.1.F: Affordable Housing Preservation Unit

Establish and maintain a division within District government to systematically and proactively work with tenants, owners of affordable housing, investors, their representatives, and others associated with real estate and housing advocacy in Washington, DC to establish relationships and gather intelligence to preserve affordable housing and expand future opportunities by converting naturally affordable unassisted units to long-term dedicated affordable housing.

510.20 Action H-2.1.G: Expand Acquisition Funding for Preservation

Continue funding for public-private partnerships to facilitate acquisition and early investments to leverage greater amounts of private capital for the preservation of affordable housing.

510.21 Action H-2.1.H: Improve Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Program

Improve the preservation of affordable housing through TOPA and TOPA exemptions by providing financial incentives to TOPA transactions, including predevelopment work, legal services, third-party reports, and acquisition bridge financing. The effort should include tracking mechanisms to collect accurate program data and evaluate outcomes for further improvement in the program.

510.22 Action H-2.1.I: Anti-Displacement Strategy

Track neighborhood change, development, and housing costs to identify areas of Washington, DC that have experienced, are experiencing, or are likely to experience, displacement pressures. Collect, disaggregate, and monitor data to consider income and racial characteristics of the neighborhoods and households affected by or at risk of displacement. Conduct racial equity analyses that identify the policies and underlying forces contributing to any inequities. Such analyses must consider different sources of displacement pressures, including a lack of new housing in high-demand neighborhoods and effects new development may have on housing costs in adjacent areas. Monitor best practices and identify new strategies for displacement prevention. Use the information to create a District-wide anti-displacement strategy, prepare reoccurring reports, improve program performance, and identify targeted areas within which to deploy resources to prevent displacement and help residents with the highest displacement risks stay in their neighborhoods. Examine ways to support low-income residents in areas that have already experienced rapid displacement, such as those in Mid-City and Near Northwest.

##### **10-A DCMR § 511** H-2.2 HOUSING CONSERVATION AND MAINTENANCE {#sec-10-a511 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A511}

511.1 Despite the advancing age of Washington, DC’s building stock, most of the District’s housing is in good condition. The number of vacant and abandoned units has continued to decline since 2006, and reinvestment in housing stock has occurred in all parts of Washington, DC. There are still threats, however. Demolition by neglect remains an issue in some neighborhoods, while other neighborhoods face the risk of housing being converted to non-residential uses, such as medical offices and nonprofits. The long-term conservation of housing requires policies and actions that promote housing rehabilitation, upkeep, and modernization while discouraging conversion to non-residential uses.

511.2 As noted above, housing conservation programs are particularly important for the District’s older adults (residents 60 years old and above), many of whom are on fixed incomes. Older adults make up 11 percent of the District’s population, but they represent over 27 percent of its homeowners. These older adults may need low-interest loans, grants, tax credits, income from home sharing arrangements and accessory dwelling units, and other programs and arrangements that reduce the financial burden of homeownership. Similar efforts are needed to assist extremely low-income households. Their housing units are often overcrowded and have structural problems and code compliance issues that affect their habitability.

511.3 Policy H-2.2.1: Housing Conversion

Discourage the conversion of viable, quality housing units to non-residential uses, such as offices and hotels. Use, and as needed update, zoning regulations to avoid the loss of housing in this manner.

511.4 Policy H-2.2.2: Housing Maintenance

Support voluntary, philanthropic, nonprofit, private, and District-sponsored programs that assist residents in the upkeep of their homes and properties, particularly programs that provide low-interest loans and grants for low-income residents, older homeowners, and people living with disabilities.

511.5 Policy H-2.2.3: Tax Relief

Maintain and simplify tax relief measures for homeowners, especially older adults and those with low incomes, faced with rising assessments and property taxes by using common income definitions and progressive relief according to need. These measures should reduce the pressure on long-term residents, especially low-income owners, to sell their homes and move out of the District.

511.6 Policy H-2.2.4: Healthy Homes

Implement programs to reduce and mitigate potential health hazards in older homes, such as lead pipes, mold, and carbon monoxide. Programs to increase the environmental sustainability of the housing stock and residential construction are also encouraged.

511.7 Action H-2.2.A: Housing Code Enforcement

Improve the enforcement of housing codes to prevent deteriorated, unsafe, and unhealthy housing conditions, especially in areas of Washington, DC with persistent code enforcement problems. Ensure that tenants are provided information on tenant rights, such as how to obtain inspections, contest petitions for substantial rehabilitation, purchase multi-family buildings, and vote in conversion elections.

511.8 Action H-2.2.B: Sale of Persistent Problem Properties

Address persistent tax and housing code violations through negotiated sales of title sale of properties by putting properties in receivership, foreclosing on tax-delinquent properties, enforcing higher tax rates on vacant and underused property, and through tenants’ rights education, including use of TOPA. Whenever possible, identify alternative housing resources for persons who are displaced by major code enforcement activities.

See the Historic Preservation Element for additional policies on homeowner tax credits.

511.9 Action H-2.2.C: Tax Relief

Review existing tax relief programs for District homeowners and consider changes to unify and simplify programs to help low- and moderate-income households address rising property assessments. Consider using the MFI as a standard for establishing need and eligibility.

511.10 Action H-2.2.D: Program Assistance for Low- and Moderate-Income Owners

Continue to offer comprehensive home maintenance and repair programs for low- and moderate-income owners and renters of single-family homes. These programs should include counseling and technical assistance, as well as zero interest and deferred interest loans and direct financial assistance.

##### **10-A DCMR § 512** H-3 HOMEOWNERSHIP AND ACCESS {#sec-10-a512 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A512}

512.1 Homeownership gives individuals a stake in the community and a chance to share in its growing prosperity. It can help foster civic pride and engagement, improve family stability, and enhance support for local schools and services. Importantly, homeownership provides a long-term asset to build long-term personal wealth. Affordable homeownership programs provide families with the benefits of value appreciation of their homes, one of the most important tangential benefits of owning instead of renting. For these reasons, the District has had a long-standing policy of helping its residents become homeowners and promoting the construction of new owner-occupied housing in Washington, DC.

512.2 An important part of ownership is access to financing and real estate opportunity. In the past, the practice of redlining (i.e., withholding home loan funds in certain neighborhoods) by certain lenders made it more difficult to secure home loans in parts of Washington, DC. This practice, along with covenants, and other land use and financing restrictions, reflected systemic racism that discriminated against groups by race, as well as ethnicity and faith, resulting in many of the gaps today in homeownership, wealth, and access to opportunity by the District’s communities of color. Enforcement of fair housing practices is important not only to stop unfair lending practices but also to address affordable housing opportunities in high-cost areas, discrimination against renters, single parents, persons with HIV/AIDS, vulnerable populations, older adults, and persons with disabilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 513** H-3.1 ENCOURAGING HOMEOWNERSHIP {#sec-10-a513 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A513}

513.1 Nationwide, about two-thirds of all households are homeowners. In the District, the 2000 census reported the homeownership rate was just 41 percent. After 2000, the homeownership rate slowly increased to 46 percent until 2006; then the national mortgage collapse caused sharp increases in foreclosures and many lost their homes. Homeownership has since declined and by 2017 stood at 42 percent in Washington, DC. Instability in the homeownership market and limited access to credit has caused many to select rental housing. These national factors are affecting all cities, but the District still has one of the lowest rates of homeownership in the country, well below Philadelphia (53 percent), Baltimore (45 percent), and Chicago (43 percent), although higher than the 32 percent rate in New York and the 34 percent rate in Boston. The ownership rate in the District has increased four percentage points since 1980, when 35 percent of Washington, DC’s households were homeowners. Homeownership for white residents is 49 percent, but only 35 percent for Black residents and 30 percent for Latino residents.

513.2 Home prices create a significant obstacle to increasing the homeownership rate. In September 2015, only 38 percent of the homes on the market with two or more bedrooms were affordable to the median income family, and this does not reflect the significant disparity in median income by race, with white households at $143,150 and Black households at $35,563. While the recent increase in the supply of condominiums has improved homeownership prospects somewhat, the options for multigenerational families continue to be limited.

513.3 DHCD administers several programs to help residents purchase homes. These include PADD, which acquires tax-delinquent properties and bids them out to small developers who fix up the properties and sell or rent them primarily for affordable housing. It also includes the Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP), which offers interest-free and low-interest loans to qualified residents for the purchase of houses, condominiums, or cooperative apartments. The District also provides grants and deferred loans to government employees who are first-time homebuyers. These programs are an important part of the District’s efforts to provide moderate-income housing for its residents (see text box entitled Meeting the Need for Moderate-Income Housing).

513.3a Text box: Meeting the Need for Moderate-Income Housing

As housing prices have outpaced income growth in many U.S. cities, housing advocates and policy makers have called for initiatives to provide moderate-income housing. Moderate-income housing refers to housing designed for people in professions that are essential to a community but do not offer sufficient wages to afford market rate housing. These professions include administrative support, clerical occupations, and service jobs, and account for one-third of the jobs in the American workforce. In the District, Black residents hold the majority of service jobs, at 54 percent, highlighting the need to also address housing barriers from a racial equity perspective.

513.3b Even with two working parents in the service industries, a family would have a difficult time purchasing a home or renting a suitable apartment in the District. Janitors, schoolteachers, licensed nurses, police officers, childcare professionals, and other service workers have been priced out of the District market and many other markets across the country. New programs, such as employer-assisted housing and down payment assistance for public sector employees, are being pursued to provide more options and keep these essential workers in Washington, DC.

513.4 In 2013, Washington, DC piloted a partnership with three employers called the Live Near Your Work (LNYW) Program. The partnership matched a contribution made by employers to provide down payment assistance to encourage employees to live close to their work. Housing tends to be more expensive the closer it is to major job centers. The LNYW Program pilot demonstrated the value of the assistance toward encouraging employees to live closer to work. Evaluations of similar programs across the country have documented the savings in travel time and costs, improvement in employee quality of life, and benefits to the employers in terms of employee performance and turnover.

513.5 Policy H-3.1.1: Increasing Homeownership

Enhance community stability by promoting homeownership and creating opportunities for first-time homebuyers in the District. Provide loans, grants, and other District programs to raise the District’s homeownership rate from its year 2016 figure of 39 percent to a year 2025 figure of 44 percent. These programs and opportunities should acknowledge and address the significant racial gaps and barriers to home ownership. Increased opportunities for homeownership should not be provided at the expense of the District’s rental housing programs or through the displacement of low-income renters.

513.6 Policy H-3.1.2: First-Time Buyer Income Targets

Structure homeownership and down payment assistance programs to benefit working families with incomes between 50 percent and 120 percent of the MFI.

513.7 Policy H-3.1.3: Asset Development Through Homeownership

Support paths to homeownership that build and sustain equity and develop assets for the transfer of intergenerational wealth, especially for low- and moderate-income households.

513.8 Action H-3.1.A: HPAP Program

Maintain and expand the District’s HPAP by periodically reviewing and establishing appropriate amounts of assistance to continue advancing affordable homeownership for low-income households.

513.9 Action H-3.1.B: District Employer Assisted Housing Program

Strengthen the District government’s existing Employer Assisted Housing (EAH) Program by increasing the amount of EAH awards and removing limitations on applicants seeking to combine EAH assistance with HPAP funds.

513.10 Action H-3.1.C: New EAH Programs

Encourage major employers in Washington, DC to develop EAH programs for moderate- and middle-income housing, including:

Private sector employee benefit packages that include grants, forgivable loans, and on-site homeownership seminars for first-time buyers;

Federal programs that would assist income-eligible federal workers who currently rent in the District;

Programs designed to encourage employees to live close to their work to reduce travel time and cost and increase their quality of life; and

Linking EAH efforts with performance-based incentives for attracting new employers.

513.11 Action H-3.1.D: Individual Development Accounts

Invest in programs that support Individual Development Accounts that assist low-income persons to save for first-time home purchases.

513.12 Action H-3.1.E: Neighborhood Housing Finance

Expand housing finance and counseling services for very low-, low-, and moderate-income homeowners, and improve the oversight and management of these services.

513.13 Action H-3.1.F: Foreclosure Prevention

Develop public-private partnerships to raise awareness of foreclosure prevention efforts and to offer assistance to households facing foreclosure.

513.14 Action H-3.1.G: Protect Homeowner Equity

Research, identify, and implement as appropriate tools to protect the equity of homeowners and help lower-income and older adult homeowners recover from volatile market forces and adverse events that threaten their equity and status as homeowners.

##### **10-A DCMR § 514** H-3.2 HOUSING ACCESS {#sec-10-a514 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A514}

514.1 The District established its commitment to fair housing under the Human Rights Act of 1977 (D.C. Law 2-38; D.C. Official Code § 2-1401 et seq.). This commitment is bolstered by federal regulations, including the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975. Together, these laws prohibit housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, sex, religion, sexual orientation, age, marital status, personal appearance, gender expression or identity, family responsibilities, political affiliation, family status, matriculation, source of income, place of residence or business, or status as a victim of an intrafamily offense.

514.2 Despite anti-discrimination laws, District residents may still be unfairly denied housing on the basis of the factors listed above. Common forms of discrimination include refusal to rent, steering to particular neighborhoods by real estate agents, setting different terms for the sale or rental of housing (such as higher security deposits for certain groups), advertising to “preferred” groups, denial of loans or imposition of variable loan terms, and the use of threats and intimidation. In addition, voucher holders often have difficulty finding a landlord willing to accept them. The District works to address these challenges through the full enforcement of fair housing laws.

514.3 The requirements of fair housing apply to both the private and public sectors. Local governments are charged with Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH), and the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that public sector actions, such as land use, zoning regulations, and patterns of affordable housing investment, can unfairly limit housing choice, even if the consequences were unintended. For instance, to avoid disparate impacts on protected classes, public sector decisions should provide the opportunity for both multi-family housing and affordable subsidy investment in higher-cost neighborhoods that provide greater opportunity because of access to good jobs, schools, transit, and other services.

514.4 Figure 5.11 displays the allocation of affordable units in the District by Planning Area. It demonstrates that the Far Southeast and Southwest Planning Area has 15,517 affordable units, which represent 31 percent of Washington, DC’s affordable units and 50 percent of the Planning Area’s total units. Similarly, it shows that the Rock Creek West Planning Area has 471 affordable units, which represent one percent of that Planning Area’s total number of units.

514.5 Figure 5.11 Affordable Units by Planning Area in 2017

**History**
- *Source: HousingInsights.org, OP. 514.6 Furthering fair housing includes taking action to combat discrimination, overcome patterns of segregation, foster inclusive communities, address significant disparities in housing need, and provide access to opportunity. Historic growth patterns and development reflected in Map 5.1 and Figure 5.11 illustrate the concentrations of affordable housing investment. Since 2006, the District has made great strides, including revising the zoning regulations to facilitate a wider range of housing opportunities, developing the IZ Program, and changing how affordable housing investment decisions are made. However, with residents concentrated along lines of race, ethnicity, and wealth, more needs to be done. 514.7 Policy H-3.2.1: Fair Housing Enforcement Strongly enforce fair housing laws to protect residents from housing discrimination. Provide education, outreach, and referral services for residents regarding their rights as tenants and buyers. Provide education and outreach to landlords, property managers, real estate agents, and others on their obligations when housing is made available. 514.8 Policy H-3.2.2: Compliance by Recipients of District Funds Nondiscrimination and full compliance with the District’s fair housing laws shall be required for all housing developers and service providers receiving financial assistance from the District. 514.9 Policy H-3.2.3: Prohibition on Redlining The practice of “redlining” local neighborhoods shall be prohibited in compliance with the federal Community Investment Act of 1977, which prohibits the practice of redlining local neighborhoods. 514.10 Action H-3.2.A: Cultural Sensitivity Require all District agencies that deal with housing and housing services to be culturally and linguistically competent. 514.11 Action H-3.2.B: Fair Housing Education Undertake a Fair Housing Act education program for all relevant staff persons and public officials so they are familiar with the Act and their responsibilities in its enforcement. Maintain programs that raise the public’s awareness of fair housing rights and responsibilities, including educational events, compliance training, affirmative marketing training, and other outreach efforts that further fair housing and eliminate discrimination. 514.12 Action H-3.2.C: Lending Practices Continue to monitor private sector lending practices for their impact on the stability of neighborhoods, and develop responses if instability is identified. 514.13 Action H-3.2.D: Overcoming Impediments to Fair Housing Develop strategies to overcome impediments and obstacles to the delivery of affordable housing in high-cost areas, such as rapid site acquisition, risk reduction, and expedited project selection and processing.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 514*

##### **10-A DCMR § 515** H-4 HOUSING FOR VULNERABLE POPULATIONS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES {#sec-10-a515 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A515}

515.1 In 2017, among Washington DC’s 693,972 residents, thousands of vulnerable populations and persons with disabilities required targeted help finding, paying for, and maintaining affordable housing. These individuals and families included persons experiencing homelessness, older adults, LGBTQ youth and adults, and persons living with other challenges, such as disabilities, HIV/AIDS, behavioral health issues, victims of domestic violence, citizens returning from correctional facilities, and youth being discharged from foster care and the juvenile justice system. Vulnerable populations and residents with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to displacement, experiencing homelessness, and other housing hardships. They often lack the income needed to afford safe, decent housing and the services that will help them lead stable, healthy lives.

##### **10-A DCMR § 516** H-4.1 INTEGRATING VULNERABLE POPULATIONS AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES {#sec-10-a516 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A516}

516.1 One of the basic premises of the District’s vision is that housing serving vulnerable populations and those with disabilities should be accommodated in all of Washington, DC’s neighborhoods and not heavily located in a handful of areas; the current distribution is uneven. While it would be unrealistic to propose that each neighborhood should have an identical number of such facilities, more can be done to avoid concentrating housing in a handful of areas. Every neighborhood should be a high-opportunity neighborhood, and all residents should have access to housing opportunities.

516.2 Steps can also be taken to reduce the stigma associated with housing for vulnerable populations or persons with disabilities and to improve its compatibility with the surrounding community. This will become even more important in the future, as displacement pressures downtown and elsewhere create additional challenge to maintain and operate some of the District’s emergency shelters and those providing services to vulnerable populations or persons with disabilities. Given limited budgets, the rising cost of land tends to drive housing for vulnerable populations or persons with disabilities to the most affordable areas of the District—the very places where these uses already are concentrated. A history of racist policies has led to Black and Hispanic residents disproportionately experiencing homelessness, being part of the foster care system, interacting with the juvenile justice system, living with HIV/AIDS, serving time in correctional facilities and experiencing behavioral health issues. So, actions to improve housing opportunities is a matter of racial equity. Washington, DC is committed to investing in community-based housing options and services that encourage independent living across all Planning Areas.

516.3 Policy H-4.1.1: Integration of Vulnerable Populations and Residents with Disabilities

Integrate residents with disabilities or vulnerable populations through housing that includes wraparound supportive services throughout Washington, DC rather than segregating them into neighborhoods that already have a significant presence of such housing.

516.4 Policy H-4.1.2: Emphasis on Permanent Housing

Emphasize permanent housing-first solutions for persons with disabilities or vulnerable populations, rather than building more temporary, short-term housing facilities. Permanent housing is more conducive to the stability of its occupants and generally has greater support from communities than transient housing.

516.5 Policy H-4.1.3: Coordination of Housing and Support Services

Coordinate the siting of housing for persons with disabilities or vulnerable populations with the location of the key services that support the population being housed. The availability of affordable public transportation to reach those services also should be considered.

516.6 Policy H-4.1.4: Protecting the Housing Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Vulnerable Populations

Protect the housing rights of all vulnerable populations or residents with disabilities through laws pertaining to property taxes, evictions, and affordable tenancy.

##### **10-A DCMR § 517** H-4.2 ENDING HOMELESSNESS {#sec-10-a517 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A517}

517.1 Homelessness in the Washington, DC, on any given night, is a significant problem that has become worse in the wake of the current housing boom. In January 2005, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) estimated that 11,419 people were experiencing homelessness in the region, including 2,694 who were chronically experiencing homelessness. More than half of those experiencing homelessness and two-thirds of those chronically experiencing homelessness lived in the District. Provisions to assist those living without housing must include emergency shelter that accommodates seasonal change and weather variations, transitional housing, rapid rehousing, and permanent supportive housing. On many levels, the need for such facilities and services outpaces supply. The shortfall will worsen if regional partners and colleagues do not match Washington, DC’s efforts, with more persons living without housing in the District.

517.2 By 2017, the number of persons experiencing homelessness declined to 11,128 persons across the region, and the persons experiencing chronic homelessness declined to 2,522. However, persons experiencing homelessness in Washington, DC now represent over two-thirds of the region’s population living without housing and 70 percent of those chronically experiencing homelessness. The sharpest increase in Washington, DC has been in families living without housing, which increased 22 percent to 3,890 persons between 2012 and 2017. Increases in the number of families experiencing homelessness strain shelter capacity and affect the District’s ability to serve other vulnerable populations, such as single adults with disabilities. Longer shelter and hotel stays were leading to a need for more shelter units, while rising costs are making it more difficult to provide services and secure housing for those in need. Homelessness has enormous social and economic consequences, resulting in increased medical, legal, and incarceration costs, as well as shelter costs.

517.3 In 2015, the District published Homeward DC, a collaborative effort by the District Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH) intended to prevent housing loss and quickly stabilize and safely shelter individuals and families who are living without housing. The plan emphasizes permanent housing solutions and community support networks. Its goal is that any household experiencing housing loss will be rehoused within an average of 60 days or less, with homelessness reduced by 65 percent by 2020. The efforts aim to transform the system to focus on crisis response, helping people quickly get back on their feet. ICH has drafted and will publish Homeward DC 2.0: 2020-2025, which builds on the lessons learned from the first five years of Homeward DC implementation and identifies additional strategies to advance the District's efforts to address homelessness in Washington, DC.

517.4 The goal of Homeward DC is to provide housing first, moving people to permanent housing as quickly as possible, accompanied by necessary supportive services. While individuals and families may face housing loss in the future, homelessness will be prevented whenever possible. When it does occur, it will be a rare, brief, and nonrecurring experience.

517.5 With the closing of the DC General facility, Washington, DC is expanding transitional family housing in all eight wards and will also continue to implement plans and assist specific subsets of the population living without housing, such as youth and veterans. Blacks are disproportionately affected by the drivers of homelessness, representing 85 percent of those experiencing homelessness in the District. These drivers include income and wealth gaps, discrimination in the criminal justice system, and credit disparities. For instance, the Solid Foundations DC plan to end youth homelessness states that a disproportionate share (24 percent) of youth experiencing homeless identify as LGBTQ or other and are exploring targeted solutions for vulnerable communities who are at risk of victimization for sexual exploitation, behavioral health, and other problems. Washington, DC will also continue to provide year-round access to shelter, which is especially important during the winter months and in heat emergencies. Provisions to assist those experiencing homelessness must include emergency shelter, transitional housing, and permanent housing, along with supportive services. However, the need for such facilities and services outpaces supply. Rising housing costs will continue to place more families at risk of homelessness.

517.6 Policy H-4.2.1: Ending Homelessness

Reduce the incidence of homelessness to rare, brief, and nonrecurring events in Washington, DC through prevention efforts, development of permanent supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness in all District Planning Areas, and active coordination of the placement of persons experiencing homelessness into housing that best fits their needs.

517.7 Policy H-4.2.2: Neighborhood-Based Services for Persons Living Without Homes

Encourage the provision of services for persons living without homes through neighborhood-based permanent supportive housing and SRO units. The smaller service model can reduce the likelihood of adverse impacts to surrounding uses, improve community acceptance, and also support the reintegration of persons experiencing homelessness back into the community.

517.8 Policy H-4.2.3: Increasing the Permanent Supportive Housing Supply

Increase the supply of permanent supportive housing affordable to extremely low-income households to reduce the length of shelter stays, free up additional shelter capacity, and provide stable long-term housing for those who are living without housing or at risk of living without housing.

517.9 Policy H-4.2.4: Homelessness Prevention and Crisis Response

Expand programs to stabilize high-risk households before they arrive at the shelter door by researching the common causes of homelessness and implementing targeted homelessness prevention programming, especially for those transitioning out of institutional settings such as foster care, correctional facilities, or behavioral health facilities. Continue efforts to create a more effective crisis response system to address homelessness, focused on helping individuals and families get back on their feet as quickly as possible.

517.10 Policy H-4.2.5: Reducing Housing Barriers for Persons Experiencing Homelessness

Reduce the barriers that prevent persons and families experiencing homeless from finding affordable and supportive housing. Overcome onerous eligibility requirements and restrictions based on credit, income, and criminal history by providing incentives to landlords willing to housing those escaping homelessness. Improve business processes and information systems, including user tests, to decrease the time it takes for individuals and families to complete paperwork and locate and lease-up an available rental unit.

517.11 Action H-4.2.A: Homeward DC

Implement the recommendations outlined in Homeward DC: 2015-2020, which updates and expands on the Homeward DC: Strategic Plan 2015-2020 and continues the District's efforts to make homelessness in the District rare, brief, and non-recurring. Homeward DC recommended strategies to expand homelessness prevention strategies, improve the quality of the District’s emergency shelter facilities, and increase the number of permanent supportive housing units and tenant-based rental subsidies available for populations experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Homeward DC 2.0 builds on the recommendations outlined in Homeward DC and highlights additional strategies to advance these efforts.

517.12 Action H-4.2.B: Emergency Assistance

Expand the emergency assistance program for rent, security deposit, mortgage, or utility expenses for very low-income families with children, older adults, and persons with disabilities to prevent homelessness.

517.13 Action H-4.2.C: Ending Youth Homelessness

Implement Solid Foundations DC: The Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Youth Homelessness. The plan includes strategies for youth homelessness prevention, expanded outreach and reunification, additional youth shelter capacity, improved support services, continuing education, and capacity building programs for organizations that support the emotional, physical, and social well-being of at-risk youth.

517.14 Action H-4.2.D: Discharge Coordination

Maintain discharge programs from the foster care, health care, and the criminal justice systems that prevent homelessness and provide a safe transition to independent living.

517.15 Action H-4.2.E: Landlord Recruitment

Develop and test pilot programs designed to incentivize landlords to house individuals and families exiting homelessness. Evaluate strategies and make recommendations on maintaining and improving an ongoing program.

##### **10-A DCMR § 518** H-4.3 MEETING THE NEEDS OF SPECIFIC GROUPS {#sec-10-a518 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A518}

518.1 The housing needs of the District’s most vulnerable populations vary among each group. Some require housing with specific physical attributes, such as wheelchair ramps or bathrooms with grab bars. Some require housing with on-site support services, such as meal service or job counseling. Most simply need housing that is safe, secure, and affordable. It is important to consider the racial composition of these groups and how historic or current racial barriers to housing opportunities may affect needs. Communities of color are disproportionately represented in the vulnerable populations discussed below; for example, 69 percent of DC residents living with HIV/AIDS are Black. Those who most commonly benefit from supportive services are the several groups profiled below.

518.2 In 2017, 118,275 District residents were age 60 years and over, including 12,133 residents 85 years and over. As the baby boom generation matures and as average lifespan increases, the population of residents aged 60 years and over in the District is expected to increase dramatically. By 2030, there will be 141,275 residents aged 60 years and over, of which 12,000 will be 85 years and older. In addition, first-time homelessness among older adults on fixed incomes continues to increase, as they face ever increasing affordability challenges. A broad range of environments will be needed for older adults, serving residents across the income spectrum.

518.3 The Age-Friendly DC initiative, launched in 2012, identified 75 strategies across 10 broad topics to allow residents of all ages to remain in community-based settings as they age. Additional programs will be needed to help older adults age in place through home retrofits. New forms of cooperative and shared housing may be explored, and additional facilities will be needed that offer on-site nursing and health care in a congregate environment. As already noted, higher levels of assistance will be required to help older adult homeowners on fixed incomes and to protect renters who are older adults from displacement. More intergenerational living facilities also may be needed; in approximately 2,881 households, grandparents are responsible for the care of their grandchildren; almost 89 percent of grandfamilies living in the District are Black.

518.4 A disproportionately large share of the region’s population of persons with disabilities resides in Washington, DC. Approximately 94,400 District residents—or 13 percent of the total population— are persons with disabilities or live with a person with a disability. Nearly one-third of Washington, DC’s population of persons with disabilities lives below the poverty level. Many of these adults are unable to work and need supportive services and accessible housing options.

518.5 Mobility limitations affect nearly 48,000 District residents. Thousands of residents need basic modifications to so that they can live well in their own homes. New units should be visitable to residents who are living with disabilities and enable residents to age in community. Visitability refers to apartments and single-family housing that can be lived in or visited by persons who have trouble with steps or who use wheelchairs or walkers. Visibility improvements are also needed to remove physical barriers, even in homes that do not currently house persons with mobility challenges, so that persons with limitations can visit others. Persons with disabilities may also require medical and personal care assistance in daily living activities. The number of housing units specifically designed for persons with disabilities, particularly units in facilities with services to help cope with these disabilities, is far short of the actual need. Moreover, many persons with disabilities rely on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and face an enormous gap between their income and the cost of their housing.

518.6 Each year, the correctional facilities system in the District releases more than 5,000 people. Many return to the District, usually without the means to pay for market rate housing and, in some cases, without the skills or means to find a decent job. Many return to neighborhoods experiencing high crime and poverty, remain chronically unemployed, and find shelter in group homes or shared housing. Unstable housing and a lack of employment undermine returning citizens’ success and can perpetuate the cycle of poverty and violence in the District’s lowest-income neighborhoods. The Department of Corrections and the Mayor’s Office on Returning Citizen Affairs have prioritized reentry programs to protect public safety and reduce recidivism, including housing strategies. In 2016, the District passed the Fair Criminal Record Screening for Housing Act, which bans landlords from asking about an applicant’s criminal record until a conditional offer has been made.

518.7 In 2015, 15,200 persons with HIV/AIDS lived in the District, or about 2.2 percent of the population. This compares to a national rate of 0.3 percent and exceeds the World Health Organization’s threshold (one percent), indicative of a continued HIV epidemic. Several research studies indicate that persons with HIV/AIDS experience elevated housing instability and homelessness relative to the general population. Stigma and discrimination may cause additional hurdles to obtain and retain appropriate housing. Data from the federal Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Program indicates an unmet need for tenant-based rental assistance for 1,239 persons with HIV/AIDS.

518.8 Over 15,000 District adults have been diagnosed as having a serious behavioral health issue by the Department of Behavioral Health based on treatment services delivered in 2016. Behavioral health issues can seriously limit one’s ability to find employment, earn a living wage, and lead an independent life. Stable, permanent housing can increase independence and help those with behavioral health issues achieve other life goals. Such housing is often paired with case management and appropriate supportive services, such as crisis intervention, ongoing counseling, and health assessments.

518.9 The DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) receives over 30,000 calls for service each year for domestic violence-related incidents. Some of these calls result in the need for safe housing for the victim. The inventory of such housing is very limited. Domestic violence also creates unique challenges for the victim, including the potential for personal harm if using the traditional shelter system. Many victims also may experience trauma, and some have children who also need to be accommodated. DHCD has designated a Housing Navigator on its staff to leverage housing contacts and find safe housing for victims of crime and domestic violence. By calling the DC Victim Hotline, victims can be directed to resources.

518.10 Policy H-4.3.1: Short-Term and Emergency Housing Options

Ensure that adequate short-term housing options, including emergency shelter and transitional housing, exists for persons with disabilities, including people living with HIV/AIDS, harm-reduction units for substance abusers, detoxification beds and residential treatment facilities, safe housing for victims of domestic violence, halfway houses, and group homes for returning citizens, and assisted-living and end-of-life care for older adults.

518.11 Policy H-4.3.2: Housing Choice for Older Adults

Provide a wide variety of affordable housing choices for the District’s older adults that enable them to age in their neighborhoods either by supporting their ability to remain in their homes or by providing new opportunities within multi-unit buildings that include Universal Design and intergenerational options. Take into account the income range and health care needs of this population. Recognize the coming growth in the older adult population so that the production and rehabilitation of affordable housing for older adults meets Universal Design standards and becomes a major District priority. Acknowledge and support the establishment of senior villages and wellness centers throughout Washington, DC that allow older adults to remain in their homes and/or communities and age in place.

518.11a Text Box: Homesharing

A new strategy and a key component of the Age-Friendly DC Housing Domain is homesharing. This strategy assists older adults to age in their current homes by sharing their housing costs with another and has been gaining steam among several age-friendly jurisdictions across the country. Homesharing has multiple benefits, including reducing housing costs and isolation and providing peer support and safety.

518.12 Policy H-4.3.3: Neighborhood-Based Housing for Older Adults

Encourage the production of multi-family housing for older adults in those neighborhoods characterized by large numbers of older adults living alone in single-family homes. This will enable older adults to remain in their neighborhoods, maintain connections with fellow residents and neighbors, and reduce their home maintenance costs and obligations.

518.13 Policy H-4.3.4: Housing for Persons with Disabilities

Work toward a target of designing 12 percent of the new housing units added to the District’s stock over the next 20 years specifically to meet the accessibility needs of persons with disabilities through Universal Design. These units should be spread evenly across affordability brackets. Facilitate and promote broader visitability standards in new construction and major renovations that enable people who have trouble with steps or who use wheelchairs or walkers to participate socially and reduce their isolation.

518.14 Policy H-4.3.5: Housing for Returning Citizens

Create adequate housing plans for people exiting the correctional system so that they do not experience homelessness, including the removal of barriers to returning citizens living in affordable housing. Returning citizens should not be concentrated in assisted housing projects, but allowed to find housing throughout Washington, DC. Rental housing providers should not be allowed to discriminate against returning citizens.

518.15 Policy H-4.3.6: Persons with Behavioral Health Issues

Support the production of housing for people with behavioral health issues through capital and operating subsidies. Improve the availability and coordination of such housing with wraparound behavioral health and other human services. Steps should be taken to prevent the eviction of persons experiencing behavioral health issues from publicly financed housing, so long as they are following the rules of tenancy, and to maintain each individual’s housing if they need to be hospitalized.

518.16 Action H-4.3.A: Incentives for Accessible Units

Create financial incentives or provide appropriate flexibility in zoning rules and public space regulations for homeowners and landlords to retrofit units to make them accessible to older adults and persons with disabilities. Encourage the production of units that are visitable, ADA-accessible, or universally designed in new housing construction.

518.17 Action H-4.3.B: Incentives for Older Adult Housing

Remove barriers and explore incentives, such as density bonuses, tax credits, and special financing, to stimulate the development of assisted living and care facilities for older adults that serve a mix of incomes, particularly in areas of high need and on sites well served by public transportation.

518.18 Action H-4.3.C: University Partnerships and Older Adults

Explore partnerships with local universities to develop intergenerational student living arrangements with older adults living near campus.

518.19 Action H-4.3.D: Aging in Community

Establish programs to facilitate low-income older renters aging in place. Examples include tenant-based vouchers or other rental assistance to older adults on fixed incomes or funds for renovation of multi-unit buildings, individual apartments, and single-family homes to create appropriate housing options for older adults to age in community.

### **10-A6** ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

##### **10-A DCMR § 600** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a600 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A600}

600.1 The Environmental Protection Element addresses the protection, conservation, and management of Washington, DC’s ’s land, air, water, energy, and biological resources. This Element provides policies and actions for addressing important issues such as climate change, drinking water safety, the restoration of the tree canopy, energy conservation, air quality, watershed protection, pollution prevention, waste management, the remediation of contaminated sites, and environmental justice. The biological, chemical, and hydrologic integrity of the environment are key indicators of the quality of life in the District. Furthermore, environmental sustainability is linked to resilience, population health, and community prosperity. Good environmental management and pollution prevention are essential to sustain all living things and to safeguard the welfare of future generations.

The Environmental Protection Element is divided into the following sections:

E-1: Adapting to and Mitigating Climate Change;

E-2: Protecting Natural and Green Areas;

E-3: Conserving Natural Resources;

E-4: Promoting Environmental Sustainability;

E-5: Reducing Environmental Hazards; and

E-6: Environment, Education, and the Economy.

600.2 The critical environmental issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapting to climate change;

Restoring the District’s tree canopy and expanding green infrastructure (GI);

Improving rivers, streams, and stream valleys;

Reducing erosion and stormwater run-off;

Conserving and restoring wildlife habitat and plant communities;

Conserving water and energy;

Expanding recycling and composting;

Encouraging green building techniques and facilitating compliance with green building mandates;

Growing access to, and use of, clean, local energy;

Reducing air pollution;

Increasing the acreage of wetlands along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers;

Eliminating the harmful effects of environmental hazards on all residents, particularly vulnerable populations and to address environmental justice issues;

Increasing resilience to flooding; and

Increasing resilience to urban heat island effect.

600.3 Environmental protection has been part of planning in Washington, DC since its inception. In 1791, the L’Enfant Plan used the natural landscape to guide the location of avenues and principal buildings. Later plans in the 19th and 20th centuries created some of the most memorable parks in the country and designated thousands of acres for resource protection. In the 1870s, Washington, DC planted 60,000 trees, leading Harper’s Magazine to dub Washington, DC the “City of Trees.” Today’s images of Washington, DC still portray a city of blue skies, pristine waters, and lush greenery.

600.4 Washington, DC’s legacy as America’s greenest city has been seriously challenged over the centuries by urbanization. In recent years, Washington, DC has made great strides in incorporating sustainability measures; however, this momentum should be maintained in order to learn, plan, and ultimately meet the District’s goals. Although the region’s air is cleaner than it has been in 20 years, the air quality does not meet federal standards for ozone, and the rivers and streams are polluted by raw sewage and runoff (oil, gas, dust, pesticides, trash, animal waste, and other pollutants). Ninety percent of Washington, DC’s wetlands have disappeared since 1790. Some sites in the District face soil and groundwater contamination problems from former industrial uses and municipal waste disposal.

600.5 The District is tackling these challenges head-on. In 2005, legislation was passed creating a District Department of the Environment, now called the Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE). In 2012, the Sustainable DC Plan was developed, with the goal to make Washington, DC the healthiest, greenest, most livable city in the United States. After five years of implementation, 71 percent of the Sustainable DC Plan’s actions are underway, and another 27 percent are complete. In 2019, the District released Sustainable DC 2.0, the comprehensive update to the plan.

600.6 Critical sustainability issues—including transportation, water quality, air pollution, and waste—are regional in scope. Washington, DC continues to work with the 24 jurisdictions that are part of Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG). Additionally, about 29 percent of Washington, DC (including most of the parks and open space) is controlled by the federal government, and 55 buildings in Washington, DC are managed directly by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), making the federal government a critical partner on sustainability. District government continues to work closely with the federal National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), National Park Service (NPS), and GSA to maximize opportunities to meet the District’s ambitious sustainability targets, including increased tree canopy coverage, habitat restoration, and stormwater management.

600.7 Washington, DC, along with hundreds of other cities around the world, has signed on to the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy and has taken on climate change as the most pressing global environmental challenge of this century. Washington, DC is committed to meeting or beating the GHG reduction target. In 2017, the District reaffirmed its commitment to the 2015 Paris Climate Accord and pledged to become carbon-neutral and climate resilient by 2050. Further, Washington, DC adopted Climate Ready DC in 2016, its plan to prepare for and adapt to the impacts of climate change; it is now also a member of 100 Resilient Cities, which is dedicated to helping cities around the world become more resilient to the physical, social, and economic challenges that are increasingly a part of the 21st century. In addition, Washington, DC has joined the C40 Cities network, which is comprised of the world’s cities committed to addressing climate change.

600.8 Washington, DC’s increased focus on environmental protection has begun to pay dividends. The District is a leader in green building and energy: Washington, DC leads the nation in LEED-certified square feet per resident, ENERGY STAR certified buildings per capita, and total District-wide green power usage. In 2017, the District was named the first Leadership in Environmental Energy and Design (LEED®) for Cities Platinum-certified city in the world. Washington, DC was the first city in the nation to pass a law, the Green Building Act of 2006, requiring green building certification for both the public and private sectors. In 2015, Washington, DC announced a 20-year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) that will supply 35 percent of the District government’s electricity with wind power. In 2018, the District government established the DC Green Bank as a key mechanism to accelerate the deployment of affordable private and public capital for clean energy projects.

600.9 In addition, the most ambitious tree planting, water quality improvement, and habitat restoration projects in decades are also underway, and great strides are being made to promote more sustainable growth. Integral to this effort are public-private partnerships that have aided the District in advancing many of its Sustainable DC goals, such as nearly reaching the 2032 tree canopy coverage target of 40 percent.

600.10 Washington, DC has become a model for innovative policies and practices, such as the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018, which demonstrates how enhancing natural and built environments, investing in a diverse clean economy, and reducing disparities among residents can help move toward a more educated, equitable, and prosperous society.

600.10a Text Box: Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018

Washington, DC’s historic Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018 provides a road map to achieving the District’s clean energy and climate action goals, including:

Mandating that 100 percent of the electricity sold in Washington, DC come from renewable sources;

Doubling the required amount of solar energy deployed in the District;

Making significant improvements to the energy efficiency of existing buildings in Washington, DC;

Providing energy bill assistance to support low- and moderate-income residents;

Requiring all public transportation and privately owned fleet vehicles to become emissions-free by 2045; and

Funding the DC Green Bank to attract private investment in clean energy projects.

600.11 The Environmental Protection Element builds on this momentum. It charts a course toward excellence in environmental quality, greater environmental resiliency, and improved environmental health. This element emphasizes that restoring the natural environment will support a healthier population, society, and workforce. Consistent with the notion of an Inclusive City, it strives for environmental justice so that all neighborhoods are provided with clean air, healthy rivers and streams, clean soils, healthy homes, and an abundance of trees and open spaces. It also takes ambitious steps to prioritize resiliency and connections between environmental stewardship and innovative solutions to some of its most pressing challenges, including sustainable growth and long-term community resilience in the face of a changing climate.

600.11a Text Box: Sustainable DC and Sustainable DC 2.0

Between 2000 and 2015, Washington, DC’s population grew by approximately 100,000 people, and all signs point to continued steady growth. As the population continues to expand, decisive actions are needed to ensure that all residents, and particularly the most vulnerable, benefit from a cleaner environment and access to nature and are prepared for any potential sudden shocks and chronic stresses posed by climate change.

600.11b In 2013, the Office of Planning (OP) and DOEE launched Sustainable DC with the goal of making Washington, DC the healthiest, greenest, and most livable city in the nation. The District continues to make significant progress on the implementation of 143 actions designed to help reach that goal, including steps not only to protect natural resources, but also to begin preparing for and adapting to climate change. Sustainable DC 2.0, launched in 2017, is a collaborative District-wide effort to update Washington, DC’s sustainability plan. The updated plan incorporates new programs and policies and changes in technology, and it better reflects the priorities of all residents.

600.11c Sustainable DC was quickly followed by several other plans and initiatives. In 2013, Washington, DC’s zoning regulations were amended to include the Green Area Ratio (GAR), a site-specific requirement designed to increase the environmental performance of the urban landscape (see a description of the GAR in Section 615 for more information). In 2016, Washington, DC released Climate Ready DC, the District’s climate adaptation plan, which outlines the strategies to make Washington, DC more resilient to future climate challenges and crises, including rising temperatures and more heatwaves, increased heavy rainfall and flooding, sea level rise, and severe storm events. In 2018, this was followed by Clean Energy DC, which is Washington, DC’s climate mitigation plan. This strategic plan outlines the necessary steps to achieve the Sustainable DC goal of a 50 percent GHG reduction by 2032.

600.11d These plans and initiatives, among others, emphasize the importance and value of preserving and enhancing natural resources and improving the built environment to bolster resilience in Washington, DC. They provide the basis for new metrics to inform policies in several sectors for the next 15-30 years, including but are not limited to energy, waste, water, health, food, nature, transportation, and the built environment. The plans also set forth road maps with timelines for implementation.

##### **10-A DCMR § 601** ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION GOAL {#sec-10-a601 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A601}

601.1 The overarching goal for the Environmental Protection Element is to protect, restore, and enhance the natural and human-made environment in Washington, DC, taking steps to improve environmental quality and resilience, adapt to and mitigate climate change, prevent and reduce pollution, improve human health, increase access to clean and renewable energy, conserve the values and functions of Washington, DC’s natural resources and ecosystems, and educate the public on ways to secure a sustainable future.

##### **10-A DCMR § 602** E-1 ADAPTING TO AND MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE {#sec-10-a602 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A602}

602.1 Climate change refers to long-term shifts in the climate, including global temperature, precipitation, and wind patterns. Washington, DC’s climate is changing because the earth is heating. In urban areas, GHGs from human activities such as heating and cooling buildings and transportation are the most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid-20th century. People have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the air by 40 percent since the late 1700s. Other heat-trapping GHGs are also increasing. These gases have warmed Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere by about one degree during the last 50 years. Evaporation increases as the atmosphere heats, which increases humidity, average rainfall, and the frequency of heavy rainstorms in many places—but contributes to drought in others.

602.2 The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated that pledges made in Paris in 2015 by the world’s governments to reduce GHGs will not be enough to keep global warming from rising nearly three degrees (°F) above pre-industrial temperatures. These global changes have serious consequences at the District level, as Washington, DC is already experiencing the impacts of human-made climate change. The region has warmed by more than two degrees (°F) in the last century. Hot days and heavy rainstorms and snowstorms are more frequent, and the tidal Potomac is rising about one inch every eight years due to rising sea levels and land subsidence. In the coming decades, climate change is likely to increase tidal flooding, cause more heavy precipitation events, and increase risks to human health and the built environment.1F The District will experience warmer average temperatures and two to three times as many dangerously hot days.

602.3 District government is approaching climate change on three tracks: mitigation locally, adaptation locally, and demonstrated leadership nationally and globally. Mitigation refers to reducing GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide). Washington, DC is committed to becoming carbon-neutral and climate resilient by 2050. Progress toward this goal is measured by an annual inventory of the District’s GHGs. From 2006 (when the District began tracking GHGs) through 2016, emissions have fallen by approximately 29 percent, on track to meet the interim goal of reducing emissions by 50 percent by 2032.

602.4 Figure 6.1 District-wide Emissions and Targets

(Source: DOEE)

602.5 Adaptation means adjusting to the impacts of climate change and doing so in a way that supports wider efforts to make Washington, DC healthier and more livable. Washington, DC will prepare for potential shocks and stressors brought on by climate change through environmental and built environment approaches that provide multiple community benefits. These solutions include the conservation of the naturally protective features of environmental assets or ecosystem services, the expansion of GI, and the inclusion of non-structural land uses (e.g., parks) in hazardous, environmentally sensitive locations. It also means designing buildings to be more responsive to threats posed by flooding and urban heat. These solutions should continue to be integrated with other community goals to improve quality of life through the promotion of environmental justice and sustainability, the preservation or restoration of natural resources, and the provision of additional trees, public parks, recreation areas, and open space.

602.6 Map 6.1 Average Land Surface Temperature

(Source: DOEE and the Environment July 2014-2018)

##### **10-A DCMR § 603** E-1.1 PREPARING FOR AND RESPONDING TO NATURAL HAZARDS {#sec-10-a603 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A603}

603.1 In the coming decades, changing climate is likely to increase tidal flooding, cause more heavy rainstorms, and increase risks to human health. Portions of Washington, DC are within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated 100-year flood plain and are subject to inundation during hurricanes and other severe storms, and as a result of sea level rise, some low-lying areas are subject to minor, recurrent flooding. Low-lying interior areas may experience more frequent and severe stormwater flooding events. It is important to use an equity lens to assess natural hazards and climate risks by race, income, and vulnerability to develop and implement strategies that result in equitable environmental outcomes.

603.2 Undeveloped floodplain areas can provide significant flood protection, allowing floods to pass through those areas while causing minimal harm. When development does occur in floodplain areas, floodplain regulations help ensure individuals living and doing business in those areas comply with safe building practices designed to prevent injury, loss of life, and property damage from flooding. Washington, DC’s current floodplain regulations apply only to the FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain.

603.3 However, communities across the country are experiencing floods that reach beyond the extents of the 100-year floodplain with increasing regularity. What is now considered a 100-year rainfall event will become considerably more common in the years to come, and interior flooding events from significant storms may increase Given these trends, expanding the regulated floodplain areas in Washington, DC beyond the 100-year floodplain will be an important step in ensuring Washington, DC is resilient to increased flood risk. Additional flood adaptation measures include integrating new natural shorelines and buffers, reducing erosion, replacing undersized culverts, and keeping streambeds free of debris.

603.4 Furthermore, increasing urbanization that replaces vegetated space with concrete and pavement can result in heat islands, or spaces that reach higher temperatures and retain heat longer than the surrounding areas and can reduce local health quality and negatively impact air quality.

603.5 Policy E-1.1.1: Resilience to Climate Change as a Civic Priority

Advance the District’s resilience to climate change as a major civic priority, to be supported through improved mitigation, adaptation, and human preparedness.

603.6 Policy E-1.1.2: Urban Heat Island Mitigation

Wherever possible, reduce the urban heat island effect with cool and green roofs, expanded green space, cool pavement, tree planting, and tree protection efforts, prioritizing hotspots and those areas with the greatest number of heat-vulnerable residents. Incorporate heat island mitigation into planning for GI, tree canopy, parks, and public space initiatives.

See Map 6.1 for Average Land Surface Temperature July 2014-2018.

603.7 Policy E-1.1.3: Natural Assets and Ecosystems for Hazard Mitigation

Expand and leverage the ability of natural landscape features, such as vegetated land cover and wetlands, and the beneficial ecosystem services they provide to mitigate natural hazards. This includes supporting and encouraging design and construction choices that conserve, restore, and enhance the protective functionality of natural assets to absorb, reduce, or resist the potentially damaging effects of wind, water, and other hazard forces. Such approaches, including natural shorelines, should be incorporated into all waterfront development projects, where possible.

603.8 Policy E-1.1.4: Non-Structural Land Uses

Incorporate non-structural uses within designated special flood hazard areas to help protect and enhance the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains, wetlands, and other undeveloped landscape features. These uses include but are not limited to parks, recreation areas, and permanently protected open spaces.

603.9 Policy E-1.1.5: Resilient Infrastructure

Design infrastructure, such as roads and parks, to withstand future climate impacts, and increase Washington, DC’s’ resilience by having roads and parks serve multiple purposes where possible, including flood risk reduction, urban heat island mitigation, and stormwater management.

See the Infrastructure Element for more information on resilient infrastructure.

603.10 Policy E-1.1.6: Floodplains, Waterfronts, and Other Low-Lying Areas

Consistent with the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, prohibit activities within floodplains, waterfronts, and other low-lying areas that could pose public health or safety hazards in the event of a flood. Regulation of land uses in floodplains, waterfronts, and other low-lying areas should consider the long-term effects of climate change—including sea level rise, increasingly heavy rain events, and more severe coastal storms—on flood hazards.

603.11 Action E-1.1.A: Update Regulations for Resilience

Continue to monitor and update Washington, DC’s regulations to promote flood risk reduction, heat island mitigation, stormwater management, renewable energy, and energy resilience, among other practices, where appropriate.

603.12 Action E-1.1.B: Development in Floodplains

Evaluate expanding restrictions and/or require adaptive design for development in areas that will be at increased risk of flooding due to climate change. Analyses should weigh the requirement to account for climate risks with the needs of a growing District.

603.13 Action E-1.1.C: Waterfront Setbacks

Ensure that waterfront setbacks and buffers account for future sea level rise, changes in precipitation patterns, and greater use of nature-based and adaptive flood defenses.

603.14 Action E-1.1.D: Covenant for Climate and Energy

Implement policies recommended by Clean Energy DC and Climate Ready DC to achieve Washington, DC’s goal of reducing GHG emissions by 50 percent below 2006 levels by 2032, and achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 while preparing for the impacts of climate change. Maintain compliance with the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, signed by Washington, DC in 2015, which commits Washington, DC to measure and reduce GHG emissions and address climate risks.

603.15 Action E-1.1.E: Update Floodplain Regulations

Update flood hazard rules to reflect the increased risk of flooding due to climate-related sea level rise, increasingly frequent and severe precipitation events, and coastal storms.

603.16 Action E-1.1.F: Comprehensive and Integrated Flood Modeling

Develop, and regularly update, Washington, DC’s floodplain models, maps, and other tools to account for climate change, including projections for increased precipitation and sea level rise, to ensure any future building in the floodplain is done sustainably. Integrate existing, and develop new, floodplain models to better understand the interplay between coastal, riverine, and interior flooding and potential climate impacts. Consider revising the regulatory flood hazard areas for Washington, DC’s Flood Hazard Rules.

603.16a Text Box: Flood Elevations

In new or substantially renovated buildings, design flood elevation is the minimum height at which residential units may be constructed and utilities like the boiler, the water heater, and electrical equipment may be located. It also sets the minimum height for dry or wet flood-proofing measures for buildings generally. The margin between this and the base flood elevation is called freeboard.

603.17 Action E-1.1.G: Design Guidelines for Resilience

Develop guidelines for new development and substantial land improvements that consider the threat of naturally occurring stressors and hazards (e.g., flooding, extreme heat, and wind), determine potential impacts to assets over the expected life cycle of the asset, and identify cost-effective risk-reduction options. Use updated and integrated flood risk models to determine potential flood extents and depths for riparian, coastal, and interior flood events and to inform design flood elevations for a development in flood hazard areas.

603.18 Action E-1.1.H: Update Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment

Update the vulnerability and risk assessment completed for Climate Ready DC as new data on potential climate impacts becomes available. Regularly assess the vulnerability of infrastructure, critical facilities (including hospitals and emergency shelters), vulnerable populations, and large developments to climate-related hazards.

603.19 Action E-1.1.I: Resiliency Evaluation

Review projects including Washington, DC capital projects and large-scale developments, for potential climate risks and adaptation strategies.

603.20 Action: E-1.1.J: Resiliency Incentives

Expand existing incentives and regulations to include thermal safety and urban heat island mitigation measures, such as green and cool roofs, solar shading, shade trees, alternatives to concrete, and other innovative building design strategies.

603.21 Action: E-1.1.K: Interagency Temperature Management Strategy

Develop an interagency heat management strategy to minimize the adverse health impacts associated with extreme cold and heat temperature days. The District government will work to ensure that residents can prepare for these events by more broadly communicating extreme heat and cold response plans that clearly define specific roles and responsibilities of government and nongovernmental organizations before and during these events. Plans should identify local populations at high risk for extreme temperature-related illness and death and determine the strategies that will be used to support such individuals during emergencies, particularly in underserved communities. Furthermore, explore strategies, including the use of technology, to help build communities’ adaptive capacity before, during, and after extreme temperature days.

##### **10-A DCMR § 604** E-2 CONSERVING NATURAL AND GREEN AREAS {#sec-10-a604 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A604}

604.1 Washington, DC’s natural landscape is characterized by two tidal rivers; a complex network of parkland, streams, and valleys; and undulating hills and terraces. This landscape provides ecological diversity, ranging from mixed oak and tulip poplar forests to magnolia bogs and wetlands.

604.2 Washington, DC provides valuable habitats for all types of wildlife, from tiny crustaceans to the bald eagle. Through careful planning and development that respects and preserves natural resources, Washington, DC continues to make strides in wildlife conservation and habitat restoration. To conserve threatened species and keep habitats healthy, Washington, DC developed the District of Columbia Wildlife Action Plan in 2006 (with a comprehensive update in 2015) as a blueprint for wildlife conservation. Additionally, the Fisheries and Wildlife Omnibus Amendment Act of 2016 designated critical areas, or areas containing species of local importance, for conservation: critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and wetlands.

604.3 GI refers to the interconnected network of land and water that supports plant and animal life, maintains natural ecology, and contributes to the health and quality of life in communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 605** E-2.1 CONSERVING AND EXPANDING WASHINGTON, DC’S URBAN FORESTS {#sec-10-a605 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A605}

605.1 The benefits of a healthy urban forests, are well documented. Street trees, trees in parks and natural areas, and trees on private lands add beauty, improve mental health, provide shade, reduce water pollution, absorb noise, produce oxygen, absorb GHGs, and provide habitat for birds and small animals. They also add economic value to neighborhoods and contribute to community identity and pride. Trees also play an increasingly important role in helping Washington, DC adapt to a changing climate that will bring hotter temperatures and more heavy rain events.

605.2 Trees currently cover about 38 percent of Washington, DC’s land area (see Figure 6.2). However, there are significant geographic disparities in tree cover, ranging from 60 percent of the land area in Ward 3 to 23 percent in Ward 1. Public awareness of the importance of trees has sparked tree planting and re-greening activities across Washington, DC.

605.3 Tree cover in Washington, DC as of 2016 is shown in Map 6.2.

605.4 Figure 6.2 District Tree Canopy Coverage

(Source: Sustainable DC)

605.5 Policy E-2.1.1: Trees in the Public Lands

Plant and maintain trees in the public lands in all parts of Washington, DC, particularly in areas with low canopy cover and areas in greater need of trees, such as those with high urban heat island effects, at high risk for flooding, or with high particulate matter levels. 605.5

605.6 Policy E-2.1.2: Tree Requirements in New Development

Use planning, zoning, and building regulations to promote tree retention and planting, as well as the removal and replacement of dying trees when new development occurs. Tree planting and landscaping required as a condition of permit approval should include provisions for ongoing maintenance.

605.7 Policy E-2.1.3: Sustainable Landscaping Practices

Encourage the use of sustainable landscaping practices to beautify the District, enhance streets and public spaces, reduce stormwater runoff, and create a stronger sense of character and identity. District government, private developers, and community institutions should coordinate to significantly increase the use of these practices, including planting and maintaining mostly native trees and other plants on District-owned land outside the right-of-ways in schools, parks, and housing authority lands.

605.8 Policy E-2.1.4: Engaging the Community

Promote partnerships between Washington, DC , community groups, and nonprofit advocacy groups to undertake tree surveys and planting campaigns, volunteer training and education, and resident stewardship of Washington, DC’s urban forest. Leverage the Urban Forestry Advisory Council’s (UFAC) diverse membership of District and federal government agencies, nonprofit partners, public utilities, and community members to promote existing policies and develop new initiatives to expand Washington, DC’s urban tree canopy. Support public-private partnerships that fund tree planting efforts on both public and private land, which can vary in scale from small parcel-level projects to large open spaces.

605.9 Policy E-2.1.5: Tree Planting on Private Lands

Encourage tree planting on private lands through incentive programs and outreach and education. Methods should include using GI, native plantings, pollinator gardens, and other habitat as a community benefit in planned unit developments and forming voluntary partnerships with major institutions such as universities, embassies, and hospitals.

605.10 Policy E-2.1.6: Urban Tree Canopy Goals

Determine the extent of Washington, DC’s tree canopy at a sufficient level of detail to establish tree canopy goals for neighborhoods across the District. Continue working toward a District-wide goal of 40 percent tree canopy cover by 2032. Encourage tree plantings in neighborhoods with lower canopy levels. Components of this program should include the removal of dead and dying trees and their replacement with suitable species, and the pruning and maintenance of trees to eliminate hazards and increase their rate of survival.

605.11 Action E-2.1.A: Tree Replacement Program

Continue working toward a goal of planting 10,500 trees on public and private open space each year.

605.12 Action E-2.1.B: Street Tree Standards

Continue to formalize the planting, pruning, removal, and construction guidelines in use by the District’s Urban Forestry Division. These standards provide further direction for tree selection based on such factors as traffic volumes, street width, shade and sunlight conditions, soil conditions, disease and drought resistance, and the space available for tree wells. They also include provisions to increase the size of tree boxes to improve tree health and longevity, and standards for soils and planting, as well improve upon existing tree boxes through impervious surface removal, increasing soil volumes, undergrounding power lines, and installing bio-retention tree boxes.

605.13 Action E-2.1.C: Tree Inventories

Continue partnership agreements with the federal government, Casey Trees, and other groups to maintain the live, publicly available database and management system for Washington, DC’s trees using Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping. Efforts should be made to inventory trees on all District lands outside the right-of-ways, as well as along its streets.

605.14 Action E-2.1.D: Operating Procedures for Utility and Roadwork

Develop standard operating procedures to minimize tree damage by public utility and road crews. All activities that involve invasive work around street trees should be reviewed by Urban Forestry Administration personnel. Promote the expansion of the urban tree canopy, while planting the right tree in the right place in consideration with overhead utility lines.

605.15 Action E-2.1.E: Urban Forest Management

Consistent with Washington, DC’s 2002 and 2016 Tree Bills, continue to protect, maintain, and restore trees and native woodlands across Washington, DC. Use the Mayor’s UFAC and new and existing District agency partnerships to coordinate urban forest management activities on all public lands managed by the District (e.g., street trees, parks, public school grounds). These partnerships and initiatives should also promote coordination with federal agencies and other large landowners and include comprehensive strategies to manage insects and diseases.

605.15a Text Box: The DC Tree Bill

The Urban Forest Preservation Act of 2002, better known as the Tree Bill, established a tree preservation program, strengthened the community notice requirements for tree removal on public land, and revised the penalties for injuring trees on public space and private property. The Tree Bill was approved in December 2002 and requires an annual program for tree planting and care, preparation of a tree master plan, and the development of maintenance standards for trees on public space.

605.15b The Tree Canopy Protection Amendment Act of 2016 was enacted to build upon the previous Tree Bill and increase Washington, DC’s tree canopy. By reducing the circumference of special trees from 55 inches to 44 inches and creating a designation of heritage trees—which are over 100 inches in circumference and cannot be cut down unless deemed hazardous by a Washington, DC arborist—the older tree canopy is better protected. The bill also assesses permits for removal of special trees and fines for damage to, and illicit removal of, special and heritage trees.

605.16 Map 6.2 Existing Tree Cover in Washington, DC and Surrounding Region

(Source: OP, 2018)

##### **10-A DCMR § 606** E-2.2 CONSERVATION OF RIVERS, WETLANDS, AND RIPARIAN AREAS {#sec-10-a606 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A606}

606.1 Washington, DC is situated at the confluence of two great rivers: the Anacostia and the Potomac. Both rivers have been altered over the centuries to accommodate development, highways, railroads, airports, military bases, parkland, federal monuments, and other vestiges of life in the nation’s capital. Throughout the 20th century, the Potomac fared better than the Anacostia in this regard—much of its shoreline is publicly accessible and has been conserved as parkland. For years, the Anacostia suffered the fate of being Washington, DC’s lesser known and less maintained river. As its natural beauty yielded to industry, its waters became polluted and the river became a divide that separated lower-income, predominantly Black neighborhoods from the rest of the District.

606.2 In the first years of the 21st century, a major initiative, the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI), was launched to restore the Anacostia River. While the initiative is perhaps best known for its efforts to reclaim the shoreline for recreation and bring new life to underused sites, its programs to improve the natural environment are equally important. A range of environmental initiatives is now being implemented to restore wetlands (land consisting of marshes or swamps) and estuarine habitat (partially enclosed bodies of brackish water), improve water quality, and increase environmental education about the river. Today, the turnaround of the Anacostia waterfront is a national model for urban rivers in terms of environmental restoration, public access, economic development, and inclusive growth.

606.3 Foremost among the recent initiatives is the Clean Rivers Project, DC Water’s ongoing program to reduce combined sewer overflows into Washington, DC’s waterways: the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and Rock Creek. The project is a massive infrastructure and support program designed to capture and clean wastewater during rainfalls before it ever reaches the rivers.

606.3a Text Box: Anacostia River Restoration

A clean river is the foundation for the Anacostia River revitalization and makes all other objectives and investments in the waterfront possible. Once dubbed the District’s forgotten river because of heavy pollution, lack of accessibility, and neglect of its banks, the Anacostia River is on its way to becoming fully fishable and swimmable. While photos from a decade ago show a river covered in floating trash, today the Anacostia River is experiencing an environmental rebirth characterized by improved water quality, wildlife repopulation, and more accessible natural shorelines. To transform the Anacostia River into a fishable and swimmable river, in 2014 Washington, DC launched a long-term project to address contaminated sediments called A Cleaner Anacostia River. This project is the most comprehensive approach to restoration in the river’s history, and Washington, DC allocated $45 million to support clean-up efforts.

606.3b Improved Water Quality

The restoration of five streams (Pope Branch, Watts Branch, Nash Run, Alger Park, and Springhouse Run) that flow into the Anacostia has diminished sediment, sewage, and trash that pollute the river’s waters. Legal requirements paved the way for the local water and sewer utility, DC Water, to initiate the biggest infrastructure project in Washington, DC since the building of the Metrorail system: the DC Clean Rivers Project, a $2.7 billion sewer tunnel system and greening program to decrease the amount of untreated sewage spills into the river by 98 percent. The greening program includes strategies to promote rainwater detention and infiltration into the soil and techniques such as rain gardens, porous pavements, green roofs, and other technologies within targeted sewersheds.

606.3c In addition to the ongoing remediation of several polluted sites, including at Kenilworth and Boathouse Row, A Cleaner Anacostia River will lead to an enforceable clean up strategy for the riverbed itself. The redevelopment of old and highly polluting industrial areas on the riverfront has stemmed industrial runoff. Washington, DC and its partners have also worked to reduce trash pollution in the river through trash traps installed on various tributaries, anti-littering education, illegal dumping enforcement programs, and volunteer clean up events, preventing millions of pounds of trash from entering the Anacostia River each year. Washington, DC’s stormwater regulations and incentive programs (e.g., the RiverSmart programs and Stormwater Retention Credit Price Lock Program) are driving the installation of GI across the District to reduce pollution and erosion from stormwater runoff.

606.4 Since 2012, Washington, DC has restored over two miles of streams, including Pope Branch, Nash Run, Alger Park, Springhouse Run, Linnean Park, and Broad Branch. Sustainable DC 2.0 calls for additional stream restoration efforts, toward a goal of 10 total miles. Stream restoration employs a set of techniques to help improve the environmental health of a stream, ranging from simply removing a disturbance that inhibits natural stream function, to stabilizing stream banks or installing stormwater management facilities such as wetlands.

606.5 When completed, these initiatives will greatly reduce sewage overflows and pollutant discharges, reduce stream bank erosion, improve water quality, slow down stormwater flows, uncover long-buried tributary streams, and bring native plant and animal species back to the river. It will also improve access to once-polluted, now restored natural resources to adjoining communities. Improving the health of the Anacostia River will help achieve broader national goals for a healthier Chesapeake Bay. Map 6.3 indicates the location of rivers and streams in Washington, DC.

See the Infrastructure Element for more information about the Clean Rivers Project and other initiatives.

606.6 Policy E-2.2.1: River Conservation

Improve environmental conditions along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and other water bodies, including shorelines, wetlands, islands, tributaries, and the rivers themselves. Particular attention should be given to eliminating toxic sediments, improving river edges to restore vegetation and reduce erosion, enhancing wetlands and wildlife habitats, creating new wetlands, and reducing litter. Particular focus on the Anacostia is important to address its history of neglect and pollution and to improve conditions for adjoining neighborhoods.

606.7 Policy E-2.2.2: Waterfront Habitat Restoration

Undertake a range of environmental initiatives along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers to eliminate combined sewer overflows, reduce urban stormwater runoff, restore wetlands and tributary streams, install natural shorelines when possible, increase oxygen levels in the water, remediate toxins in the riverbed, remove seawalls when possible, clean and redevelop contaminated brownfield sites, and enhance natural habitat.

606.8 Policy E-2.2.3: Retention of Environmentally Sensitive Areas as Open Space

Retain environmentally fragile areas such as wetlands and riparian areas along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers as critical areas. In areas under federal jurisdiction, such as Rock Creek Park and some portions of the Anacostia waterfront, work with NPS to conserve and carefully manage such areas, and to implement an effective no-net-loss policy.

606.9 Map 6.3 Waterways in Washington, DC

(Source: DOEE and DC GIS, 2018)

606.10 Policy E-2.2.4: Identification, Protection, and Restoration of Wetlands

Identify and protect wetlands and riparian habitat on private and public land. Require official surveys when development is proposed in areas where wetlands are believed to be present to ensure that wetlands are preserved. Implement the Wetland Conservation Plan to achieve the objective of no net loss and eventual net gain of wetlands. Work collaboratively with stakeholders to undertake wetlands restoration, enhancement, and creation projects on public and private lands to mitigate the impacts of stormwater runoff, sea level rise, and storm events, and to improve habitats.

606.11 Policy E-2.2.5: Wetland Buffers

Maintain natural buffers around existing and restored wetlands to reduce the likelihood of environmental degradation from runoff and human activities.

606.12 Action E-2.2.A: Potomac and Anacostia River Habitat Improvements

Work collaboratively with federal agencies, upstream jurisdictions, and environmental advocacy groups to implement conservation measures for Washington, DC’s waterways by:

Restoring tidal wetlands while maintaining access along the Anacostia River and infilled areas that were historically tidal wetlands, consistent with the 2015 District of Columbia Wildlife Action Plan;

Installing stormwater management best practices upland of tributary streams;

Creating new stormwater wetlands along tributary streams;

Restoring degraded streams in Washington, DC and, where possible, daylighting streams by removing them from pipes to let them flow uncovered;

Removing bulkheads and seawalls and replacing them with natural shoreline and fringe wetlands, where possible, to provide protection from flooding and erosion;

Restoring degraded gullies downstream of stormwater outfalls;

Preventing litter and trash from entering waterways and removing it when it is present;

Encouraging natural buffers compatible with the recommendations of the AWI Framework Plan; and

Preventing the net loss of parkland and improving access to the waterfront and river trails.

606.13 Action E-2.2.B: Wetland Setback Standards

Establish clear regulations to conserve and preserve wetlands, streams, and their buffers during development and ensure compliance with these regulations during plan review, permitting, and inspections.

606.14 Action E-2.2.C: Wetland Planting and Maintenance

Plant and maintain wetlands to achieve the objective of no net loss and eventual net gain of wetlands. Focus efforts in areas of the District that offer the best opportunity and potential for conservation, as identified in Washington, DC’s 2015 Wildlife Action Plan.

606.15 Action E-2.2.D: Anacostia River Sedimentation Project

Develop and implement an Anacostia River remediation work plan that restores fish and wildlife habitats while improving public access to the river.

See the Water Quality section of this element for additional recommendations for the Anacostia River watershed.

##### **10-A DCMR § 607** E-2.3 CONSERVING SOIL AND REDUCING EROSION {#sec-10-a607 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A607}

607.1 Soils in Washington, DC affect the suitability of land for buildings, roads and infrastructure, community gardening, and tree planting. Even in a built-out city like Washington, DC, soil and underlying geologic characteristics must be considered when designing foundations, basements, and other structures. Good soil management also involves the control of erosion resulting from natural forces like rain and wind. Erosion can undermine foundations, destabilize hillsides, and lead to sedimentation of streams. Measures to reduce erosion are particularly important during construction, when soil is disturbed and exposed to the elements.

607.2 Policy E-2.3.1: Preventing Erosion

Public and private construction activities should not result in soil erosion or the creation of unstable soil conditions. Support the use of retaining walls and other best management practices on new and existing properties that reduce erosion hazards. Erosion requirements shall be implemented through building permit and plan reviews and enforced through the permitting and regulatory processes.

607.3 Policy E-2.3.2: Grading and Vegetation Removal

Encourage the retention of natural vegetation and topography on new development sites. Prevent or require mitigation of construction practices that result in unstable soil and hillside conditions. Grading of hillside sites should be minimized, and graded slopes should be quickly revegetated for stabilization.

607.4 Policy E-2.3.3: Reducing Sedimentation

Prevent sedimentation of rivers and streams by implementing comprehensive stormwater management measures, including regular maintenance of storm drains and catch basins and the use of sedimentation ponds where appropriate.

607.5 Policy E-2.3.4: Restoring Eroded Areas

Abate soil erosion problems in developed areas, particularly where erosion has resulted from poor site design, aging streets and alleys, or deferred maintenance.

##### **10-A DCMR § 608** E-2.4 PRESERVING STEEP SLOPES AND STREAM VALLEYS {#sec-10-a608 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A608}

608.1 Wooded hillsides and stream valleys provide beauty and visual relief in Washington, DC, particularly in Upper Northwest and in neighborhoods in Wards 7 and 8. Many of Washington, DC’s stream valleys have been preserved by NPS, protecting local waterways and providing corridors for wildlife and recreation. But preservation alone has not fully safeguarded these areas. Development and tree removal on private properties can reduce their natural, unspoiled character and cause erosion and water quality problems. Along some stream valleys, illegal dumping remains a problem. In some places, the streams themselves have been buried or diverted into stormwater culverts; streams have been restored to their natural condition at Alger Park, Springhouse Run, and Watts Branch.

608.2 A similar set of challenges is present on steep slopes, generally defined as slopes with a grade of 25 percent or more. As Map 6.4 indicates, such slopes are concentrated in protected areas like Rock Creek Park and the Potomac Palisades. But they are also present in neighborhoods like Forest Hills and Woodland-Normanstone, and on large sites like the St. Elizabeths Campus.

608.3 Policy E-2.4.1: Conservation of Steep Slopes

Strongly discourage development on steep slopes (i.e., greater than 25 percent or with highly erodible soil), such as those found along stream valleys in Upper Northwest and Southeast DC. Planning and building regulations should require that any construction on such slopes is sensitively designed and includes slope stabilization measures.

608.4 Policy E-2.4.2: Management of Uplands Along Stream Valleys

Protect stream valley parks by limiting construction, requiring sensitive design, and retaining vegetation on adjacent upland properties. Development of land draining to stream valleys shall be managed as needed to protect flora, fauna, and water quality; prevent erosion and siltation of streams; minimize intrusion of views from the parks; and retain a natural gradient green buffer between the built environment and these natural areas.

608.5 Policy E-2.4.3: Open Space Protection Along Stream Valleys

Preserve publicly owned land adjacent to streams, ravines, and contiguous tracts of habitat as densely vegetated open space. Natural drainage channels and buffer zones in these areas should be protected from the adverse effects of nearby urban uses.

608.6 Policy E-2.4.4: Channelization of Streams

Retain streams and ravines in their natural condition rather than constructing human-made channels. Where possible, restore channelized streams to more natural conditions. Where alteration is necessary, encourage design solutions that retain or re-create natural ecological values.

608.7 Action E-2.4.A: Expand Tree and Slope Protection

Work with neighborhood and community groups, homeowners and other landowners, and Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) to identify additional areas to which the Tree and Slope Protection (TSP) should be extended. Such areas should generally abut streams or public open spaces and should have steep slopes, significant natural tree cover, and some potential for future development. Particular attention should be given to extending the TSP to lands in Wards 7 and 8.

608.8 Map 6.4 TSP Areas, Steep Slopes, and Areas with Erodible Soils

(Source: OP, 2018)

608.9 Action E-2.4.B: Hillside Conservation Easements

Explore land trusts, conservation easements, and other tools for preserving steep slopes and hillside areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 609** E-2.5 SUSTAINING WILDLIFE {#sec-10-a609 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A609}

609.1 At the time of initial European settlement, Washington, DC was home to species as diverse as buffalo, bear, sturgeon, cranes, rattlesnakes, wolves, and bobcats. While these animals were killed off or driven from the local landscape decades ago, Washington, DC continues to provide habitat for hundreds of species of birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, and invertebrates. Raccoon, red foxes, rabbits, white-tailed deer, cardinals, and mockingbirds have adapted to human activities and are not uncommon. Much of Washington, DC’s biodiversity can be attributed to undeveloped natural areas along Rock Creek, the two rivers, and the Civil War defenses of Washington, also known as the Fort Circle Parks. The District’s parks, street trees, institutional lands, and backyards are important to sustaining wildlife diversity. Many commercial and residential neighborhoods, as well as the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, are located adjacent to permanently protected natural areas. The close proximity between developed areas and undeveloped habitats creates a dynamic between wildlife and habitat conservation and human activity.

609.2 District government is committed to protecting Washington, DC’s natural areas while also providing all residents with convenient access to nature and green places. Pursuant to federal law, DOEE’s Fisheries and Wildlife Division prepared a Wildlife Action Plan in 2005, with a comprehensive update in 2015. The plan—which was prepared in partnership with public and local wildlife agencies and organizations to identify priority actions for conserving wildlife and wildlife habitats over the next 10 years—lists the animal wildlife in the District with the greatest conservation needs and describes specific terrestrial and aquatic threats. As an urban area, Washington, DC bears a high degree of responsibility for conserving urban species.

609.3 In 2016, Washington, DC adopted the Fisheries and Wildlife Omnibus Amendment Act to help protect critical wildlife habitats and better manage invasive species. The District’s State Wildlife Action Plan, last updated in 2015, is a comprehensive, 10-year road map for sustaining, conserving, and preserving Washington, DC’s wildlife and habitats.

609.4 Policy E-2.5.1: Habitat Restoration

Encourage interagency efforts to restore native habitat in Washington, DC’s rivers, streams, forests, meadows, wetlands, parklands, and developed lands, and encourage public-private partnerships and partnerships with nongovernmental organizations to re-create native habitats within the District. Where appropriate, designate critical areas for protection within Washington, DC.

609.5 Policy E-2.5.2: Protected Species

As required by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, protect endangered, threatened, and other special status species from the adverse effects of human activities.

609.6 Policy E-2.5.3: Habitat Management on Private Land

Encourage environmentally sound landscaping and gardening techniques by District homeowners and institutional landowners, and on federal lands to maximize the habitat value of privately owned and federal land. Such techniques should include reduction of herbicide and pesticide use; the selection of disease-resistant, drought-resistant, and native species; the removal of invasive plants; the use of rain gardens to reduce runoff; and landscaping that provides food and cover for wildlife.

609.7 Policy E-2.5.4: Conserve Critical Areas

Preserve, conserve, or enhance the environmental function and value of critical areas—including areas containing species of local importance, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and wetlands—while balancing the needs of a growing District.

609.8 Policy E-2.5.5: Manage Invasive Species

Support approaches that limit the spread of invasive plants, animals, and other organisms that threaten wildlife and wildlife habitats.

609.9 Policy E-2.5.6 Ecosystem Services and Nature-Based Design

Support and encourage ecosystem services and nature-based design related to air and water quality, noise reduction, flood risk reduction, native habitat re-creation, and food supply, among others.

609.9a Text Box: Ecosystem Services and Nature-Based Design

Ecosystem services are the benefits that humans freely gain from the natural environment and from properly functioning ecosystems. Such ecosystems include agroecosystems, forest ecosystems, grassland ecosystems, and aquatic ecosystems. Collectively, these benefits are known as ecosystem services and are often integral to the provisioning of clean drinking water, the decomposition of waste, and the natural pollination of crops and other plants.

609.9b Nature-based design elements can include a visual connection with nature, the presence of water, the use of natural materials, and incorporation of dynamic and diffuse light. These elements can provide humans with physical health and mental health benefits, as well as other benefits.

609.9c Project examples include but are not limited to green roofs or farms, green facades (e.g., vertical gardens), GI projects, net-zero or net-positive energy-use buildings, and use of alternative energy sources.

609.10 Policy E-2.5.7: Meadow Habitats

Create meadow habitats by converting large, contiguous mowed areas to native meadows and/or shrub habitats where feasible. Reduce mowed grassy areas in road and highway rights-of-way and on District-owned property by converting those areas to meadows with native plants and small trees. The design of these areas should balance habitat enhancement with public safety, including vehicle and pedestrian sightlines.

609.11 Action E-2.5.A: Implementation of the Wildlife Action Plan

Implement the 2015 Wildlife Management Plan, including programs to increase meadow habitats in the District, restore tidal wetlands, propagate native plants, and create vernal pools, artificial nesting structures, wildlife crossings and corridors, and resident science projects.

609.12 Action E-2.5.B: Data Improvements

Improve the collection and monitoring of data on plant and animal life within Washington, DC, particularly data on rare, endangered, threatened, and candidate species, and species of greatest conservation need.

609.13 Action E-2.5.C: Pollinator Pathways

Create pollinator pathways and other contiguous habitat paths that allow the migration of species into natural habitats and that support the goals of the Wildlife Action Plan. Incorporate biodiversity and the use of native plants in GI along roads and sidewalks.

609.14 Action E-2.5.D: Landscape Practices

Encourage the use of landscape practices compatible with industry best practices and certifications, including water-efficient landscape design using native species and GI. Incorporate biophilic design elements to enhance health and well-being by providing a connection between people and nature.

609.14a Text Box: Biophilic Design

Biophilic design is incorporating nature—plants, water, light, etc.—into the built environment, including homes and offices. Biophilic elements have measurable benefits relative to human productivity, emotional well-being, stress reduction, learning, and healing. Biophilic features can also foster increased appreciation and stewardship of the natural environment. By providing guidance on how to incorporate natural elements into the built environment, District government will help to promote well-being and also be a resource for other entities.

For further examples of biophilic principles, see the Urban Design; Parks, Recreation, and Open Space; and Community Services and Facilities elements.

##### **10-A DCMR § 610** E-3 CONSERVING NATURAL RESOURCES {#sec-10-a610 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A610}

610.1 This section of the Environmental Protection Element addresses the conservation of water and energy resources and the reduction of solid waste. Water and energy are both limited resources, subject to growing demand, constrained supply, and aging infrastructure. Using more renewable sources of energy and reducing the use of fossil fuels have become critical to maintaining Washington, DC’s sustainability. The District has enacted several laws to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy, notably the Clean and Affordable Energy Act and the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard Act. Washington, DC also released a plan with a long-term road map for drastically cutting greenhouse emissions: Clean Energy DC (see text box on Clean Energy DC for more information).

610.2 Similarly, reducing solid waste that is incinerated or disposed of in landfills can have beneficial environmental and economic impacts—both on the local and the regional scale. Recycling and composting programs, which are mandated by District law, can effectively reduce natural resource consumption, expand the local economy, and reduce the need for trash transfer facilities in Washington, DC.

610.3 Washington, DC’s Clean and Affordable Energy Act of 2008, effective October 22, 2008 (D.C. Law 17-250; D.C. Official Code § 8-1773.01 et seq.), fosters more energy efficiency and conservation, energy diversification through the production of clean and renewable energy, and energy security through a distributive energy infrastructure system.

##### **10-A DCMR § 611** E-3.1 CONSERVING WATER {#sec-10-a611 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A611}

611.1 Washington, DC’s drinking water is sourced from the Potomac River. While there have not been any water supply issues, severe drought conditions could stress the Potomac River. With competing demands in the watershed during the next 20 years, the District should explore opportunities for water security in close coordination with DC Water. These efforts should include community participation, and specifically consider water security needs for communities of color, low-income, and other vulnerable populations.

611.2 DC Water encourages customers to use water wisely and has a number of programs aimed at changing consumer behavior and improving service reliability. Looking to the future, a sustained effort by DC Water and other District agencies will be necessary to reduce water waste and maximize conservation, particularly because water treatment is energy-intensive and contributes to GHG emissions. DC Water’s High Water Usage Alert (HUNA) system notifies residents when water usage is higher than normal and helps them track and stay informed about their water usage.

See the Infrastructure Element for more information on water supply.

611.2a Text Box: Grey and Black Water

Both greywater and blackwater are types of wastewater. Greywater is water that may contain chemicals or contaminants that may be harmful to humans. Greywater can come from shower, sink, and dishwasher drains. Blackwater is contaminated water from flood and sewage waters. Blackwater can come from a flooded river or a backed-up toilet or sewage line. Blackwater can contain harmful contaminants like bacteria, mold, and viruses that can be extremely harmful to humans.

611.3 Policy E-3.1.1: Promoting Water Conservation

Promote water conservation efforts in Washington, DC. This conservation will be necessary to keep current overall consumption levels as the District continues to grow.

611.4 Action E-3.1.A: Leak Detection and Repair Program

Continue DC Water’s efforts to reduce water loss from leaking mains, including reducing the backlog of deferred maintenance, using audits and monitoring equipment to identify leaks, performing expeditious repairs of leaks, and instructing customers on procedures for detecting and reporting leaks. Incorporate smart infrastructure that provides automatic feedback to identify irregularities in the system, leading to greater leak detection and swifter repair.

611.5 Action E-3.1.B: Building Code Review

Support efforts by the Construction Code Coordinating Board and the Green Building Advisory Council (GBAC) to strengthen building, plumbing, and landscaping standards and codes in order to identify possible new water conservation measures.

611.6 Action E-3.1.C: Water Conservation Education

Work collaboratively with DC Water and other partners to launch a large-scale marketing and educational campaign, bringing greater awareness to the need for water conservation, and to the savings achievable through conservation and use of efficient technology, and to achieve a reduction in the daily per capita consumption of water resources. This per capita reduction is needed to maintain Washington, DC’s total water consumption level as the District grows. Special efforts should be made to reach low-income customers and institutional users. Engage the public, particularly low-income residents and communities of color, in programs for water conservation and water security.

611.7 Action E-3.1.D: Water Conservation Financial Incentive Program

Explore mechanisms to create a water conservation financial incentive program. Similar to energy efficiency and renewable energy incentives, consider a program that creates stronger incentives for residents, small businesses, and private development to use less water in daily operations. The program should include both landscaping and building efficiency.

611.8 Action E-3.1.E: Distributed Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Recycling

Explore the use of distributed rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling to reduce demand on potable water systems during shortages or disruptions.

##### **10-A DCMR § 612** E-3.2 CONSERVING ENERGY AND REDUCING GHG EMISSIONS {#sec-10-a612 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A612}

612.1 Greater energy efficiency results in a cleaner District, better air quality, and lower energy bills for District residents. More than $2.3 billion a year is spent on energy by District residents, employees, businesses, visitors, and government. Pursuant to the Clean Energy DC Act, the District will establish building energy performance standards (BEPS) to gradually improve the efficiency of the District’s existing building stock, reducing Washington, DC’s greatest source of GHG emissions. The energy used to power, heat, and cool buildings remains by far the largest contributor to the District’s GHG emissions, accounting for nearly 75 percent of total emissions in 2013. It may be possible to slow the growth of these costs in the future, even as Washington, DC grows with new people and jobs. Conserving energy is the cheapest and fastest way to cut GHG emissions and will be essential to achieving the District’s climate goals. Energy conservation and efficiency measures can help reduce dependency on outside energy sources, reduce energy costs for the District’s residents most in need, and improve environmental quality.

612.2 While energy conservation efforts in America started in part due to concerns about supply shortages, declining demand and increased supply have reduced these risks. Due to energy-efficiency efforts, District-wide energy use declined between 2006 and 2016, despite a rapidly growing population. Today, the prime energy challenges the District faces are energy costs and the environmental impacts of energy use—most critically, energy use that produces GHGs. The most common GHGs include carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The use of fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas to generate electricity, natural gas for heating and hot water, and gasoline and diesel in vehicles are the prime contributors in the District to increasing concentrations of GHG emissions in the atmosphere, which cause climate change. Rising global temperatures will severely harm societies and ecosystems around the world and in the District, specifically. Washington, DC has joined the global effort to reduce GHGs and is committed to reducing its GHG footprint by 50 percent by 2032 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. Living up to these commitments requires both reducing energy use and increasing the use of renewable, carbon-free energy sources.

612.2a Text Box: Net-Zero Energy Buildings

Net-zero energy buildings combine energy efficiency and renewable energy generation to consume only as much energy as can be produced on- and offsite through renewable resources each year. Achieving net-zero energy is an ambitious yet increasingly achievable goal that is gaining momentum across geographic regions and markets. Clean Energy DC and Sustainable DC 2.0 include targets designed to ensure the highest standards of building performance and operation for all new construction, including moving toward a net-zero energy building code by 2026, while advancing health and overall livability.

612.2b Energy supply and demand should continue to be carefully managed, and efficiency should be improved in all sectors. The related text box (entitled Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018) provides an overview of Clean Energy DC, the District’s official guide for meeting future energy needs. With the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2018, by 2032, 100 percent of the District’s electric generation mix is to be renewable energy, with 10 percent of that energy derived from District-generated solar resources by 2041. Further, if Washington, DC is to eliminate all carbon emissions by 2050, new net-zero energy buildings will play a critical role. To facilitate the construction of systems that will support these goals, policies should be updated to reflect market conditions in the region and be designed to do more than simply facilitate growth of particular technologies. Amended distributed energy resource laws govern issues such as storage, efficiency, and demand management, and should create favorable conditions for the continued adoption of carbon-neutral and resilient energy generation solutions.

612.3 Policy E-3.2.1: Carbon Neutrality

Support land use policies that move Washington, DC toward achieving District-wide carbon neutrality by 2050. This means that the District will eliminate GHG emissions, or offset any remaining emissions, by supporting initiatives that will reduce emissions, such as tree planting, renewable energy generation, and land conservation. In the short term, the District government will develop a detailed implementation plan with clear milestones in order to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

612.4 Policy E-3.2.2 Net-Zero Buildings

Provide incentives for new buildings to meet net-zero energy design standards, as called for in Clean Energy DC and Sustainable DC 2.0. Establish a path to the phased adoption of net-zero codes between 2022 and 2026. The District’s building energy codes should be updated again by 2026 to require that all new buildings achieve net-zero energy use or better. Prior to 2026, the District should provide incentives to projects that voluntarily seek to achieve net-zero energy use.

612.5 Policy E-3.2.3: Renewable Energy

Promote the efficient use of energy, additional use of renewable energy, and a reduction of unnecessary energy expenses. The overarching objective should be to achieve reductions in per capita energy consumption.

612.6 Policy E-3.2.4: Energy Availability

Improve energy availability and buffer District consumers from fluctuations in energy supply and prices. This should be achieved through the District’s energy purchasing policies, financial assistance programs for lower-income customers, incentives for green power, and regulatory changes that ensure that local energy markets are operating efficiently.

612.7 Policy E-3.2.5: Reducing Home Heating and Cooling Costs

Encourage the use of energy-efficient systems and methods for home insulation, heating, and cooling, both to conserve natural resources and also to reduce energy costs for those residents who are least able to afford them.

612.8 Policy E-3.2.6: Alternative Sustainable and Innovative Energy Sources

Support the development and application of renewable energy technologies, such as active, passive, and photovoltaic solar energy; fuel cells; and other sustainable sources such as shared solar facilities in neighborhoods and low- or zero-carbon thermal sources, such as geothermal energy or wastewater heat exchange. Such technology should be used to reduce GHGs and imported energy, provide opportunities for economic and community development, and benefit environmental quality. A key goal is the continued availability and access to unobstructed, direct sunlight for distributed-energy generators and passive solar homes relying on the sun as a primary energy source.

612.9 Policy E-3.2.7: Energy-Efficient Building and Site Planning

Include provisions for energy efficiency and for the use of alternative energy sources in the District’s planning, zoning, and building standards. Encourage new development to exceed minimum code requirements and contribute to energy efficiency and clean energy goals.

612.10 Policy E-3.2.8: Locally Generated Electricity

Support locally generated electricity from renewable sources, including both commercial and residential renewable energy projects. Policies could support the option to share a solar project among several neighbors (i.e. community solar), financial incentives, research and education, and maximizing existing programs to help install solar panels and solar thermal systems throughout the District.

612.10a Text Box: DC Green Bank

The DC Green Bank is an innovative policy tool that will use public purpose funding to attract and accelerate private investment. The DC Green Bank can be used by residents or businesses to finance sustainable projects and will offer loans, leases, credit enhancements, and other financing services to close funding gaps for clean energy projects and energy efficiency improvements.

612.10a1 Text Box: Fossil Fuel Use in Washington, DC

Along with increasing energy efficiency and conservation, reducing the carbon content in electricity and fuels is also critically important. Fossil fuels remain the dominant source of energy for electricity, for heating buildings through natural gas or fuel oils, and for motor vehicles. Over the long term, phasing fossil fuels out of the District’s energy supply will be essential to achieving the District’s climate commitments. In fact, 96 percent of the emissions in the District are attributable to using energy, and nearly 75 percent of those emissions come from the energy used to heat, cool, and power buildings. Energy generation from fossil fuels also hurts regional air quality. One of the biggest challenges facing the District is how to reduce costs, reduce energy use overall, and shift the power supply to renewable sources like solar and wind—all while the District’s population and economy continue to grow. Figure 6.3 displays regional sources of GHG emissions.

612.10a2 Washington, DC’s goal is to reduce GHG emissions by 50 percent by 2032 through increasing clean energy and reducing dirty energy—meaning the District government will help businesses, residents, and municipal operations improve energy efficiency and increase their access to renewable energy. Clean energy is energy generated with no pollution or carbon emissions, in contrast to dirty fuels (such as coal and oil). Washington, DC already has some significant tools: The DC Sustainable Energy Utility (DCSEU) was created to help residents and businesses use less energy and save money, while Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing and the newly established Green Bank provide innovative financing for energy efficiency and clean energy upgrades.

612.10a3 Washington, DC is seeking to remove barriers to electricity infrastructure modernization, including neighborhood-scale energy systems, which allow neighborhoods to cut costs, help the environment, and recover quickly from power outages or prevent them completely. Neighborhood-scale energy systems benefit from the efficiencies of coordinating across several properties. Individual buildings see these benefits in the form of cost savings, system reliability, and other economic and environmental gains that come from centralizing energy production and managing a shared distribution network. The community can benefit from these systems because they help reduce GHG, can use renewable energy, and can align with other community and environmental efforts.

612.11 Figure 6.3 Metropolitan Washington Emissions Inventory, 2006-2016.

(Source: DOEE, 2016)

612.12 Policy E-3.2.9: Energy Efficiency for Major Employers

Continue efforts that enable major employers in Washington, DC— including the government, institutions, schools, and the private sector—to implement energy conservation measures.

612.13 Policy E-3.2.10: Consumer Education on Energy

Promote resident awareness concerning energy issues through educational and demonstration initiatives and other programs.

612.14 Policy E-3.2.11: Conserving Energy Through Rate Structure

Continue to propose rate changes that encourage the efficient use of energy resources. Economic incentives and disincentives should vary based on the different classes of rate payers and should contribute to the economic viability of energy sources.

612.15 Policy E-3.2.12: Resilient Energy Systems

Increase the resilience of Washington, DC’s energy systems through partnerships that enable the District to respond to energy emergencies and interruptions in supply to achieve a secure and reliable energy infrastructure that is also resilient and able to respond to and restore services rapidly in the event of an outage. Participate in regional efforts to plan for such emergencies, including those organized by MWCOG.

612.16 Policy E-3.2.13: Coordinating Energy Policies to Reduce GHGs

New and existing energy policies should reduce GHG emissions and increase resiliency and innovation for the District.

612.17 Policy E-3.2.14: Clean Energy DC Plan

Per the goals and actions outlined in the Clean Energy DC Plan, develop building codes and policies that require renewable energy, either for purchase or on-site installation, to make up a portion of every building’s energy usage.

612.18 Policy E-3.2.15: Neighborhood-Scale Energy

Reduce regulatory, political, and physical barriers to modernizing electricity infrastructure to enable the deployment of neighborhood- or campus-scale energy systems and distributed energy resources.

612.19 Action E-3.2.A: Energy Conservation Measures

Pursuant to the District’s Clean Energy DC Plan, implement energy conservation programs for the residential, commercial, and institutional sectors. These programs include financial incentives, technical assistance, building and site design standards, public outreach, and other measures to reduce energy consumption and improve efficiency.

612.20 Action E-3.2.B: Assistance Programs for Lower-Income Households

Implement Clean Energy DC Plan programs to reduce energy costs for lower-income households, including the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and additional measures to reduce monthly energy.

612.21 Action E-3.2.C: Consumer Education on Energy

Increase education and public awareness around energy issues, including school curricula, awards programs, demonstration projects, websites, and multimedia production.

612.22 Action E-3.2.D: Energy Regulatory Reforms

Enact legislative and regulatory reforms, including but not limited to building and zoning codes as well as utility regulations aimed at improving energy efficiency and expanded clean, distributed energy generation in Washington, DC to reduce energy costs and improve reliability and resilience. Permitting agencies should have technological expertise in clean energy solutions. Permitting times and costs should conduce toward rapid adaptation of clean energy solutions.

612.23 Action E-3.2.E: Energy Assurance Plan

Regularly amend the District’s Energy Assurance Plan and collaborate with regional partners such as MWCOG and the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO). Regularly scheduled training for energy emergencies should be provided to appropriate District personnel.

612.24 Action E-3.2.F: Energy Conservation Area

Explore the establishment of neighborhood-based energy conservation areas or districts to incentivize energy efficiency, distributed generation, storage, and demand response. This is an opportunity for consumers to play a significant role in the operation of the electric grid by reducing or shifting their electricity usage during peak periods in response to time-based rates or other forms of financial incentives, which will contribute to and achieve the District-wide energy performance outcomes as defined by Clean Energy DC.

612.25 Action E-3.2.G: Energy Supply

Explore and adopt policies that allow for every District resident to have a cost-competitive option for the purchase of a 100 percent clean and renewable energy supply.

612.26 Action E-3.2.H: Solar Easements

Continue to review and modify, as needed, zoning regulations and other relevant District regulations regarding solar easements.

612.27 Action E-3.2.I: Building Energy Performance Standard

Develop and implement a BEPS, as described in Clean Energy DC, which would establish regular energy check-ups of buildings and require the owners of poorly performing buildings to improve the energy efficiency of their buildings.

612.28 Action E-3.2.J: Neighborhood-Scale Energy

By 2021, complete a neighborhood-scale clean energy system development plan to target high-load growth areas and at-risk communities and begin implementation. Encourage large projects or aggregated projects driven by energy consumers to contribute to the District’s resilience goals through neighborhood-scale clean energy strategies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 613** E-3.3 REDUCING SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL NEEDS {#sec-10-a613 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A613}

613.1 Sustainable materials management practices and policies consider the entire life cycle of products, from materials extraction, manufacturing, distribution, and usage through end-of-life management, including solid waste disposal and recovery. This systematic approach is supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the goals of reducing environmental impact, conserving natural resources, and reducing costs. Sustainable materials managing programs implemented in the District include sustainable purchasing guidelines, product stewardship programs, and waste diversion and resource recovery activities.

613.2 In 1988, the District passed legislation requiring recycling in commercial buildings and setting targets for residential recycling. The legislation also contained provisions for the District’s government to increase the use of recycled products through its procurement practices. Despite these mandates, recycling efforts were sporadic during the 1990s, and it was not until the early 2000s that most of the current programs were initiated. Washington, DC still lags behind many U.S. cities in the percentage of waste it diverts from landfills; however, recent improvements have been significant.

613.3 Sustainable DC included the goal of reducing the waste generated and disposed of in Washington, DC. This led to the creation of the Sustainable Solid Waste Management Amendment Act in 2014, which called for the District to achieve 80 percent waste diversion District-wide without the use of landfills, waste-to-energy, or incineration by 2032. Accomplishing this goal requires the collaboration of District agencies, business, nonprofits, residents, and neighboring jurisdictions.

613.3a Text Box: Zero Waste DC

Zero Waste DC is an initiative that enables the District to speak with one voice in developing and providing resources that help residents, businesses, and visitors move toward zero waste. Zero Waste DC brings together government agencies and programs responsible for developing and implementing cost-effective strategies for converting waste to resources, improving human and environmental health, reducing GHG emissions, creating inclusive economic opportunity, and conserving natural resources.

613.4 Waste diversion is the process of diverting waste from landfills. Source reduction is the elimination of waste before it is created. Solid waste can be diverted from landfills through source reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, and anaerobic digestion. Additional waste diversion can be achieved through public education, recycling of construction and demolition debris, and expanded recycling in schools, offices, and other places of employment. Among the many benefits of recycling is the fact that it reduces demand on the Washington, DC’s trash transfer stations, with attendant benefits to nearby neighborhoods.

See the Infrastructure Element for more information on solid waste disposal.

613.4a Text Box: Sustainable Solid Waste Management

The District’s Sustainable Solid Waste Management Amendment Act sets a bold vision to divert 80 percent of all solid waste generated in the District through source reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, and anaerobic digestion. This law applies to residential, commercial, and industrial waste and requires that waste is source separated at the point of discard.

613.4b To support this goal, the Office of Waste Diversion was established in 2015 in the Department of Public Works (DPW). This office is charged with supervising and coordinating the implementation of the District’s waste diversion policies and programs.

613.4c The Sustainable Solid Waste Management Amendment Act established a sustainable solid waste management hierarchy with the following in order of priority:

Source reduction and reuse

Recycling or composting of solid waste, or conversion of compostable solid waste into biofuel

3. Landfill or waste-to-energy

613.5 Policy E-3.3.1: Solid Waste Source Reduction and Recycling

Actively promote the reduction of the solid waste stream through reduction, reuse, recycling, recovery, composting, and other measures. Use appropriate regulatory, management, and marketing strategies to inform residents and businesses about recycling and composting opportunities and best practices for reducing waste requiring landfill disposal or incineration.

613.6 Policy E-3.3.2: Construction and Demolition Recycling

Support the recycling of construction and demolition debris as a key strategy for reducing the volume of waste requiring landfill disposal. To carry out this policy, encourage the deconstruction of obsolete buildings rather than traditional demolition. Deconstruction dismantles buildings piece by piece and makes the components available for resale and reuse.

613.7 Policy E-3.3.3: Organic Waste Diversion

Support policies and programs that will reduce the amount of organic material sent to waste disposal facilities and landfills by encouraging source reduction, food donation, composting, and/or anaerobic digestion of food and yard waste.

613.8 Policy E-3.3.4: Regional Approach to Plastic Waste Reduction

Work with surrounding jurisdictions to develop and implement a regional approach to reducing plastic waste. Goods (including items that eventually become plastic waste) flow freely into and out of the District, carried not only by waterways but also by residents, commuters, and visitors. Regional cooperation is required to align the policies and practices of neighboring jurisdictions.

613.9 Policy E-3.3.5: Promote Product Stewardship

Promote product stewardship as a product-centered approach to environmental protection. Also known as extended product responsibility (EPR), product stewardship calls on those in the product life cycle—manufacturers, retailers, users, and disposers—to share responsibility for reducing the environmental impacts of products. Washington, DC’s product stewardship program requires manufacturers to develop and pay for systems to reuse, recycle, or properly dispose of electronics and paint in a manner that is safe for people and the environment.

613.9a Text Box: Managing Organic Waste

The District and surrounding Maryland and Virginia counties lack sufficient capacity/infrastructure to process large volumes of organic materials. A 2017 compost feasibility study concluded that a facility located in the District would be the most cost-effective and sustainable means of extracting the full value from organic materials. The facility would process organics via composting, anaerobic digestion, co-digestion preprocessing, or a combination of multiple options. Sustainable DC 2.0 calls for the creation of a new composting facility within the District by 2032.

613.10 Action E-3.3.A: Expanding District Recycling Programs

Expand implementation of District-wide recycling initiatives, with the long-term goal of diverting 80 percent of all waste generated in the District by 2032. Special efforts should be made to (i) expand workplace recycling through a combined education and inspection/enforcement campaign, (ii) conduct studies of successful recycling programs in other jurisdictions and import effective practices, and (iii) plan for the composting of yard waste.

613.11 Action E-3.3.B: Expand Recycling Efforts in District Institutions

Work with DC Public Schools (DCPS) and public charter schools to expand school recycling programs and activities. Encourage private schools, universities, colleges, hospitals, and other large institutional employers to do likewise.

613.12 Action E-3.3.C: Revisions to Planning and Building Standards for Solid Waste

Review building code standards for solid waste collection to ensure that new structures are designed to encourage and accommodate recycling and convenient trash pickup.

613.13 Action E-3.3.D: Installation of Sidewalk Recycling Receptacles

Install receptacles for sidewalk recycling in neighborhood commercial centers with high pedestrian volume as a way of increasing waste diversion and publicly reaffirming the District’s commitment to recycling.

613.14 Action E-3.3.E: E-Cycling Program

Continue to operate drop-off e-cycling programs and other measures to promote the recycling of computers and other electronic products in an environmentally sound manner.

613.15 Action E-3.3.F: Commercial and Industrial Waste Reduction

Work with the commercial and industrial sectors to foster appropriate source reduction and waste minimization activities, such as the environmentally sound recycling and disposal of mercury-containing fluorescent lamps and electronic equipment.

613.15a Text Box: Sustainable DC Waste Vision

Washington, DC envisions a District that generates zero waste. This means reducing the amount of waste created and reusing or recycling waste that is produced. The District will recapture the value of waste through urban agriculture or composting, recycling, material reuse, and (potentially) energy production, creating a closed-loop waste management system.

613.16 Action E-3.3.G: Zero Waste Plan

Develop a comprehensive Zero Waste plan, as required by the Sustainable Solid Waste Management Amendment Act of 2014, with the objective of decreasing all District-wide waste streams and achieving source reduction goals. The development of such a plan would tie together existing activities and inform the development and evaluation metrics of new policies, so that Washington, DC can strategically achieve zero waste, which is defined as 80 percent diversion of all solid waste from landfills and waste-to-energy.

613.17 Action E-3.3.H: Product Stewardship Requirements

Expand product stewardship requirements to create additional waste-stream-specific programs (e.g., pharmaceuticals, textiles, plastic bottles, durable goods) to accompany the current electronics and paint programs.

613.18 Action 3.3.I: Increase Residential Recycling and Composting

Design and launch new incentive programs to encourage residents to increase their recycling and composting rates, which is necessary to achieve the District’s 80 percent diversion goal.

613.19 Action 3.3.J: Reduce Organic Waste

Develop and launch a curbside composting program for residential customers and require commercial customers to separate and compost food and other organic waste.

613.20 Action 3.3.K: Organics Processing Facility

Explore creating a new organics processing facility (composting, anaerobic digestion, or co-digestion preprocessing) in the District to capture food and other organic waste.

613.21 Action 3.3.L: Reduce Residential Construction and Demolition Waste

Create an accessible recycling and product reuse pathway for residential construction and demolition waste, including construction waste management requirements, contractor education, and a market for recycled and salvaged construction materials. Assess existing regulatory barriers to reusing these materials.

613.22 Action 3.3.M: Source Reduction

Explore innovative source reduction programs and policies to find ways to keep items out of the waste stream.

##### **10-A DCMR § 614** E-4 PROMOTING ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY {#sec-10-a614 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A614}

614.1 The term sustainability has many definitions. At its core, it refers to managing resources so that they are not permanently depleted or lost for future generations. On a local level, this principle suggests that care is taken to protect Washington, DC’s natural features for future residents and visitors to enjoy. On a global level, it suggests that the consumption of natural resources is reduced while the goal of advancing equity and being a more inclusive District is pursued.

614.2 Five principal tactics for growing more sustainably are described here:

Encourage GI that retains stormwater, thereby protecting local waterways from pollution while allowing flexibility for developers to install GI on-site or in an off-site location where GI has a larger water quality benefit;

Promote green buildings, which are buildings that are designed through an integrated process that considers site planning, architecture, engineering, the environment, and aspects of the natural world that contribute to human health and productivity, and that incorporate recycled materials, advanced energy and water conservation systems, and minimal use of toxic or hazardous materials;

Provide opportunities for food production and urban gardening;

Monitor and mitigate the environmental impacts of development and human activities; and

Expand workforce development programs to further develop the District’s green economy.

##### **10-A DCMR § 615** E-4.1 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a615 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A615}

615.1 GI can include a variety of construction and design techniques that conserve the natural hydrology of development or redevelopment sites. It includes small-scale practices that allow water to infiltrate, evaporate, or transpire on-site rather than flowing off and entering local storm drains and waterways. In urban areas like Washington, DC, typical GI measures include green roofs (which absorb rainwater and also reduce energy costs), porous pavement, limits on impervious surface cover, rain barrels, and rain gardens. See Figure 6.4 for more information on GI.

615.2 Figure 6.4 Green Infrastructure.

(Source: DC Water)

615.2a Text Box: Green Area Ratio

In 2013, the District adopted the GAR, an environmental sustainability zoning regulation that sets standards for landscape and site design for all new multi-family, commercial, and industrial development to help reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, and keep Washington, DC cooler. The purposes of the GAR regulations are to implement a points-based system of requirements for environmental site design that provides flexibility in meeting environmental performance standards, and to promote attractive and environmentally functional landscapes.

615.3 Policy E-4.1.1: Maximizing Permeable Surfaces

Encourage the use of permeable materials for parking lots, driveways, walkways, and other paved surfaces as a way to absorb stormwater and reduce runoff.

615.4 Policy E-4.1.2: Using Landscaping and Green Roofs to Reduce Runoff

Promote an increase in tree planting and vegetated spaces to reduce stormwater runoff and mitigate the urban heat island, including the expanded use of green roofs in new construction and adaptive reuse, and the application of tree and landscaping standards for parking lots and other large paved surfaces.

615.5 Policy E-4.1.3: GI and Engineering

Promote GI and engineering practices for rainwater reclamation and wastewater reuse systems. GI practices include green roofs, bioretention facilities, permeable pavement, and rainwater harvesting. Green engineering practices include emerging wastewater treatment technologies, constructed wetlands, and purple pipe systems or other design techniques, operational methods, and technology to reduce environmental damage and the toxicity of waste generated.

615.6 Action E-4.1.A: GI Criteria

Support continued refinement of GI provisions for new development, such as the GAR. Explore provisions for expanded use of elements such as porous pavement, bioretention facilities, and green roofs.

615.7 Action E-4.1.B: GI Demonstration Projects

Continue to install retrofit demonstration projects that educate developers, engineers, designers, and the public to illustrate use of current and new GI technologies, and make the project standards and specifications available for application to other projects in Washington, DC. Such demonstration projects should be coordinated to maximize environmental benefits, monitored to evaluate their impacts, and expanded as time and money allow.

615.8 Action E-4.1.C: Road Construction Standards

Use District Department of Transportation’s (DDOT) GI standards on all roadway reconstruction projects, with the goal of reducing stormwater pollution from roadways by minimizing impervious surface areas, expanding the use of porous pavements, and installing bioretention tree boxes and bump-outs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 616** E-4.2 PROMOTING GREEN BUILDING {#sec-10-a616 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A616}

616.1 Green building standards are well-established as a means of growing more sustainably. The LEED rating system, established by the Green Building Council, establishes varying levels of certification for green buildings based on the degree to which they mitigate the pollution created during building construction, as well as the long-term effects resulting from building operation. Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM®) is another internationally recognized certification system for sustainable performance in planning, design, construction, operation, and refurbishment; several other certifications also exist. Typical green building strategies include the use of light-colored paving materials to reduce heat build-up, recycled building materials, and energy-conserving windows and insulation methods. Green buildings are also designed to avoid indoor air quality problems and to encourage pedestrian and bicycle accessibility. Improving the performance of the District’s older building stock through green retrofits is a fundamental component of the Sustainable DC Plan.

616.2 The District’s GBAC was established in 2007. The GBAC is comprised of both public agency and private sector members. It monitors the District’s compliance with relevant green building requirements and makes recommendations on green building policies.

616.3 Policy E-4.2.1: Support for Green Building

Broaden the requirements for the use of green building methods in new construction and rehabilitation projects to include all building typologies and develop green building standards for minimum performance or continued improvement of energy use through improved operation and maintenance activities.

616.4 Policy E-4.2.2: Green Building Education and Awareness

Support programs that educate the public, business, and building and real estate communities on the benefits and techniques of green building, including utility cost savings and environmental and health benefits.

616.5 Action E-4.2.A: Building Code Revisions

Periodically review regulatory obstacles to green building construction in the District, and work to reduce or eliminate such obstacles if they exist. Adopt amendments to the District’s green building codes as necessary to promote green building methods and materials, and to encourage such actions as stormwater harvesting, structural insulated panels, and high-quality windows.

616.6 Action E-4.2.B: Green Building Incentives

Continue green building incentive programs to encourage green new construction and the rehabilitation of existing structures that go beyond the baseline code requirements. Identify and implement strategies to make green building affordable for lower-income residents.

See also Action E-7.1.A on green building requirements for District projects and projects receiving municipal funds.

##### **10-A DCMR § 617** E-4.3 ENHANCING URBAN FOOD PRODUCTION AND COMMUNITY GARDENING {#sec-10-a617 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A617}

617.1 With more than 60 percent of District residents living in multi-family housing with limited access to private open space, community gardens provide an important opportunity for green community space and for residents to supplement their food budget. There are more than 34 such gardens in Washington, DC, each independently operated. Community gardens not only provide a place to grow fruits, vegetables, and flowers, they also provide an environmental, recreational, cultural, and educational asset in the neighborhoods they serve. In addition, urban farms are small businesses that contribute to their surrounding communities by growing fruits, vegetables, and other products and offer environmental, cultural, and educational opportunities. The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) plays an integral part in promoting urban food production and community gardening in the District. It helps to manage all 34 community gardens and works with six partner urban farms across Washington, DC, which are all 501(c)(3) organizations that manage farms on DPR properties, focusing on offering gardening and nutrition programs while increasing access to healthy and affordable food to District communities.

617.2 Additionally, the University of the District of Columbia (UDC), through the College of Agriculture and Urban Sustainability and Environmental Sciences (CAUSES) and its Land Grant University status, expands academic and public knowledge of sustainable farming techniques that improve food and water security, health, and wellness by providing research, education, and gardening techniques to residents and organizations in Washington, DC.

617.3 Policy E-4.3.1: Promotion of Community Gardens, Urban Farms, and Educational Growing Spaces

Continue to encourage and support the development of community gardens, urban farms, rooftop farms, and educational growing spaces on public and private land across Washington, DC, with the Sustainable DC 2.0 plan, by identifying public and private land suitable for urban agriculture and streamlining the permitting process for gardeners and farmers.

617.4 Policy E-4.3.2: Capacity Building for Community Gardening

Enhance the capacity of private, public, and nonprofit community gardening organizations to develop and operate community gardens. This should include working with the private sector and local foundations to mobilize financial support.

617.5 Policy E-4.3.3: Domestic Gardening and Urban Farming

Provide technical and educational support to District residents who wish to plant backyard and rooftop gardens or start urban farming businesses. This could include measures such as partnerships with local gardening groups; education through conferences, websites, and publications; tool lending programs; integrated pest management; and information on composting and best practices in gardening.

617.6 Policy E-4.3.4: Use of Fertilizer

Educate District homeowners, businesses, and commercial applicators on the proper use of fertilizer, and encourage native species plants and landscaping that do not require fertilizer.

617.7 Policy E-4.3.5: Schoolyard Greening

Work with DCPS and public charter schools to make appropriate portions of buildings and grounds, including rooftops, available for GI and community and school gardens, and to use buildings and grounds for instructional programs in environmental science, urban farming, and gardening classes. Encourage private schools to do likewise.

617.8 Policy E-4.3.6: Produce and Farmers Markets

Support the creation, maintenance of, and outreach for farmers markets in all quadrants of the District to provide outlets for urban farms and community gardens to sell healthy, locally grown produce to District residents.

617.9 Policy E-4.3.7: Composting Programs and Community Gardens

Support composting programs at community gardens (through the DPR Compost Cooperatives), food waste drop-off locations at farmers markets (through the DPW Food Waste Drop-Off Program), composting in schoolyard gardening programs, and residential composting. Residents composting in common spaces and at their homes should be properly trained, as required in the Residential Composting Incentives Amendment Act of 2018.

617.10 Action E-4.3.A: Community Gardens and Urban Farms in Wards 7 and 8

To activate community spaces, increase sustainability, and help address the lack of healthy food retail options in Wards 7 and 8, work with community leaders and gardening advocates to identify and establish property for new gardens or urban farms in this area. The District should assist in this effort by providing an inventory of publicly and privately owned tracts of land that are suitable for community gardens and urban farms, and then work with local advocacy groups to make such sites available. This action should supplement, but not replace, efforts to increase retail options in this part of the District.

617.11 Action E-4.3.B: Support for UDC Cooperative Extension

Enhance the capability of the Cooperative Extension of the UDC to provide technical assistance and research, including educational materials and programs to support resident gardening, tree planting efforts, urban farming, food entrepreneurship, and nutrition education.

617.12 Action E-4.3.C: Support for Sustainable Agriculture

Continue to support sustainable agriculture with the goal of producing healthy, abundant crops, preserving environmental services, improving neighborhood health, and creating new entrepreneurial opportunities. Implement the Urban Farming and Food Security Act and expedite the process to make public and private lands available for a variety of urban agriculture uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 618** E-4.4 REDUCING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a618 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A618}

618.1 The District of Columbia Environmental Policy Act (DCEPA), modeled after the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), requires all District agencies to analyze and disclose the environmental effects of their major actions, including the permitting of new development. Environmental Impact Statements are required for projects that are likely to have substantial negative impacts on the environment.

618.2 To determine if a project meets this threshold, applicants must complete a checklist called an Environmental Impact Screening Form (EISF). Unlike NEPA’s Environmental Assessment, the EISF contains simple yes/no questions and requires no narrative or analysis. The policies and actions below call for a more rigorous analysis of impacts in the future, with more substantive documentation of environmental effects.

618.3 Policy E-4.4.1: Mitigating Development Impacts

Future development must mitigate impacts on the natural environment and anticipate the impacts of climate change, resulting in environmental improvements wherever feasible. Construction practices that would permanently degrade natural resources without mitigation shall not be allowed.

618.4 Policy E-4.4.2: Transparency of Environmental Decision-Making

Ensure that discussions and decisions regarding environmental impacts and mitigation measures occur through a transparent process in which the public is kept informed and given a meaningful opportunity to participate.

618.5 Policy E-4.4.3: Environmental Assessments

Ensure full and meaningful compliance with the District of Columbia Environmental Policy Act of 1989, effective October 18, 1989 (DC Law 8-36; DC Official Code § 8-109.01 et seq.), including the use of procedures to assess the environmental impacts of major development projects comparable to the regulations developed by the Council on Environmental Quality for the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, approved January 1, 1970 (83 Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The environmental review should include all pertinent information about the effects of the project on the human environment, including information about existing conditions, projected impacts, and mitigation measures. Carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions impacts should be included in the environmental impact assessments. The process should ensure that such information is available when a development is proposed and is available to the public and decision-makers before any decision is made.

618.6 Policy E-4.4.4: Monitoring of Operational and Construction Impacts

Strengthen District government programs that monitor and resolve air pollution, water pollution, noise, soil contamination, dust, vibration, and other environmental impacts resulting from commercial uses, industrial uses, trucking, construction activities, and other activities around Washington, DC that could potentially degrade environmental quality.

618.7 Action E-4.4.A: District-wide Natural Resource Inventory

Compile and maintain a District-wide natural resources inventory that catalogs and monitors the location and condition of Washington, DC’s natural resources. The inventory should be used as a benchmark to evaluate the success of environmental programs and the impacts of land use and development decisions.

618.8 Action E-4.4.B: Environmental Enforcement

Continue interagency efforts to improve compliance with the District’s existing environmental laws and regulations. This effort should include public education, compliance assistance, and continued support for Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and DPW’s partnership to address environmental crimes.

##### **10-A DCMR § 619** E-5 REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS {#sec-10-a619 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A619}

619.1 Environmental hazards in Washington, DC that may be related to land use include a variety of sudden shocks and chronic stressors, such as air and water pollution, contaminated soils, hazardous materials, noise, disease vectors, flooding, light pollution, electromagnetic fields, and earthquakes. The overall purpose of Comprehensive Plan policies on these topics is to minimize the potential for damage, disease, and injury resulting from these hazards. Environmental hazards define basic constraints to land use that have to be reflected in how and where development takes place. The severity of these hazards also helps define the priority for future remediation and abatement programs.

619.2 The presence of environmental hazards in Washington, DC also means that up-to-date emergency response planning is essential. As indicated in the Community Services and Facilities Element, the District’s Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency (HSEMA) is charged with preparing and implementing these plans and ensuring that District agencies, residents, and businesses are informed and prepared in the event of a disaster or other emergency. Other agencies, including the Health Emergency Preparedness Response Administration (HEPRA) and the District Department of Transportation (DDOT), are also actively involved in emergency planning and response.

##### **10-A DCMR § 620** E-5.1 REDUCING AIR POLLUTION {#sec-10-a620 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A620}

620.1 Air quality has improved tremendously over the decades thanks to successful air pollution control programs and technology improvements. Washington, DC residents continue to experience occasional smoggy summer days that can be harmful to human health. Effects range from minor problems like watery eyes and headaches to serious respiratory problems and heart ailments. Those with lung or heart disease, children, and older adults are particularly vulnerable, and these conditions are disproportionately experienced by communities of color and low-income residents.

620.2 Air pollution is comprised of carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, ground-level ozone, particle pollution (often referred to as particulate matter), and sulfur oxides, as well as other hazardous air pollutants. The greatest contributor to air pollution in the Washington metropolitan region is motor vehicle emissions. Emissions from local smokestacks and other stationary sources are fairly limited, although the District is subject to such pollution from upwind states. While cleaner-burning gasoline and federal engine standards have helped reduce pollution to some degree, urban sprawl and accompanying congestion have countered this gain. Clearly, reducing motor vehicle emissions is not something the District can do on its own, though the District is undertaking numerous efforts to make Washington, DC less dependent on automobiles. Numerous multi-state organizations and regional committees exist to address the issue, all working toward compliance with federal Clean Air Act standards. These entities focus not only on reducing vehicle emissions, but also on curbing other sources of pollution, ranging from power plants, locomotives, and jet fuel to consumer products such as paints, lawnmowers, gas-fired leaf-blowers, and home fireplaces and barbecues.

620.3 The 1970 Clean Air Act established standards for six criteria pollutants. These are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. Areas where these standards are not met are designated as nonattainment by the EPA. As of 2015, the Washington metropolitan region is classified as a marginal non-attainment area for the federal eight-hour ozone standard (see Figure 6.5, 2018 Ambient Air Quality Trends). Because of this status, the District (along with Maryland and Virginia) must prepare State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to track the progress toward attaining federal air quality standards.

620.3a Text Box: Vehicle Emissions

In two related settlements, German automaker Volkswagen AG (VW) has agreed to spend nearly $25 billion to settle allegations of cheating on vehicle emissions tests and deceiving customers. VW’s use of a defeat device in its diesel vehicles enabled the vehicles to emit levels of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) significantly in excess of the limits set by the EPA. NOx is a precursor to ozone formation and is hazardous to human health. The automaker will spend $2.925 billion to mitigate the pollution from these diesel cars, $2 billion to invest in clean vehicle technology, and $10 billion in the vehicle recall program.

620.3b Washington, DC is expected to receive $8.125 million from the VW settlement and must develop a Mitigation Plan outlining the use of the funds for eligible projects, with the main goal of reducing NOx emissions. The District plans to spend the $8.125 million of VW settlement funds in three project areas: locomotive switcher engine replacement, incentives for replacement of diesel transit buses and trash trucks, and rebates for tailpipe pollution reduction retrofits.

620.4 Figure 6.5 2018 Ambient Air Quality Trends

(Source: DOEE and the Environment, 2018)

620.5 Air quality trends data demonstrates that despite population increases and other related activities in the District, ambient concentrations of all criteria pollutants and pollution emissions have dropped during the assessment period. However, ozone continues to be the biggest air pollution challenge the region faces. Figure 6.6 shows the number of days the federal eight-hour ozone standard was exceeded at three monitoring locations in the District between 1997 and 2018. The second chart, Figure 6.7, shows the statistical three-year average of pollutant concentrations in the air per year over the same time period from each monitor in Washington, DC. The third chart, Figure 6.8, shows that levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution, or soot, have also declined at each monitor over time. In 2014, the District officially was designated as being in attainment of all federal standards for fine particulate matter.

620.6 Figure 6.6: Number of Exceedance Days in the District Compared to the 2015 Eight-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

(Source: DOEE, 2019)

620.7 Figure 6.7 Eight-Hour Ozone Design Concentration Values for Each Monitor

(Source: DOEE, 2019)

620.8 Figure 6.8 Annual Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Design Concentration Values for Each Monitor

(Source: DOEE, 2019)

620.9 Through implementation of the GAR, District-wide tree planting efforts, and other GI initiatives, the District is supporting the use of landscaping and tree planting to absorb ozone and other pollutants.

See Section 615 for more information about the GAR.

620.10 Policy E-5.1.1: Attaining Air Quality Standards

Continue to undertake programs and initiatives that move the region closer to attaining and maintaining federal air quality standards. Expand these programs as feasible to incorporate new technology and to reflect best practices around the country.

620.11 Policy E-5.1.2: Regional Planning

Recognize that air quality is a regional issue that requires multi-jurisdictional strategies and solutions. Accordingly, work with surrounding cities, counties, states, the federal government, and appropriate regional organizations to more effectively conduct air quality planning.

620.12 Policy E-5.1.3: Evaluating Development Impacts On Air Quality

Evaluate potential air emissions from new and expanded development, including transportation improvements and municipal facilities, and take measures to mitigate any possible adverse impacts, particularly to any adjoining residential uses. These measures should include construction controls to reduce airborne dust and transportation emissions.

620.13 Policy E-5.1.4: Stationary Sources

Maintain controls on gaseous and particulate emissions from stationary sources of air pollution in Washington, DC, such as boilers and generators. Particular attention should be given to achieving compliance of local industrial/commercial/institutional boilers, which are the largest stationary sources of air pollution in the District.

620.14 Policy E-5.1.5: Improving Air Quality Through Transportation Efficiency

Promote strategies that reduce motor vehicle emissions in the District and surrounding region. As outlined in the Land Use and Transportation Elements of this Comprehensive Plan, this includes the development of a fully integrated regional system of buses, streetcars, rail transit, bicycles, taxis, and pedestrian facilities to make it easier and more convenient to travel without an automobile. It also includes the promotion of trip reduction measures, such as video conference facilities, telecommuting, flextime, and carpooling. Strategies to reduce congestion and idling time, such as improved signal timing and reversible commute lanes, also should contribute to air quality improvement.

620.15 Policy E-5.1.6: Clean Fuels

Encourage the use of clean fuel vehicles and enhance efforts to place refueling and recharging equipment at facilities accessible for public use. When feasible, provide financial incentives for District residents and businesses to use clean vehicles, such as reduced motor vehicle tax and license fees. Support proliferation of EVs through innovative rate designs.

620.16 Policy E-5.1.7: Energy Efficiency and Air Quality

Encourage making energy-efficiency upgrades to provide the co-benefit of improving air quality.

620.17 Policy E-5.1.8: Air Quality Education

Support increased public awareness of air quality issues through Air Quality Action Day programs, publication of air quality data, and distribution of educational materials that outline steps residents and businesses can take to help maintain clean air. For the regulated community, continue outreach about air quality requirements and compliance assistance. Increase use of innovative technological outreach, such as a bench monitoring station.

620.18 Policy E-5.1.9: Zero-Emission Vehicles

Encourage the use of electric and zero-emissions vehicles. When feasible, provide financial incentives for District residents and businesses to use electric and zero-emissions vehicles, such as reduced motor vehicle tax and license fees. Support expansion of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, including innovative designs that encourage off-peak charging and enhance efforts to place refueling and recharging equipment at facilities accessible for public use.

620.19 Action E-5.1.A: SIP

Cooperate with appropriate state, regional, and federal agencies to carry out the federally mandated SIP in order to attain federal standards for ground level ozone by the end of 2021.

620.20 Action E-5.1.B: Control of Bus and Truck Emissions

Collaborate with Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA) and local motor coach operators to reduce diesel bus emissions through the acquisition and use of clean fuel and electric transit vehicles. Additionally, encourage natural gas-powered, electric-powered, and hybrid commercial trucks to reduce emissions and improve air quality.

620.21 Action E-5.1.C: Motor Vehicle Inspection Programs

Regularly update the District’s motor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs to ensure that they are employing the latest monitoring technologies. Consider expanding requirements for heavy vehicle emission inspections.

620.22 Action E-5.1.D: Air Quality Monitoring

Continue to operate a system of air quality monitors around the District and take corrective actions in the event the monitors detect emissions or pollution that exceeds federal standards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 621** E-6 THE LINK BETWEEN LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION, AND AIR QUALITY {#sec-10-a621 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A621}

621.1 Land use and transportation policies work in tandem to affect the region’s air quality. Fifty-one percent of nitrogen oxide emissions and 31 percent of volatile organic compounds emissions—the two precursors to ground-level ozone formation—come from transportation, making it the second-largest source (see Figure 6.9 and Figure 6.10, respectively), and as noted earlier, transportation is the largest overall contributor to air pollution. In general, the more vehicle miles Washington, DC-region residents must travel to reach home, work, shopping, and services, the worse the air quality becomes. Longer commutes are compounded by traffic congestion, which results in additional emissions from idling cars. Despite the use of cleaner-burning fuels and newer vehicles with tighter emissions standards, attaining federal air quality standards will be difficult until the adoption and implementation of new approaches to rethink how the region handles its growth. New approaches include supporting smart city data, applications, and technology to help people and goods move more quickly, cheaply, and efficiently—all of which will also contribute to further reductions in air pollution.

621.2 Figure 6.9 District Nitrogen Oxide Emissions by Sector in 2014

(Source: DOEE)

621.3 Figure 6.10 District Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions by Sector in 2014

(Source: DOEE)

621.4 Fortunately, Washington, DC is already implementing sustainable approaches to land use and urban form, resulting in lower vehicle emissions even as the District’s population continues to grow. These approaches are at the District, neighborhood, and site level, and together they will help Washington, DC maintain attainment of air quality standards. For example, the District’s land use development patterns mean that jobs, housing, and recreation are in proximity to each other. As the Land Use and Transportation Elements of this Comprehensive Plan note, clustering higher-density development along major corridors, bus routes, and near Metrorail stations means shorter and fewer car and truck trips, thus reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and motor vehicle emissions, which improves air quality for residents. At the same time, historic land use patterns segregated residents by race and income with the result that these residents frequently have longer trips, often by car, to reach jobs, education, shopping, and services. Equitable development patterns have the potential to improve or mitigate air quality problems by providing and promoting alternatives to vehicular travel, such as mass transit, biking, or walking. However, the rise of ridesharing services provided by transportation network companies (TNCs) is a countervailing trend that must be considered; likewise, autonomous vehicles may encourage more people to live farther from their work.

621.5 At the site level, several District policies contribute to a further reduction in vehicle emissions. Washington, DC continues to support the proliferation of EV charging and bikeshare stations throughout the District. In addition, the District continues to work with private businesses to develop a suite of incentives that can be offered to employees to encourage clean commuting, such as including facilities for showering after biking and walking, as well as providing transit subsidies.

621.6 The District is fortunate to have one of the best transit systems in the country and many options for traveling without a car. The District, however, is not an island. The air is polluted from the suburbs and by power plant emissions from places as far away as the Ohio Valley. Washington, DC will continue to work with regional partners through MWCOG to support transportation policies resulting in lower air emissions. Recent data shows a reduction in regional emissions is due not only to a cleaner electric grid, but also because of cleaner cars and less driving per person. In addition, the continued development of a safe and convenient regional and District-wide bicycle lane and trail network contributes to a reduction in VMT.

See the Transportation Element for additional policies on improving mass transit, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation, and transportation management.

##### **10-A DCMR § 622** E-6.1 REDUCING WATER POLLUTION {#sec-10-a622 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A622}

622.1 Like cities across the United States, Washington, DC faces the challenge of combating the pollution of its rivers, streams, and groundwater. The problem dates to colonial days when the District disposed of sewage and agricultural waste in its rivers. While the days of open sewers and unregulated dumping are in the past, Washington, DC’s waterways are still significantly impaired. Although there is still work to do, given the progress made as a result of DC Water’s Clean Rivers Project, the District is significantly closer to achieving the Sustainable DC goal of fishable and swimmable rivers.

622.2 Most of the pollutants entering Washington, DC’s waters cannot be traced to specific points. Oil, gas, dust, pesticides, trash, animal waste, and other pollutants are carried to rivers and streams each time it rains. Vegetated and unpaved areas absorb some of these pollutants, while paved surfaces do not. Industrial uses like power plants and military bases also impact water quality. Toxins from these uses have contaminated the groundwater in certain areas and have settled into riverbeds, creating the danger that they will be re-released if the sediment is disturbed. In addition, runoff carries high volumes of fast-moving water to local streams, scouring natural channels and stripping away the resources necessary to support local fish and wildlife.

622.3 As noted in the Infrastructure Element, the combined storm sewers system serves the dual purpose of conveying sewage as well as stormwater in about one-third of the District. During major storms or snow melts, stormwater and sanitary sewage flows exceed the capacity of the conveyance system, causing raw sewage and stormwater to be released into the Anacostia and Potomac rivers, Rock Creek, and tributary streams. Millions of gallons of sewage may be dumped into the river during such events, lowering oxygen levels and damaging aquatic life. When fully completed in 2030, the 18-mile Clean Rivers Project will result in a 96 percent system-wide reduction in combined sewer overflow volume.

622.4 The federal Clean Water Act required the District to take steps to control stormwater pollution and eventually meet clean water standards. The Long-Term Control Plan for sanitary and storm sewer separation is one of these steps. Another is the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, which includes specific requirements for the two-thirds of Washington, DC where storm and sanitary sewers are already separated. The MS4 Program, which is managed by the DOEE, authorizes the discharge from industrial and construction sites and other critical source facilities, monitoring of these discharges, enforcement activities for violators, and annual reporting. In 2001, the District passed legislation authorizing the collection of fees to fund these activities.

622.5 As with air quality, water quality improvements cannot be tackled by the District alone. The Anacostia watershed includes 176 square miles, and over 80 percent of this area is in Maryland. The Potomac watershed is larger still—over 14,600 square miles—and extends as far as West Virginia and Pennsylvania. A number of interstate and multi-agency initiatives have been launched to address water quality problems. These must be sustained and expanded in the future.

622.6 Policy E-6.1.1: Improving Water Quality

Improve the quality of water in the District’s rivers and streams to meet public health and water quality standards, and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of these watercourses for multiple uses, including recreation and aquatic life.

622.7 Policy E-6.1.2: Wastewater Treatment

Continue sustained capital investment in the District’s wastewater treatment system in order to reduce overflows of untreated sewage and improve the quality of effluent discharged to surface waters. Maintain and upgrade the Blue Plains treatment plant as needed to meet capacity needs and to incorporate technological advances in wastewater treatment.

See the Infrastructure Element for more details on wastewater treatment.

622.8 Policy E-6.1.3: Control of Runoff

Continue to implement water pollution control and management practices aimed at reducing runoff and pollution, including the flow of sediment and nutrients into streams, rivers, and wetlands.

622.9 Policy E-6.1.4: Riverbed Sediment

Reduce the concentration of chemicals with identified ecological and human health risks in Anacostia and Washington Channel sediments. Remediation measures should restore wetlands and riparian habitats, address ongoing sources, and minimize the possibility of media (e.g., water, sediment, or biota) contamination resulting from dredging or disturbances of the river bottom.

622.10 Policy E-6.1.5: Groundwater Protection

Protect Washington’s groundwater from the adverse effects of construction processes and urban land uses. Contaminated groundwater should be investigated to determine whether long-term monitoring or treatment is necessary or feasible. Future land uses and activities should be managed to minimize public exposure to groundwater hazards and reduce the likelihood of future contamination.

622.11 Policy E-6.1.6: Control of Illicit Discharges

Provide public outreach and education and maintain inspection and enforcement to identify and eliminate illicit discharges to Washington, DC’s stormwater system and District waters.

622.12 Policy E-6.1.7: Regional Coordination

Promote planning at the watershed level, particularly cooperative efforts with Maryland, to address existing pollution loads in the Anacostia River basin. Undertake similar efforts with jurisdictions in the Potomac watershed to address water quality in the Potomac River.

622.13 Action E-6.1.A: Stormwater Management Program

As required by the EPA, Washington, DC creates a Stormwater Management Plan every five years, covering such topics as runoff-reducing GI, maintenance of GI infrastructure, education, surface regulations, fees, and water quality education. The plan should include measures that achieve specific water quality standards, reevaluate and clarify stormwater standards to eliminate confusion, and propose fee levels that are sufficient to maintain an effective stormwater management program and encourage residents and businesses to reduce stormwater pollution.

622.14 Action E-6.1.B: Funding

Continue funding for water quality improvements, including abatement of combined sewer overflow, removal of toxins, and Anacostia River clean up. Set incentive-based fee structures for District residents and commercial property owners. Evaluate opportunities to adjust stormwater fees to accelerate the restoration of local waters as required by the District’s federally issued MS4 permit.

622.15 Action E-6.1.C: Monitoring and Enforcement

Maintain a District water pollution control program that enforces water quality standards, regulates land-disturbing activities (to reduce sediment), inspects and controls sources of pollution in the District, and comprehensively monitors District waters to identify and eliminate sources of pollution . This program should be adequately staffed to carry out its mission and to implement innovative stormwater management programs. Other environmental programs—including underground storage tank (UST) regulation, contaminated site remediation, and pesticide control programs—must take groundwater impacts into account in their regulatory and enforcement activities.

622.16 Action E-6.1.D: Clean Water Education

Working with DC Water, DOEE, DCPS, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE), and local universities, increase public information, education, and outreach efforts on stormwater pollution. These efforts could include such measures as community clean ups, storm drain marking, school curricula, demonstration projects, signage, and advertisement and media campaigns.

622.17 Action E-6.1.E: Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation

A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) sets the quantity of a pollutant that may be introduced into a water body. As a critical step in implementing these requirements, waste load allocations for individual sources or discharges (including District entities) into the municipal stormwater system should be assigned, and the technologies and management practices to control stormwater should be identified. Continue to work with stakeholders to update and execute Washington, DC’s 2016 Consolidated TMDL Implementation Plan, which details actions to reduce pollution from the MS4 as necessary to achieve water quality objectives. Remove TMDLs for tributaries where the water is not being polluted. Update the District’s Watershed Implementation Plan for the Chesapeake Bay, and continue to implement through two-year milestones as part of Chesapeake Bay Program efforts to have all practices in place by 2025 to meet the Chesapeake Bay TMDL.

622.18 Action E-6.1.F: Houseboat Regulations

Improve regulation of houseboats and other floating structures in the Washington Channel, Anacostia River, and Potomac River to reduce water pollution.

622.19 Action E-6.1.G: Clean Marinas

Promote the Clean Marinas Program, encouraging boat clubs and marinas to voluntarily change their operating procedures to reduce pollution to District waters.

622.20 Action E-6.1.H: Rainwater and Greywater

Explore the capture and reuse of rainwater and greywater for potable and non-potable indoor uses, including the creation of new policies and guidance that would allow for captured and recycled water for clothes washers, toilets, showers, dishwashers, and other domestic uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 623** E-6.2 CONTROLLING NOISE {#sec-10-a623 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A623}

623.1 Noise affects the general health and well-being of District residents. High noise levels can create a host of problems, ranging from stress to hearing loss. Noise can also impact urban wildlife. In the noisiest parts of Washington, DC, the sounds of cars, trucks, buses, helicopters, and sirens may seem almost constant. Even in relatively quiet parts of Washington, DC, household noise sources like car alarms and leaf blowers can be a source of annoyance. While the maintenance of peace and quiet is a basic expectation in most of Washington, DC’s neighborhoods, it must be balanced with the realities of living in a vibrant and growing District.

623.2 Reducing exposure to noise requires strategies that address both noise sources (e.g., freeways and airports) and noise receptors (e.g., homes, schools, and hospitals). It also involves the enforcement of ordinances regulating the hours of operation for noise-generating activities, such as construction and machinery use. The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) enforces Chapter 27 of the DC Municipal Regulations Title 20, which formally declares the “policy of the District that every person is entitled to ambient noise levels that are not detrimental to life, health, and enjoyment of his or her property,” and further that “excessive or unnecessary noises within the District are a menace to the welfare and prosperity of the residents and businesses of the District.”

623.3 Noise reduction measures also address highways and aviation. The District has a noise abatement and barrier policy for highways, in compliance with Federal Highway Act requirements, that focuses on highway traffic noise and construction noise. Airport noise reduction measures—including regulations on flight paths, hours of operation, aircraft type and model, and helicopters—are coordinated through MWCOG.

623.4 Policy E-6.2.1: Interior Noise Standards

Ensure that interior noise levels in new buildings and major renovation projects comply with federal noise standards and guidelines. Support the retrofitting of existing structures to meet noise standards where they are currently exceeded.

623.5 Policy E-6.2.2: Reduction of Vehicle Noise

Provide regulatory, mitigation, and monitoring measures to minimize exposure to noise from vehicular traffic, including buses, trucks, cars, and trains. Encourage the use of landscaping and sound barriers to reduce exposure to noise along freeways, rail lines, and other transportation corridors.

623.6 Policy E-6.2.3: Household Noise Control

Strengthen enforcement of local ordinances and regulations that limit sources of household noise in Washington, DC, including noise originating from car alarms, construction activities, mechanical equipment and machinery, and similar sources.

623.7 Policy E-6.2.4: Airport Noise Control

Work with appropriate federal and regional agencies to continue aircraft noise reduction programs related to Washington Reagan National Airport, especially in neighborhoods along the Potomac and Anacostia rivers.

623.8 Policy E-6.2.5: Noise and Land Use Compatibility

Avoid locating new land uses that generate excessive noise adjacent to sensitive uses such as housing, hospitals, and schools. Conversely, avoid locating new noise-sensitive uses within areas where noise levels exceed federal and District guidelines for those uses.

623.9 Action E-6.2.A: Evaluation of Noise Control Measures

Continue to evaluate the District’s noise control measures to identify possible regulatory and programmatic improvements, including increased education and outreach on noise standards and requirements.

623.10 Action E-6.2.B: Enforcement of Noise Regulations

Pursuant to District municipal regulations, continue to enforce laws governing maximum daytime and nighttime levels for commercial, industrial, and residential land uses; motor vehicle operation; solid waste collection and hauling equipment; and the operation of construction equipment and other noise-generating activities.

623.11 Action E-6.2.C: Aviation Improvements to Reduce Noise

Actively participate in the MWCOG Aviation Policy Committee to reduce noise levels associated with take-offs and landings at Washington Reagan National Airport. Particular emphasis should be placed on limiting nighttime operations, reducing the use of older and noisier aircraft, maintaining noise monitoring stations within the District, and following flight path and thrust management measures that minimize noise over District neighborhoods.

623.12 Action E-6.2.D: Reduction of Helicopter Noise

Encourage the federal government to reduce noise from the operation of helicopters, especially over residential areas along the Potomac and Anacostia rivers during nighttime and early morning hours.

623.13 Action E-6.2.E: Measuring Noise Impacts

Require evaluations of noise impacts and noise exposure when large-scale development is proposed, and when capital improvements and transportation facility changes are proposed.

623.14 Action E-6.2.F: I-295 Freeway Noise Buffering

Consistent with DDOT’s noise abatement policy, continue to pursue the development of sound barriers and landscaping to shield neighborhoods abutting the I-295 (Anacostia) Freeway, Kenilworth Avenue, and I-395 (SE/SW Freeway) from noise levels that exceed acceptable standards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 624** E-6.3 MANAGING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND MATERIALS {#sec-10-a624 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A624}

624.1 Hazardous substances include materials that may pose a threat to human health or the environment when they are improperly handled, stored, or disposed of. The use of hazardous substances is common in households and businesses across Washington, DC, from the perchloroethylene used by dry cleaners, to the pesticides and herbicides used in lawn care, to common cleansers and solvents used in District households. Hazardous building materials such as asbestos, lead, and mercury may be present in many of Washington, DC’s older structures. Naturally occurring hazards such as radon, and biological contaminants such as mold, also may be present.

624.2 Hazardous materials are also transported through the District on trucks and in rail cars. Even if all handling, transport, and storage regulations are properly followed, such substances may pose a risk in the event of an accidental spill or act of terrorism.

624.3 A complex set of federal and District regulations govern hazardous substance handling. Many of these regulations are implemented through District programs designed to reduce public health hazards and conserve the environment. These include UST regulation, clean-up programs for contaminated sites, toxic substance investigations, and household hazardous waste disposal programs. The level of investigation and clean up required at any given site depends on the degree of contamination, existing land uses, and the particular land use that is planned there in the future. Looking forward, pollution-prevention practices (including hazardous waste minimization and toxic chemical source reduction), stronger environmental review procedures, and continued remediation measures can reduce the likelihood of exposure to hazardous materials and protect public safety and ecological resources.

624.4 Vigilance must be taken to enforce regulations regarding the transport of hazardous materials through Washington, DC. This continues to be a high priority of the District’s Emergency Management Agency, both to protect the security of District residents, workers, and visitors, and to respond swiftly and effectively in the event of an emergency.

624.5 Policy E-6.3.1: Hazardous Materials Management

Strengthen and enforce programs to manage the use, handling, transportation, storage, and disposal of harmful chemical, biological, and radioactive materials, including expanded enforcement of local regulations and the establishment of training programs on hazardous materials and emergency planning.

624.6 Policy E-6.3.2: Hazardous Building Materials and Conditions

Protect public health and safety by testing for and, where appropriate, removing lead, radon gas, asbestos, and other hazardous materials from the built environment. When these hazards are abated, require full compliance with all applicable licensing and inspection standards.

624.7 Policy E-6.3.3: Accidental Spills and Releases

Comply with District laws relating to the notification and reporting of accidental spills and releases of hazardous materials. Improve public education and awareness of these requirements as part of a broader effort to improve emergency planning, preparedness, and response in Washington, DC.

624.8 Policy E-6.3.4: Toxic Chemical Source Reduction and Disposal

Encourage the substitution of nontoxic or less toxic chemicals and products for toxic chemicals and products in small businesses and households. Provide options for the disposal of hazardous waste generated by households and small businesses to minimize illegal and harmful dumping. Maintain penalties and fines for the illegal dumping of materials such as used oil and batteries.

624.9 Policy E-6.3.5: Clean Up of Contaminated Sites

Necessary steps shall be taken to remediate soil and groundwater contamination in Washington, DC, both in areas where future development is likely and in areas that are already fully developed. In addition, require soil and groundwater evaluations for any development that is proposed on a site where contamination may be possible due to past activities. Depending on the site, it may also be necessary to investigate the effects of contamination on air quality, surface water, or river sediments, or to conduct an ecological risk assessment. If contamination is found to be above acceptable levels, require remediation and, where necessary, long-term monitoring and institutional controls.

624.10 Policy E-6.3.6: Hazardous Substances and Land Use

Ensure that land use planning and development decisions minimize the exposure of residents, workers, and visitors to hazardous substances. New residences, schools, and similarly sensitive land uses should not be sited in areas where significant quantities of hazardous substances are handled, stored, or disposed. Likewise, new municipal or industrial facilities that use toxic materials or produce hazardous waste should not be sited in residential or environmentally sensitive areas.

624.11 Policy E-6.3.7: Design Considerations

For uses where hazardous substances are handled, require design and construction practices that minimize the possibility of hazardous spills, accidents, leaks, or security breaches, and encourage other measures as necessary to prevent injury and disease and to protect property and natural resources.

624.12 Policy E-6.3.8: Hazardous Materials Transport

Regulate and guide the transport of hazardous materials through the District to minimize risks to human health, property, and the environment.

See the Land Use Element for additional policies on conflicts between industrial and residential uses. See the Community Services and Facilities Element for further information on emergency preparedness.

624.13 Action E-6.3.A: Household Hazardous Waste Disposal

Expand the District’s education and outreach programs on the dangers of household hazardous wastes and continue to sponsor and publicize household hazardous waste collection events. Provide additional sites and regularly scheduled events for the safe collection and disposal of such wastes. Explore options for addressing the collection and disposal of hazardous waste from businesses that are classified as conditionally exempt small quantity generators.

624.14 Action E-6.3.B: Compliance with Hazardous Substance Regulations

Maintain regulatory and inspection programs to ensure that all non-household entities that store, distribute, or dispose of hazardous materials comply with all applicable health, safety, and environmental requirements. These requirements range from used oil collection facilities at automotive repair shops to disposal of medical waste from area hospitals and clinics.

624.15 Action E-6.3.C: Reducing Exposure to Hazardous Building Materials

Implement programs to reduce exposure to hazardous building materials and conditions, including the existing radon gas testing program, the asbestos program, and the childhood lead poisoning prevention and lead-based paint management programs. The latter programs are designed to eliminate childhood lead poisoning District-wide and to regulate the lead abatement industry to ensure the use of safe work practices. District programs should provide technical and financial support to the owners of residential properties, and particularly resident homeowners, for the abatement of these hazards.

624.16 Action E-6.3.D: UST Management

Maintain and implement regulations to monitor USTs) that store gasoline, petroleum products, and hazardous substances. Prevent future releases from USTs to soil and groundwater, abate leaking tanks and other hazardous conditions, remediate contaminated sites, and provide public education on UST hazards.

624.17 Action E-6.3.E: Reductions in Pesticide Use

Maintain a pesticide management program that complies with the District’s Municipal Regulations for pesticide registration, operator/applicator certification, and handling/use. Implement new programs to promote integrated pest management by the public and private sectors and discourage the use of harmful pesticides by District residents, institutions, and businesses. Encourage household practices that limit mosquito breeding areas by draining standing water in such places as clogged drain pipes, flower pot trays, and discarded tires.

624.18 Action E-6.3.F: Hazardous Substance Response and Water Pollution Control Plans

Complete the hazardous substance response plan required under the District’s Brownfields Act, and update the water pollution control contingency plan, as required under the District’s Water Pollution Control Act.

624.18a Text Box: Water Pollution Control Contingency Plan

In 2011, MWCOG developed a Water Pollution Control Contingency Plan on behalf of the District. The plan is intended to provide guidance to the District agencies and departments that respond to hazardous substance, oil, and sewage spills that may threaten or taint ground or surface waters or natural resources within the boundaries of Washington, DC. To ensure that this plan remains current, it will be updated and revised every five years.

624.19 Action E-6.3.G: Water Pollution Control Contingency Plan

Update the Water Pollution Control Contingency Plan, which includes specific notification and response strategies for major and minor spills/releases and effective containment/clean up methods. Incorporate changes in organizational structures, laws, and regulations, and in programmatic needs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 625** E-6.4 DRINKING WATER SAFETY {#sec-10-a625 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A625}

625.1 Drinking water quality in the District is impacted by land use in the Potomac Basin and by the condition of Washington, DC’s water distribution system. Runoff from upstream development, dairy and hog farms, and other agricultural and mining uses presents an ongoing threat to the water supply. Even if the water supply were pristine, however, the pipes used to transport water from treatment facilities to individual customers would affect water quality. Some of these pipes are more than 100 years old and are in poor condition. Problems with old, leaky water pipes are compounded by dead ends where water does not adequately circulate. DC Water is addressing this issue by creating open loops to allow for improved water circulation through the system.

625.2 A related water supply issue is exposure to lead. Water is lead-free when it leaves the treatment plant, but lead can be released when water comes in contact with pipes and plumbing fixtures that contain lead. Lead service lines between the distribution system and individual homes are relatively common in Washington, DC. There are about 11,300 known lead service lines in public spaces, and 7,500 known lead service lines on private property. Considering most pipes on private property are unknown, the District estimates there are 48,000 lead service lines on private property. Lead sources and lead levels vary between buildings, so it is important to identify and remove any lead sources in and to each building. While the risk of lead poisoning is very low for most, it can be more significant for infants and children. Tests conducted in 2004 showed elevated levels of lead in tap water, prompting a collaborative effort by DC Water, the EPA, and the District Department of Health ( DC Health) to accelerate service-line replacement, increase monitoring, and enact corrosion-control measures. DC Water’s efforts to replace water service lines are partially supported through a new meter-based fee established in 2016.

625.2a Text Box: Protecting Drinking Water

DC Water is working with the Washington Aqueduct Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to minimize lead release from pipes throughout the District by controlling corrosion, monitoring for lead at the tap, replacing lead service pipes, educating customers on the health impacts of lead, and helping them identify and remove lead sources on their property. Protecting drinking water from lead sources is the shared responsibility of DC Water and the property owner.

625.2b Advancements in technology, like DC Water’s interactive map that helps property owners identify their water service line material, increase transparency and strengthen residents’ confidence in their drinking water.

625.3 Policy E-6.4.1: Drinking Water Safety

Ensure the safety of Washington, DC’s drinking water supply and distribution system. Maintain sustained efforts to reduce health hazards associated with lead and other contaminants.

625.4 Policy E-6.4.2: Affordable Water Access

Ensure affordable access to safe drinking water through continued support for DC Water’s programs that discount the amount of water needed for residents’ basic needs.

625.5 Action E-6.4.A: Lead Pipe Testing and Replacement

Aggressively implement programs for residential, commercial, and governmental sectors to test for lead, replace lead feeder pipes, and educate the community on safe drinking water issues and stagnant water control.

625.6 Action E-6.4.B: Source Water Conservation

Implement measures to protect natural systems and abate pollution sources in the Potomac Basin that could potentially harm the District’s drinking water quality.

625.7 Action E-6.4.C: Interagency Working Group

Create an interagency working group on safe drinking water to address drinking water emergencies. Coordinate with DC Water and DC Health to expand public education on water supply.

##### **10-A DCMR § 626** E-6.5 SANITATION, LITTER, AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH {#sec-10-a626 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A626}

626.1 Among the many aspects of environmental health in the District are the maintenance of sanitary conditions, the reduction of litter, and the control of disease-carrying pests. DC Health maintains numerous programs to reduce foodborne illness, ensure compliance with hygiene standards, provide for animal and welfare control, and reduce exposure to animal-transmitted diseases like rabies and West Nile Virus.

626.2 Litter and trash are probably the most visible and pervasive forms of pollution in Washington, DC. Policies and programs have been developed to address issues with litter and trash, including establishment of a $0.05 fee on disposable plastic and paper retail bags; a ban on the use of polystyrene foam take-out containers, straws, and other food service ware that is not recyclable or compostable from any entity that serves or sells food in the District; implementation of a robust street-sweeping program; stringent enforcement against littering and illegal dumping; operation of a skimmer boat fleet in the lower Anacostia River; installation of litter traps in the Anacostia River; robust rat control programs that involve cleaning up litter and trash; implementation of education and outreach programs; and funding for the Mayor’s Office of the Clean City, which provides leadership on these issues.

626.3 Policy E-6.5.1: Vector Control

Continue and strengthen efforts to control rats, mice, mosquitoes, and other disease vectors and pests. A variety of related strategies should be used to support these programs, including public outreach and education, garbage control and containment, adequate trash and refuse collection services, ongoing maintenance of public space, enforcement of littering and dumping regulations, clean up of construction and demolition debris, structural controls and integrated pest management, and a reduction in the number of vacant and abandoned buildings.

626.4 Policy E-6.5.2: Clean City Programs

Improve environmental quality through programs that promote efficient trash removal, neighborhood clean ups, and levying of fines and penalties for the abandonment of personal property (including cars) and illegal dumping.

626.5 Policy E-6.5.3: Discouraging Illegal Dumping

Develop and maintain effective public education and enforcement tools to curb littering and illegal dumping, and to promote the safe disposal of solid waste (including hazardous waste, medical waste, construction debris, used oil, and scrap tires), and bulky items.

626.6 Policy E-6.5.4: Environmental Health Activities

Maintain and improve existing District programs to ensure community hygiene, food and restaurant safety, animal welfare and control, and the control of disease vectors. Promote continuous coordination among District agencies to ensure healthful and sanitary conditions throughout the District.

626.7 Action E-6.5.A: Expanded Trash Collection and Street Sweeping

Evaluate and implement new programs to ensure the cleanliness of vacant properties, roadsides, public spaces, parks, and District-owned lands. Continue implementation of environmental street sweeping in hot spots for trash.

626.8 Action E-6.5.B: Trash Collection in District Waterbodies

Continue to install and maintain trash traps in the District’s waterbodies. Explore opportunities to partner with Virginia and Maryland on capturing trash that is deposited in rivers and streams upstream of the District. Continue to implement the District’s skimmer boat fleet in the lower Anacostia River.

626.9 Action E-6.5.C: Neighborhood Clean Ups

Co-sponsor and participate in neighborhood and District-wide clean up activities, such as those currently held along the Potomac and Anacostia rivers and around schoolyards and District parks. Encourage ANCs), local institutions, businesses, and other community groups to develop and announce clean up campaigns in conjunction with the District’s bulk trash removal schedule.

626.10 Action E-6.5.D: Strengthening and Enforcing Dumping Laws

Take measures to strengthen and enforce the District’s littering, rodent and disease vector control, and illegal dumping laws. These measures should include:

Providing adequate funding to carry out anti-littering programs;

Empowering the community to report illegal dumping activities;

Increasing public education on dumping laws, including posting of signs where appropriate; and

Expanding surveying and enforcement activities.

626.11 Action E-6.5.E: Publicizing and Expanding Bulk Waste Disposal and Recycling Options

Continue to sponsor and publicize options for bulk waste disposal and recycling, including information on the Fort Totten transfer station and the District’s schedule for curbside bulk trash waste removal. Increase the types of materials that can be dropped off by residents, including hard-to-recycle items.

626.12 Action E-6.5.F: Single-Use Bottles

Discourage the purchase of single-use bottles, which often end up in parks and streams, by encouraging persons to carry refillable water bottles and by encouraging institutions to have working water fountains and bottle-filling stations. Consider mandating manufacturer take-back programs for beverage containers and other packaging.

626.13 Action E-6.5.G: Vacant and Underused Properties

Continue investigating and classifying vacant and underused properties. Continue pursuing enforcement of violations on these properties to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public.

See the Hazardous Materials section of this chapter for additional actions relating to hazardous waste disposal.

##### **10-A DCMR § 627** E-6.6 OTHER HAZARDS AND POLLUTANTS {#sec-10-a627 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A627}

627.1 Two other environmental hazards are addressed in this Comprehensive Plan. The first, light pollution, has been raised in the past around the Naval Observatory in the northwest quadrant. In some instances, brighter lighting may be desirable to enhance public safety or illuminate civic buildings and monuments. In other instances dark skies are more desirable. Where lighting is required or desired, steps can be taken to use the correct number of lights, coloring, and brightness of lighting for the desired purpose; direct the lighting appropriately; employ energy-efficient lighting devices; and design and install quality lighting that reduces sharp contrast, glare, and halo effects. Electromagnetic fields (EMF) are the second hazard, which can be attributed to communication antennas and electric power facilities. Maintain compliance with all Federal Communications Commission (FCC) siting standards for communication antennas and electric power facilities.

627.2 Policy E-6.6.1: Prudent Avoidance of EMF Impacts

Incorporate prudent avoidance in decisions regarding the approval, location or routing, and intensity of facilities that generate EMF, such as power lines and communication antennas in accordance with FCC guidelines. Such facilities should be located only when and where necessary, based on local service needs, and should be designed using methods to mitigate involuntary public exposure to potential adverse effects.

627.3 Policy E-6.6.2: Co-Location of Antennas

Consider the joint use and co-location of communication antennas to reduce the number of towers necessary, thereby reducing aesthetic impacts and limiting the area of radiofrequency exposure.

627.4 Policy E-6.6.3: Light Pollution

Consistent with the goals of Sustainable DC, maintain regulations for outdoor lighting to reduce light pollution, conserve energy, and reduce impact on wildlife, particularly migratory birds. Particular attention should be given to preventing glare and nighttime light trespass near the Naval Observatory, so that its operational needs are respected.

627.5 Action E-6.6.4: Managing Backlight, Uplight, and Glare

Work to reduce backlight, uplight, and glare and identify programmatic improvements such as increased education and outreach on light standards and requirements.

##### **10-A DCMR § 628** E-6.7 ACHIEVING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE {#sec-10-a628 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A628}

628.1 Environmental justice refers to the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, national origins, and incomes, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. A just community is one in which all people experience protection from environmental and health hazards and have equal access to the decision-making process for having a healthy environment.

628.2 These are particularly important principles to abide by when the goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to grow an inclusive city. Some District neighborhoods have been adversely impacted by pollution-generating uses and other forms of environmental degradation, particularly in Wards 5, 6, 7, and 8. Power stations, public works facilities, rail and highway infrastructure, and a variety of industrial uses have all been concentrated in these areas. Many were historically located in communities of color and low-income neighborhoods that lacked the resources to fight these uses. The legacy of these uses includes the pollution of the Anacostia River, contaminated sites, and continuing noise, air pollution, and hazardous cargo on roads and rail that disproportionately impact often overlapping vulnerable populations, including the young, the old, those with existing health conditions, lower income residents and communities of color. It is critical to identify and remove or mitigate these existing environmental conditions. Low-income and minority communities must not face disproportionate environmental burdens and must enjoy clean and safe places to live, work, play, and learn. As Washington, DC grows and changes, it is important to continue to focus on environmental justice through an equity lens in order to mitigate and prevent harm to current and future residents. Furthermore, all residents must have a fair and meaningful opportunity to participate in environmental decisions.

628.3 Policies and actions found throughout the Comprehensive Plan, particularly those focused on improving equity and resilience, comprise a forward-looking approach to environmental justice. It is the District government’s charge to improve the environment of vulnerable communities that continue to face significant barriers to overall health, livelihood, and sustainability.

628.3a Text Box: The Environment and Health

Environmental factors such as air and water quality are fundamental determinants of people’s health and well-being. These factors can also lead to disease and health disparities when the places where people live, work, learn, and play are burdened by social inequities. These social inequities, often referred to as social determinants of health, include differences in individual behaviors, socio-cultural influences, access to health services, economic status, and literacy levels. Environmental health disparities exist when communities exposed to a combination of poor environmental quality and social inequities have more sickness and disease than higher-income, less polluted communities.

628.4 Policy E-6.7.1: Addressing Environmental Injustice

Continue to develop and refine solutions to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of industrial, transportation, municipal, construction and other high impact uses, particularly when proximate to residential areas, and specifically identify and address impacts to vulnerable populations. These solutions include enhanced buffering; sound walls; operational improvements; truck routing; regular air, soil, and water quality assessments; and regulating specific uses that result in land use conflicts.

628.5 Policy E-6.7.2: Expanded Outreach to Underserved Communities

Identify and understand the needs of the entire community, particularly vulnerable populations, lower-income residents, communities of color, or people with characteristics such as age-related and health conditions that make them more susceptible to pollutant exposures. Incorporate these needs into plans, programs, and investments. Expand local efforts to involve and enable the equitable participation of economically disadvantaged communities—particularly those communities that historically have been impacted by power plants, trash transfer stations, and other municipal or industrial uses—in the planning and development processes.

628.5a Text Box: Rising Temperatures

Hot days can be unhealthy—even dangerous. Rising temperatures will increase the frequency of hot days and warm nights. High air temperatures can cause heat stroke and dehydration and affect people’s cardiovascular and nervous systems. Warm nights are especially dangerous because they prevent the human body from cooling off after a hot day. Certain people are vulnerable, including children, the elderly, the sick, and low-income residents. Because Washington, DC is warmer than surrounding areas and does not cool off as quickly at night, Washingtonians—particularly those without air conditioning—face a greater risk of heat-related illnesses. Furthermore, high air temperatures can increase the formation of ground-level ozone, a component of smog that can contribute to respiratory problems.

628.6 Rising temperatures may also increase the length and severity of the pollen season for plants such as ragweed. Lengthened pollen seasons have already been observed in other regions. The risk of some diseases may also increase. West Nile virus, transmitted by mosquitoes, could become more common due to rising temperatures, which speed up the mosquito life cycle and increase biting rates, as well as dry periods that benefit the type of mosquito that transmits West Nile. The effects are still uncertain and likely to vary by region. Increased flooding from more intense storms could lead to more indoor dampness and mold, which contribute to asthma, allergies, and respiratory infections.

628.7 Policy E-6.7.3: Capital Facilities

Consider factors supporting environmental justice when updating the capital improvement program for existing public facilities and the development of new facilities. Plan for the equitable distribution of infrastructure improvements and public facilities and services, considering both number/size and access/distance to facilities.

See the Community Services and Facilities Element and the Infrastructure Element for further information about capital facilities.

628.8 Policy E-6.7.4 Health Impacts of Municipal and Industrial Uses

Inform public policy decisions on the siting of municipal and industrial facilities using environmental justice principles, recognizing links between public health and the location of municipal and industrial uses such as power plants and waste treatment facilities.

See the Land Use Element regarding industrial uses and mitigation of impacts.

628.9 Action E-6.7.A: Clean and Reuse Contaminated Properties

Clean up brownfields and Superfund sites to improve the environment and the health of surrounding neighborhoods, and so that these sites can be reused for commercial and industrial activities, housing, parks, and other community facilities that can boost local economies and improve quality of life.

628.10 Action E-6.7.B: Environmental Health Threats in Affordable Housing

Audit and eliminate environmental health threats (e.g., mold, lead, and carbon monoxide) in the District’s affordable housing. Work with the DC Housing Authority to reduce these threats, as well as threats from other contaminants, including lead in drinking water, in all District affordable housing.

##### **10-A DCMR § 629** E-7 ENVIRONMENT, EDUCATION, AND THE ECONOMY {#sec-10-a629 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A629}

629.1 The final section of this Element presents policies and actions that tie environmental quality to strategic decisions about government operations, economic growth, and education in Washington, DC. These policies take the Environmental Protection Element beyond its traditional focus to a new level that recognizes the link between environmental quality and the broader goals set by the Vision for Growing an Inclusive City. The basic premise is that environmental protection should not be seen as a regulatory burden or an added expense, but rather as a measure of stewardship, respect for the earth, and respect for communities that have borne the brunt of previous decision-making affecting the environment. Environmental protection can ultimately reduce the cost of doing business by reducing accidents, disease, and waste. It can create jobs for District residents, strengthen tourism and hospitality, improve the educational experience for District students, and make the District a more attractive and healthy place for all those who live and work there.

629.1a Text Box: Environmental Education

Washington, DC partners with environmental nonprofits and advocacy groups to promote environmental education throughout the District, with the goal of raising awareness about the intersections among human activities and the built and natural environments. These partnerships provide a variety of programs, including educational boat tours, wetland restoration planting projects, river clean ups, classroom fish hatching and restoration projects, and Meaningful Watershed Educational Experiences. The District also organizes special annual environmental education events with its partners, such as the Anacostia Environmental Youth Summit, Family & Youth Casting Call, and DC EV Grand Prix. In addition, the DC Infrastructure Academy (DCIA) coordinates, trains, screens, and recruits residents to fulfill the needs of the infrastructure industry and infrastructure jobs with leading companies, including in the renewable energy sector. Further, Solar Works DC, a low-income solar installation and job training program, aims to increase access to clean energy and create a long-term pipeline for green jobs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 630** E-7.1 GREENING THE GOVERNMENT {#sec-10-a630 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A630}

630.1 The District needs to set high standards for its own operations if it expects others in the community to follow suit. It should be a role model in energy efficiency, renewable energy production, green building construction, GI, sustainable transportation and vehicles, environmentally sound landscaping, and adhering to green meeting standards. It should lead the way in sustainable materials management, sustainable procurement, reducing waste generation, reusing materials whenever possible, and recycling and composting what is left. It should also ensure its buildings and infrastructure are resilient to a changing climate.

630.2 District government will continue to adopt as appropriate the latest green construction codes for all new construction and major renovations. The International Green Construction Code (IgCC) and Energy Conservation Code are international standards for the most innovative practices in green building. District government will continue to integrate the most recent version of the IgCC in the District’s construction codes for all new construction and major renovations, which will apply to both public and private buildings of over 10,000 square feet.

630.3 In 2003, a Mayor’s Order established a Greening the Government subcommittee comprised of directors from almost 20 District agencies. The subcommittee was charged with setting priorities and measurable goals to further energy efficiency and environmental health in District government workplaces. It was asked to implement energy efficiency measures, educate the District workforce, and bring green building practices into District buildings. The subcommittee produced a Strategic Plan in 2004. An additional Mayor’s Order on Greening the Government was promulgated in 2013 to build on the initial order. Key elements of the plan are summarized in the policies and actions below.

630.4 Policy E-7.1.1: GI and Green Building Methods for the District

Strongly encourage the use of GI best management practices and green building design methods and materials in new construction and major rehabilitation projects undertaken by District government.

630.5 Policy E-7.1.2: Environmentally Friendly Government Operations

Promote energy-efficient and environmentally friendly District government operations, the purchase of recycled and recyclable products, procurement of green power for District operations where feasible, the use of energy-saving equipment, and contracting practices that include incentives for sustainable technology.

630.6 Policy E-7.1.3: Sustainable Landscaping

Require sustainable practices for landscaping projects, GI, and restoration projects on District properties that reduce the need for watering and mowing, control the spread of invasive species, increase the use of landscaping for stormwater management, provide habitats, and reduce the use of pesticides and herbicides. Consider using industry best practices and certifications to guide this policy.

630.7 Action E-7.1.A: Green Building Legislation

Update legislation to increase green standards for projects constructed by the District or receiving funding assistance from the District. Strive for higher levels of energy efficiency, renewable energy requirements, net-zero standards for new construction, and broader sustainability metrics for public projects, using 2019 as the baseline year.

630.8 Action E-7.1.B: Energy Management Plans

Require the submittal and periodic updating of Energy Management Plans by District agencies. These plans should be developed in coordination with Clean Energy DC to ensure that they have baselines, goals, and strategies that are compatible with, and support the goals and objectives of, Clean Energy DC and Climate Ready DC.

630.9 Action E-7.1.C: Sustainable DC

By 2032, fully implement Washington, DC’s sustainability plan, Sustainable DC, to address the District’s built environment, energy, food, nature, transportation, waste, and water. Dedicate District government staff and funding to implement the Sustainable DC Plan, track progress, and make the results publicly available.

630.10 Action E-7.1.D: Sustainable DC Innovation Challenge

Fully launch the Sustainable DC Innovation Challenge to help District agencies test new innovations and technology with the goal of increasing the use of renewable energy.

630.11 Action E-7.1.E: Reduce Energy Use in District Government-Owned Buildings

Retrofit and maintain District government-owned buildings to minimize energy use. Install renewable energy technology to minimize energy use.

630.12 Action E-7.1.F: Environmental Partnerships

Continue to leverage the local business and environmental advocacy communities by collaborating on sustainability initiatives.

630.12a Text Box: Public-Private Coordination

Coalitions of stakeholders and government representatives—including the Food Policy Council (FPC), GBAC, and UFAC—regularly convene to evaluate and make recommendations regarding the effectiveness of the District’s sustainability policies. These coalitions analyze the impact of existing and proposed policies on the District’s environmental health, including the potential impact of policies on the specific environmental challenges facing Washington, DC.

630.13 Action E-7.1.G: Environmental Audits

Evaluate existing and proposed new District government facilities to guide decisions about retrofits and other conservation measures. Audits should include analysis with regard to resilience and energy efficiency and also be required any time the District leases space for government use. Resilience audits should support Washington, DC’s capacity to thrive amidst challenging conditions by preparing and planning to absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to adverse events.

##### **10-A DCMR § 631** E-7.2 SUSTAINABILITY EDUCATION AND STEWARDSHIP {#sec-10-a631 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A631}

631.1 A key element of the District’s environmental strategy is increased environmental education. This should begin with collaborative efforts between local nonprofits, the private sector, District and federal governments, and K-12 schools. The District’s Sustainable DC Plan, Environmental Literacy Plan, and regional 2014 Chesapeake Bay Plan provide road maps for environmental education implementation. Aquatic and wildlife education programs instill appreciation of natural resources in youth and provide them with knowledge and skills that they may use later in life. Environmental education activities should continue with adult programs, professional development for teachers, and outreach to the business community on environmental quality issues. These programs should move Washington, DC beyond environmental awareness to increased stewardship and informed action. Furthermore, demonstration projects, such as those funded through the Sustainable DC Innovation Grant program, provide the means to introduce and experience innovative ideas and approaches and prepare the way for replication and upscaling.

631.2 Policy E-7.2.1: Sustainability Education in District Schools

Expand programs to educate youth from preschool to high school about the importance of sustainability.

631.3 Policy E-7.2.2: Continuing Education on the Environment

Encourage greater participation by residents, business owners, institutions, and public agencies in reaching environmental goals. This should be achieved through public education, community engagement, compliance assistance, and environmental enforcement programs.

631.4 Policy E-7.2.3: Interpretive Centers

Support the continued development of environmental education and nature centers in the District, particularly in recovering habitat areas such as the Anacostia River shoreline.

631.5 Policy E-7.2.4: Demonstration Projects

Encourage best practice guides, demonstration projects, tours, and other tools to create a culture where the green choice (i.e., the choice that results in greater energy efficiency, resiliency, sustainability, innovation, and better environmental health) is the preferred choice for energy, transportation, construction, and design decisions.

631.6 Policy E-7.2.5: Sustainable Purchasing

Strengthen the District’s Sustainable Purchasing Program through the addition of guidance in new product categories, making the resources more accessible, training more District employees on the use of the product specifications, and making Environmentally Preferable Products and Services (EPPS) the default through District purchasing systems.

See also Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policy PROS-2.2.8 on Stewardship of public space.

631.7 Action E-7.2.A: Partnerships for Environmental Education

Develop partnerships with environmental nonprofits and advocacy groups to promote environmental education in the District. Examples of such programs include the Earth Conservation Corps effort to employ youth in environmental restoration along the Anacostia River; the Anacostia Watershed Society’s tree planting, clean up, and riverboat tour events; and the NPS summer programs for high school students at Kenilworth Park.

631.8 Action E-7.2.B: Production of Green Guide

Continue to update guidance aimed at homeowners, builders, contractors, and the community-at-large with guidelines and information on green building and GI.

631.9 Action E-7.2.C: Sustainability in Schools, Recreation Centers, and Libraries

When modernizing all public school buildings, recreation centers, and libraries, reduce their environmental footprint and integrate sustainable and healthy practices into their operations. Continue to support District-wide schoolyard greening efforts and related programs and encourage public and charter schools to participate in schoolyard greening efforts.

##### **10-A DCMR § 632** E-7.3 ENVIRONMENT AND THE ECONOMY {#sec-10-a632 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A632}

632.1 Environmental and economic development goals intersect with respect to the redevelopment of brownfield sites. Brownfields include industrial, commercial, institutional, or government sites that are abandoned or underused, in part due to environmental contamination or perceived contamination. Their redevelopment provides the opportunity to revitalize underserved communities, increase property tax revenue, and create new jobs. In the District, a Voluntary Clean up Program has been initiated to provide incentives to clean up brownfields and put them back into active use.

632.2 Linked to the redevelopment of brownfields is the idea of growing the environmental sector of the District’s economy. A number of Washington, DC-based organizations have pioneered the idea of building a green-collar workforce to demonstrate how employment and natural resource conservation can sustain one another. Training programs have been established to help District youth find jobs in green construction, horticulture, parks and recreation, landscaping, recycling, renewable energy, and similar professions. The District can contribute to these programs through initiatives to attract green businesses to Washington, DC. Such efforts can help diversify the economy and provide new jobs while advancing the sustainability goals of the Comprehensive Plan.

632.3 Policy E-7.3.1: Brownfield Remediation

Clean up and redevelop contaminated brownfield sites, providing new business and job opportunities and expanding land resources for equitable development, as appropriate, housing and affordable housing, as appropriate, open space, and other purposes. Expand financial incentives for the remediation and redevelopment of these sites.

632.4 Policy E-7.3.2: Job Training

Continue to train more District residents to be competitive for livable-wage jobs in growing industries such as sustainability, the environment, and resilience. Connect underemployed residents to training programs and any necessary social services.

632.5 Policy E-7.3.3: Incentives for Green Business

Support economic incentives that encourage environmentally sustainable businesses to locate in the District.

632.6 Action E-7.3.A: Voluntary Clean Up Program

Continue the District’s Voluntary Clean Up Program. The program is designed to encourage the investigation and remediation of contamination on any site that is not on the EPA’s National Priority List and that is not the subject of a current clean-up effort.

632.7 Action E-7.3.B: Sustainable Business Program

Develop a more robust, voluntary sustainable business program that partners with businesses to help them operate sustainably.

632.8 Action E-7.3.C: Green-Collar Job Corps

Continue to implement green-collar job training programs focused on GI installation and maintenance, solar installations, and lead abatement in order to educate and train unemployed or underemployed District residents. Efforts should be made to connect trainees with employers in the green fields upon the completion of their training programs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 633** E-7.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM MANAGEMENT {#sec-10-a633 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A633}

633.1 The final section of this chapter addresses the administration of environmental policies and programs in Washington, DC.

633.2 Policy E-7.4.1: Adequacy of Funding

Provide for adequate funding and coordination of environmental protection activities and ensure that the environmental impacts of public actions and decisions are fully evaluated.

633.3 Action E-7.4.A: DOEE

Provide the necessary staff resources, funding, and regulatory authority for the DOEE to achieve its mission and successfully implement the District’s key environmental protection programs.

### **10-A7** ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 700** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A700}

700.1 The Economic Development Element addresses the future of Washington, DC’s economy and the creation of economic opportunity for current and future District residents. It includes strategies to sustain the District’s major industries, diversify the economy, accommodate job growth, maintain small businesses and neighborhood commercial districts, and increase access to employment for District residents.

700.2 The critical economic development issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Ensuring that prosperity is equitably shared by addressing the disparities and underlying barriers that exist across race and geography;

Growing and diversifying Washington, DC’s economy;

Increasing career opportunities and the workforce development system’s effectiveness for residents most in need;

Expanding opportunities for small, local, and minority businesses; and

Responding to the impacts of technological advancements on employment and businesses.

700.3 Since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2006, Washington, DC has achieved success in:

Growing the tax base;

Increasing jobs across a wide range of industries;

Catalyzing economic development through reuse of large sites across the District;

Improving the District’s market position in the regional economy;

Revitalizing commercial corridors;

Expanding workforce development programs that prepare residents for in-demand occupations;

Increasing support for entrepreneurs, including greater access to capital;

Deploying creative placemaking initiatives that advance community building, urban design, and retail revitalization;

Attracting, nurturing, and retaining growth in innovation-driven fields; and

Growing local industries in the maker economy.

Data included in this Element precede the 2020 public health emergency. While the District’s economic position may be substantially affected in the early 2020’s, the District anticipates that economic trends highlighted in this chapter will hold in the long-term along with the policies contained in this chapter, which are designed to guide the District through both growth and recession cycles.

700.4 Since 2006, Washington, DC’s economy has expanded and diversified with growth in a range of sectors across the central employment area and along commercial corridors. Additionally, the District has been a national epicenter in the changing nature of work, where the increasing prevalence of teleworking, independent contracting, and gig work has increased commercial activity in both formal and informal workspaces. As a result, the District’s economy has become strong, benefitting from sustained growth, which generates a tax base that balances costs with revenue. However, the District’s economic growth has contributed to increases in property values that present challenging barriers for both established and emerging businesses, which can be particularly severe among small businesses. Additionally, more work remains to ensure that all residents have access to retail, commercial facilities and job opportunities with career pathways. The District is striving to ensure that all residents, particularly those from communities of color, are able to enjoy the benefits of economic growth in the District and the region.

700.5 Economic development is about more than simply increasing the number of jobs and improving the District’s finances. It is also about ensuring that all residents have opportunities to thrive economically. This means fostering good-quality jobs with career paths to higher wages and connecting more residents to those good-quality jobs through better preparation. This is especially true for residents who have traditionally faced greater challenges accessing the benefits of economic growth, such as communities of color and low-income residents. Economic development harnesses the benefits of the strong regional economy to grow the District’s economy equitably. . Economic development strategies are also critical to improving the quality of life in neighborhoods, and bringing retail, , restaurants, and basic services to communities that are underserved by these amenities today.

700.6 A racially equitable economy that ensures all residents, particularly those disadvantaged historically, can become economically secure is fundamental to the District’s resilience and prosperity. While the District has experienced population and economic growth in recent years, poverty, child poverty, and income inequality have all grown, and disproportionately affect people of color. In 2017, 26 percent of the Black population lived below the poverty level, the highest among all racial and ethnic groups. While Blacks represent 45 percent of the population, Black-owned businesses make up less than 14 percent of total businesses. Labor force participation is lower among Black residents than white residents, and 72 percent of Black residents work full-time and earn less than $75,000, compared to just 34 percent of their white counterparts. Significant racial disparities exist in household incomes, business ownership, and employment. These structural inequalities are present in earning gaps, homeownership rates, retirement savings, student loan debt, and uneven asset building strategies, all contributing to wealth disparities in the District. The District must commit to closing the racial wealth gap by reducing income inequality. Racially equitable economic development must mean intentionally disrupting systems that perpetuate income and wealth inequality. The policies and actions in this Element must be applied recognizing this context, with the goal to reduce the racial income and wealth gaps and specific inequalities facing communities of color.

700.7 Prior to 1998, the District faced chronic negative economic trends that limited its ability to meet the needs of many residents. These trends included population loss, job decline, high unemployment and poverty rates, fiscal insolvency, and the loss of spending power to the suburbs. As of 2019, Washington, DC, is financially healthy and experiencing sustained population and job growth. However, the historic east-west socio-economic divide in the District has become more stark. While many neighborhoods are becoming more diverse socio-economically, the lowest-income residents—who are predominately Black—have become increasingly concentrated in many southern and eastern communities. In addition, the same residents are more likely to have lower levels of education, which corresponds to much lower labor force participation and higher unemployment rate.

700.8 In 1950, Washington, DC accounted for nearly 75 percent of the metropolitan region’s jobs. By 2000, the District’s share of the region’s jobs had fallen to less than 25 percent. Figure 7.1 depicts a new wave of job growth that began in 1998. This wave increased the number of jobs in Washington, DC by 126,000—from 672,000 in 2000 to 798,000 by 2015. Much of this growth occurred in the recovery from the 2008 recession, when the District’s net employment growth increased from an average of 7,000 jobs per year to over 10,000 jobs per year. As a result of this growth, the District has begun regaining a larger share of the metropolitan region’s total employment. By 2018, Washington, DC accounted for approximately 30 percent of the metro area’s jobs. This is an important economic shift following the 1980s and 1990s, when the District experienced little to no job growth.

700.9 Figure 7.1: Employment in Washington, DC

**History**
- *Source: BLS, DC Office of Planning, 2016*
- *Note: Chart shows employment indexed to its 1990 value. Each subsequent value is a percentage of the 1990 value. 700.10 The District has more jobs than residents but still has an unemployment rate that is more than 50 percent higher than the regional average. Jobs in the District provide some of the highest wages in the country, but over 16 percent of the District’s residents live below the poverty line. The region has had strong and sustained economic growth, adding an average of more than 41,000 jobs a year since 2000. Despite sustained job growth locally and regionally, many District residents, especially from communities of color, continue to face long-term unemployment due to structural barriers which lead to persistent inequities in skills and education. The District must commit to reducing barriers that disproportionately incarcerate, penalize and reduce opportunities within Black, Indigenous, and Peoples of Color (BIPOC) communities. Additionally, billions of dollars of income are generated in the District, the majority of which the District is unable to tax because its earners live in other states. This limitation adds to the District’s challenge harnessing its economic growth to invest in residents with the greatest need. 700.11 Some of the negative trends of the past have begun to reverse course. Washington, DC is reasserting its position at the center of the regional economy, which had the fifth greatest number of jobs in the country in 2017, with more than 3.2 million jobs. Since 1997, the District has seen significant private sector employment growth, particularly in industries that generate large amounts of secondary employment through business-to-business transactions that facilitate the delivery of goods and services to customers. The growth has occurred in industries that also have higher than typical average compensation, such as architectural and engineering services, advertising, and public relations. This generates notable indirect employment growth through consumer spending in sectors such as accommodations and food services. 700.12 The District’s rapid and sustained population growth has contributed to higher property values and increased personal wealth for many long-time homeowners. The growth has also alleviated the District’s financial limitations through increased tax revenues. For example, adjusted for inflation, the value of all the commercial properties in the District more than doubled between 2006 and 2018, which contributed to an 85 percent increase in commercial property tax assessments over that period. 700.13 In addition, downtown retail rebounded following steep declines in previous decades and neighborhood commercial districts like U Street NW, 14th Street NW, and Barracks Row also rebounded. After decades in which retailers shunned areas east of 16th Street NW, new retail and fresh food options are being developed in the eastern half of the Washington, DC, including in Wards 7 and 8; national/brand tenants are clustered in Columbia Heights and Fort Lincoln; and a thriving commercial and cultural district has emerged along H Street NE. 700.14 Tourism also rebounded; in 2017 the District hosted nearly 23 million visitors. Those visitors were accommodated by a growing supply of hotel rooms, totaling 32,000 rooms in 2018, with 2,500 additional rooms under construction and another 6,100 in pre-development. The sustained expansion of hotel rooms is particularly notable because it has coincided with the introduction of short-term rental housing options, which significantly increased lodging options for visitors. 700.15 By 2045, the District is projected to add 247,100 jobs. One of the most significant economic challenges will be filling more of these jobs with District residents. This will not only create wealth and opportunity within Washington, DC, it will offset commuter traffic, reduce social service expenses, and improve the quality of life for thousands of households. Confronting this challenge successfully will require a multi-pronged strategy to continue improving the educational system, increasing career training, strengthening workforce preparedness, growing partnerships with employers, and improving the regional transportation network to support job access.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 700*

##### **10-A DCMR § 701** ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL {#sec-10-a701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A701}

701.1 The overarching goal for economic development in the District is to drive inclusive economic expansion and resilience by growing the economy and reducing employment disparities across race, geography, and educational attainment status.

##### **10-A DCMR § 702** ED-1 DEFINING THE ECONOMIC FUTURE {#sec-10-a702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A702}

702.1 The District’s economy is underpinned by a handful of core industries, including government (particularly federal government); educational services; professional, technical, and scientific services; administrative support services; religious, grantmaking, civic, professional, and similar organizations; accommodation and food services; arts, entertainment, and recreation; and health care and social assistance. These eight industries account for more than 85 percent of jobs in Washington, DC and distinguish the District’s economy in the regional and national economies. Economic development strategies must explore ways to sustain these industries while leveraging them to attract new businesses and jobs. Diversifying the economic base through focused support of fields with high-growth opportunities can expand job opportunities for residents and can increase the District’s resilience against economic downturns.

702.2 The District’s economy is diversifying, but it is still dominated by the government sector. More than 30 percent of the jobs are public sector jobs, with the federal government directly accounting for approximately 26 percent of total employment, and local government jobs accounting for approximately five percent in 2016. The federal government generates many of the District’s private sector jobs because it spends heavily on contracting and procurement from local businesses.

702.3 In the 1980s, federal procurement spending emerged as a major component of the federal government’s budget as an approach to reduce its workforce by outsourcing work to contractors on a competitive basis. Federal procurement spending in the metropolitan region increased steadily between 1980 and 2010, when it peaked at $81.5 billion in 1996 after exceeding spending on the federal payroll. Since 2010, federal procurement in the region has declined by approximately 10 percent. However, most of the regional decline has been to spending in Virginia. As of 2016, procurement spending in the District has remained flat since 2010 at $20.5 billion. Additionally, the federal government’s employment in the District grew by only three percent, from 192,800 employees in 2006 to 199,300 employees in 2016. The DC Department of Employment Services’ (DOES) industry projections indicate that the federal government is not likely to increase its employment in Washington, DC between 2016 and 2026.

702.4 These trends of flat or declining federal employment and procurement in the District are significant, because historically federal spending and employment have accounted for the overwhelming majority of the region’s economic growth. This shift marks a major economic transition following generations of sustained growth propelled by the federal government’s operations.

702.5 Figure 7.2 shows the District’s top 20 private industries in 2017 ranked by numeric change in jobs between 2004 and 2017 . Over this period, employment has grown dramatically but the same industries still dominated the District’s economy, representing 60 percent of all jobs and 89 percent of private sector jobs in the District.

702.6 Figure 7.2: 20 Largest Private Sector Industries in the District of Columbia: 2004–2017 Ranked by Total Employment Change

NAICS

Code

Industry

2004

2017

Numeric Change

Percent Change

722

Food services and drinking places

30,483

52,577

22,094

72.48%

541

Professional, scientific, and technical services

93,841

116,041

22,200

23.66%

813

Religious, grantmaking, civic, professional, and similar organizations

44,078

57,548

13,470

30.56%

611

Educational services

35,798

45,892

10,094

28.20%

621

Ambulatory health care services

10,215

20,479

10,264

100.48%

622

Hospitals

22,466

26,917

4,451

19.81%

561

Administrative and support services

41,415

46,387

4,972

12.01%

624

Social assistance

10,696

13,809

3,113

29.10%

238

Specialty trade contractors

5,963

8,490

2,527

42.38%

531

Real estate

9,301

11,661

2,360

25.37%

445

Food and beverage stores

5,483

7,917

2,434

44.39%

711

Performing arts, spectator sports, and related industries

2,759

4,936

2,177

78.91%

812

Personal and laundry services

5,915

7,965

2,050

34.66%

623

Nursing and residential care facilities

7,372

7,482

110

1.49%

814

Private households

4,315

5,216

901

20.88%

515

Broadcasting, except internet

4,374

5,234

860

19.66%

721

Accommodations

14,795

15,111

316

2.14%

999

Unclassified

6,106

2,151

-3,955

-64.77%

522

Credit intermediation and related activities

8,529

7,209

-1,320

-15.48%

511

Publishing industries, except internet

9,180

5,563

-3,617

-39.40%

All other private sector Jobs

54,339

56,188

1,849

3.40%

Total private employment

429,176

524,773

95,597

22.27%

**History**
- *Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Covered Employment and Wages (CEW) series; DC DOES Current Employment Survey (CES) series NAICS = North American Industry Classification System*
- *Note: Total retail employment (which is comprised of several NAICS industries) is estimated at 20,000 702.7 Washington, DC’s largest private sector industry is professional, scientific, and technical services, which accounted for approximately 30 percent of the District’s private sector employment in 2017. This category includes lawyers, architects, engineers, and accountants. The second-largest category, religious, grantmaking, civic, professional, and similar organizations, includes the many industry, trade, and interest groups in the District. The food services and drinking places industry had among the greatest numeric and percentage increases in employment between 2004 and 2017. The industry added over 22,094 jobs, jumping from the District’s fifth-largest industry by employment in 2004 to the third-largest in 2017. Other key sectors are educational services and ambulatory health care, which added 10,264 and 4,451 jobs, respectively. 702.7a Text Box: The Sharing Economy The sharing economy, which includes businesses that provide shared-use goods and services such as mobility, housing, workspace, and equipment, is expanding and driving innovation in business practices across numerous industries. Its most visible impact has been on transportation through services, such as car sharing, on-demand ride hailing, and bike sharing. It also includes business cooperatives, community farms, and membership workspaces. 702.7b The sharing economy has the potential to reshape the District’s built environment and infrastructure by shifting where work occurs and how people move. However, many of the people who deliver the goods and services in the sharing economy are employed as independent contractors, and there are significant concerns related to worker compensation, benefits, retirement planning, and career stability. 702.8 In 2006, forecasts by DOES and research organizations including the Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University anticipated the District would add approximately 7,000 new jobs per year on average between 2005 and 2015 These forecasts accurately projected the total amount of jobs that were created across this period. 702.9 The DC Office of Planning (OP) anticipates job growth to maintain a long-term average of approximately 9,000 per year through 2035. OP’s long-term growth rates balance cycles of rapid growth against periods of economic contraction. DOES expects nearly all sectors of the economy to grow during the next decade, but certain retail segments closely connected to neighborhood commercial corridors—such as clothing, furniture, and electronics—are forecast to contract. These contractions are associated with the rise of online retailing.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 702*

##### **10-A DCMR § 703** ED-1.1 DIVERSIFYING THE ECONOMIC BASE {#sec-10-a703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A703}

703.1 The District can do more to leverage the strengths of its economy and the region’s skilled, highly educated labor force. It already has an enviable mix of assets that includes the nation’s capital, high-performing industries, numerous colleges and universities, amenity-rich neighborhoods, and a robust multimodal transportation system that links the entire metropolitan region. To increase its competitiveness, the District will need to further diversify its economy in sectors that have growth potential.

703.2 The District’s economic growth strategy emphasizes sustaining established industries as well as growing and supporting six cross-cutting industry clusters. Supporting and enhancing core industries facilitates future growth that strengthens the District’s competitive advantage. Established fields include the federal government, professional services, universities, media and communications companies, hospitality and tourism providers, and design firms.

703.3 Beyond the established fields, the District will also build economic resilience by supporting and growing cross-cutting industry clusters where the District has a competitive advantage nationally. Economic resilience is the ability for the District government, in partnership with businesses and the workforce, to mitigate the impacts of chronic stressors (such as high unemployment) as well as shocks (such as the sudden loss of economic activity due to a recession or technology changes). The clusters include the impact economy, smart cities and civic solutions, professional services innovation, hospitality innovation, security technology, as well as data science and analytics. By supporting these forward-looking industry clusters, the District is seeking diversify its economy.

See also the Infrastructure Element for additional information on smart cities.

703.4 Figure 7.3 Cross-Cutting Industry Clusters Identified by the 2016 DC’s Economic Strategy

(certified as the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy or CEDS by the U.S. Economic Development Administration in August 2017)

703.5 The District is also a center of international business and foreign direct investment. The foreign missions and offices of global economic organizations, such as the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), represent a major economic sector in their own right. The concentration of missions and institutions makes the District a unique place to conduct business for companies engaging in international investment or transactions.

703.6 Figures 7.2 and 7.3 provide some indication of where the District’s economy may be headed. Since 2004, four sectors—professional, scientific, and technical services; accommodation and food services; health care and social assistance; and educational services—have produced more than 80 percent of new private sector jobs in the District. Looking forward to 2026, the DOES 2016 industry projections indicate that these four sectors are likely to continue producing the vast majority of job growth over the next six years. Among these sectors, growth in the professional, scientific, and technical services segment is particularly beneficial because it is one of the District’s strongest domestic and international export industries. Exports are important because they help drive higher rates of economic growth by capturing spending from other economies.

703.7 Between 2016 and 2026, several high-growth industries—including computer systems design and related services; professional, scientific, and technical services; ambulatory health care services; and food services and drinking places—are anticipated to drive growth, offsetting stagnant federal government employment and procurement as well as losses in declining industries, such as travel arrangement and reservation services.

703.8 The 15 industries listed in Figure 7.4 represent more than half of the job growth expected in Washington, DC during the 10-year period between 2016 and 2026. Some of the gains reflect continued growth of core industries like professional, scientific, and technical services; health care and social assistance; and food services and drinking places. Other gains are in emerging sectors, which show promise for even greater expansion.

703.9 Figure 7.4: Top 15 Projected High-Growth Industries, in the District 2016-2026

Industry

New Jobs Projected

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

14,450

Educational Services

7,283

Ambulatory Health Care Services

7,214

Administrative and Support Services

6,337

Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services

5,438

Computer Systems Design and Related Services

5,433

Food Services and Drinking Places

4,886

Home Health Care Services

4,187

Social Assistance

3,680

Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools

3,103

Elementary and Secondary Schools

3,084

Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations

2,138

Employment Services

2,109

Hospitals

1,943

Total Federal Government Employment

1,785

703.10 In 2018, the District’s economy had been growing in employment and output for 20 years. Long-standing core sectors had propelled economic growth along two dimensions: expansion of established lines of business and the addition of new lines of business. Strength in established sectors had positioned the District to take advantage of growing segments in the nation’s economy by specializing in rapidly growing technology-driven and enabled fields, such as cybersecurity and coworking. Through continued growth in core sectors and emerging industries, the District will continue building a resilient and inclusive economy.

703.10a Text Box: Opportunity Zones

In 2017, a new federal tax law, the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, included a tax incentive program called Opportunity Zones. The program provides tax benefits for investors with capital gains that invest through Qualified Opportunity Funds in real estate and operating businesses located in Census tracts designated as Opportunity Zones. The tracts—nominated by each state, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories—were certified by the U.S. Treasury Department as Opportunity Zones, which are eligible to receive investments from the Qualified Opportunity Funds. This program, although unproven, could be a useful tool in attracting investment in communities that have historically been overlooked by many investors. The District is focused on aligning Opportunity Zone investments with community priorities and supporting community-driven projects in leveraging the incentive.

703.11 Map 7.1: Federal Opportunity Zones within the District

(Source: DC GIS 2019) Note: As of 2019, the Opportunity Zone designations are set to expire December 21, 2028.

703.12 Policy ED-1.1.1: Core Industries

Continue to support and grow the District’s core industries, particularly the federal government; professional, scientific and technical services; religious, grantmaking, civic professional, and similar organizations; postsecondary education; accommodation and food services; health care and social assistance; and administrative support services.

703.13 Policy ED-1.1.2: Economic Linkages

Leverage the potential of core industries to provide new employment opportunities, particularly the growth of businesses that supply essential goods and services to the government, universities, hospitals, law firms, hotels, nonprofits, and other major employers in the District.

703.14 Policy ED-1.1.3: Diversification

Diversify the District’s economy by targeting fields with the greatest potential for growth, including the impact economy, smart cities and civic solutions, professional services innovation, hospitality innovation, security technology, and data science and analytics. Established industries with significant growth potential include retail, international business, infrastructure, and building construction.

703.15 Policy ED-1.1.4: Promote Local Entrepreneurship

Support District residents, including women-owned businesses and equity impacts enterprises (small, resident-owned Black and Brown business) seeking entrepreneurship opportunities through layered programs, including technical assistance, promotion of District products and services, and market development.

703.16 Policy ED-1.1.5 Build Capacity and Opportunities

Focus on building capacity and opportunities to participate in core and growth industries for minority- and women-owned businesses. Ensure under-represented entrepreneurs have access to business opportunities created through public sector spending, anchor institution spending, and corporate supply chains. Provide layered support through technical assistance, product promotion, and market development.

703.17 Policy ED-1.1.6: Competitive Edge

Maintain and enhance the District’s competitive edge relative to the metropolitan Washington, DC region and U.S. markets in fields such as federal government, professional services, health care, postsecondary education, media and communications, and hospitality and tourism. Enhancing the District’s competitive edge may require continued government support and performance-based incentives for economic development programs; government participation in local economic development projects and initiatives; strengthened capacity among local economic development organizations, community development corporations, and workforce development groups; well-maintained business fundamentals, including transportation access; and support for and partnerships with communities of color .

703.18 Policy ED-1.1.7: Use of Large Sites

Plan strategically for large development sites to ensure that their unique potential is fully realized both as a source of economic dynamism and equity building, maximizing the sites’ utility to the District. View the sites as assets to further the District’s goals to diversify its economy and provide inclusive, equitable job growth, for housing and affordable housing production, and to bring desired amenities and services to neighborhoods. Sites with Metro access and priority transit access should be used to advance growth in emerging industries that diversify the District’s economy.

703.19 Policy ED-1.1.8: International Assets

Draw on international business and institutional assets to develop businesses that specialize in international trade of goods and services. Expand cultural opportunities to residents and visitors, and create links between the District and foreign cities, industries, retail, institutions, and markets.

703.20 Policy ED-1.1.9: International Tourism

Support efforts by Destination DC and the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) to strategically expand direct flights and market the District as a tourism destination to foreign markets. International visitors generate particularly large amounts of tax revenue that benefit District residents.

703.21 Action ED-1.1.A: Economic Development Strategic Plan

Maintain an Economic Development Strategic Plan that lays out in greater detail the steps the District must pursue to maintain and grow its economy. This plan should cover all economic sectors, evaluate competitiveness, and include strategies for workforce development, as well as business attraction and retention. It shall be developed through broad input from stakeholders, including those representing resident, industry, communities of color, and education interests. The Plan should identify approaches that provide recruitment and opportunities to participate by small and minority-owned businesses, and approaches to close the racial income and wealth gaps in the District.

703.22 Action ED-1.1.B: Data Tracking

Maintain and regularly update statistical data on employment in core sectors, wages and salaries, forecasts by sector, and opportunities for future employment growth. Where possible, the District should consistently track, collect, and disaggregate data by race.

703.23 Action ED-1.1.C: Monitoring and Updating Data to Support Recovery from 2020 Public Health Emergency

Monitor and update appropriate data to support 2020 public health emergency response and recovery efforts. Such data will include a wide range of economic indicators and drivers, such as jobs, population, and housing, and where possible, should track, collect, and disaggregate data by race.

703.24 Action ED-1.1.D: Business Support Structures

Work collaboratively across District agencies to streamline processes and create a more centralized system that assists businesses in meeting regulatory requirements quickly and efficiently, with a particular focus on serving small and local businesses, equity impact enterprises, businesses that show the promise to create many jobs, and businesses that help the District meet goals, such as its commitment to reduce greenhouse gasses. Centralize information and assistance to small and local businesses on starting a new business, the business permitting processes, zoning, fees and regulations, incentives, financing, unique programs, and opportunities. Create and maintain a fast-track permits and approvals system for businesses interested in opening or expanding in priority, underserved neighborhoods.

703.25 Action ED-1.1.E: Improve Access to Capital and Financing Opportunities

Support collaboration between District agencies and private organizations that facilitate increased access to capital for District entrepreneurs. This includes strategic grantmaking, facilitating small business access to capital, and facilitating new forms of investment, such as social impact investing and Opportunity Funds.

703.26 Action ED-1.1.F: Identify Underused Sites

Explore the feasibility of identifying underused commercial sites using techniques such as parcel-based development capacity analysis. This identification would inform land-use planning and economic development.

703.27 Action ED-1.1.G: Monitor Opportunity Zones

Monitor effects of the federal Opportunity Zones incentive in DC’s Qualified Opportunity Zones to ensure that these programs benefit communities and to identify and address adverse community impacts, particularly to communities of color. If significant impacts are identified, recommend program and policy changes to mitigate the impacts.

703.28 Action ED-1.1.H: Stabilize Business Occupancy Costs

Explore program and policy alignments that stabilize or reduce commercial occupancy costs in the District, especially for historically disadvantaged businesses. Potential options include alignment with the District’s sustainability programs to reduce energy costs, increased awareness of small business capital programs, and agreements for the reuse of public lands.

703.29 Action ED-1.1.I: Increasing Exports

Seek opportunities to increase domestic and international exports of goods and services produced by District-based organizations through cost-effective strategies. Examples include high-visibility pop-ups that introduce DC brands to new markets, and foreign trade missions that help build new business partnerships.

##### **10-A DCMR § 704** ED-1.2 SUSTAINING THE FEDERAL PRESENCE {#sec-10-a704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A704}

704.1 Although the number of federal jobs declined between 1990 and 1998 and continued to decline as a percentage of all jobs through 2017, retaining federal employment is an important part of the District’s economic development strategy. Not only does the federal government buffer the District’s economy from cyclical boom-and-bust cycles, it generates significant private employment.

704.2 Washington, DC’s status as the nation’s capital and seat of the United States government is intrinsic to the local economy. In 2016, the federal government employed 199,300 workers in the District, and federal activities accounted for almost 34 percent of the District’s economic output. It accounts for one in every four jobs in Washington, DC. The continued presence of the federal government and related uses is a key source of the District’s preeminence in the region. Supporting this presence is important to maintaining the District’s central position in the metropolitan economy.

704.3 Decentralization of federal jobs from Washington, DC has been a concern since the 1950s. The combination of interstate highways, suburbanization of the workforce, lack of available land, and national security issues resulted in the relocation of many federal offices to Maryland and Virginia in the 1950s and 1960s. Historically, the National Capital Planning Commission’s 60/40 policy encouraged centralization of the federal government’s regional workforce within the District of Columbia.

704.3a Text Box: The 60/40 Policy

The 60/40 policy refers to a federal guideline on the distribution of federal jobs within the Washington, DC metropolitan area. The policy was first established in 1968 by NCPC as a symbolic commitment to retain the District of Columbia as the seat of the federal government during a period when many jobs and residents were leaving the District for the suburbs. A goal was set to retain at least 60 percent of the region’s federal jobs within the District, and thus allow no more than 40 percent of the federal jobs to locate in the District suburbs.

704.3b The District’s share of federal jobs in the region dropped below 60 percent in the 1970s and currently stands at about 49 percent. Pressure to relocate federal jobs to the suburbs continues to be strong due to factors such as security and a desire to be closer to the District’s suburbs. In recent decades, the region’s federal employment in the District has hovered in the 50 percent range, and now NCPC is expected to transition away from the longstanding 60/40 policy.

704.3c However, the District encourages the federal government to recommit to Washington, DC as the seat of the federal government. The District is uniquely positioned to serve this role because of its constitutional status, unparalleled access to a specialized workforce, and its supportive infrastructure including the Metrorail system’s core.

704.4 In addition to regional decentralization of federal employment, recent federal policy has encouraged greater national distribution of federal employment. This policy increases the District’s competition for hosting federal jobs.

704.5 One of the factors driving both regional and national decentralization of the federal workforce is the relatively high cost of office space in the District. In response, the General Services Administration (GSA) has been working to decrease the space per employee in federal offices within the District in order to reduce the total amount of space the government owns and leases. Together, these trends have been contributing to an elevated level of office vacancy in Washington, DC through increasingly compact facilities and the ongoing decentralization of the federal government, which is by far the District’s largest industry and employer.

704.6 Looking forward, the District should continue to retain as much federal employment as it can. Federal jobs have historically provided tremendous job opportunities for District residents, ranging from entry level and clerical jobs to advanced managerial and highly skilled positions.

704.7 Even greater opportunities lie in federal procurement. Procurement in the metropolitan region surpassed direct federal spending on wages in the mid-1990s and has remained a leading category of federal spending ever since. A substantial amount of procurement spending—more than $20 billion in 2016—already occurs within the District, as shown in Figure 7.5. Additionally, the District has the potential to grow its economy by capturing a greater portion of federal procurement, which exceeded $72 billion regionally and $432 billion nationally in 2016.

704.8 Figure 7.5: Federal Procurement Spending in the District 2010-2016

**History**
- *Source: Stephen S. Fuller Institute 2017 704.9 More concerted and strategic efforts should be made to help companies capture contract services in the future, leveraging the District’s already strong presence in computer systems design; engineering; cybersecurity; and management, scientific, and technical consulting services. 704.10 Figure 7.6: Federal Procurement by Federal Agency in the Washington, DC Region ($ billions), 2008-2016 (Source: Stephen S. Fuller Institute 2017, Federal Procurement Spending in the Washington Region 2008-2016) 704.11 Policy ED-1.2.1: Sustaining the Federal Workforce Advocate for the retention of the federal workforce within the District, consistent with the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 704.12 Policy ED-1.2.2: Federal Workforce Growth Support the growth of the federal workforce in Washington, DC, particularly in leased office space whose owners pay District property taxes. Consistent with the Federal Elements, ensure that federal expansion plans support the District’s neighborhood revitalization and job creation programs. 704.13 Policy ED-1.2.3: Procurement and Outsourcing Opportunities Improve the District’s competitive position for capturing federal procurement and outsourcing dollars. The District should help local businesses take advantage of procurement opportunities and should employ strategies to increase the number of local minority businesses that qualify, while working to attract new firms that can also take advantage of these opportunities. The District should work closely with local and regional economic development agencies to formulate attraction and retention strategies for such businesses, including tax and financial incentives. 704.14 Policy ED-1.2.4: Retaining Federal Employment Work with NCPC, Maryland and Virginia to retain federal employment in the national capital region including a strong majority of federal jobs in the District. 704.15 Action ED-1.2.A: Retention and Recruitment Programs Work with private sector economic development organizations and through the Office of Federal and Regional Affairs (OFRA) to discourage federal jobs and agencies from leaving Washington, DC, and to enhance the District’s ability to capitalize on federal procurement opportunities. 704.16 Action ED-1.2.B: Technical Assistance Through the Department of Small and Local Business Development (DSLBD), provide local firms with technical assistance in bidding on District and federal procurement contracts so that the District’s companies and workers may capture a larger share of this economic activity. Periodically evaluate the success of local technical assistance programs, and make adjustments as needed to achieve higher rates of success. When practical, collect data and publish informational resources detailing opportunities to participate in District and federal government contracting. 704.17 Action ED-1.2.C: Study Federal Employment Conduct a study in coordination with NCPC to identify updated approaches to retain and attract federal jobs as well as related federal activities in Washington, DC. This study should respond to the changing needs of the federal workplace, identify federal uses best aligned with the District’s workforce and economic development priorities, building types and locations compatible with those federal activities.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 704*

##### **10-A DCMR § 705** ED-1.3 SUPPORTING INNOVATION IN THE ECONOMY {#sec-10-a705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A705}

705.1 The District’s long-term economic strength depends on fostering continual growth and diversification. Historically, the federal government has driven the vast majority of the District’s economic growth. Looking forward, it is likely that an increasing amount of growth will be driven by the private sector.

705.2 Fortunately, Washington, DC is uniquely positioned to support economic innovation driven by technology businesses, technology-enabled businesses, and businesses that use new models. These new and expanding businesses are growing from the foundations of the District’s leading fields, such as issue-driven advocacy, hospitality, regulation management, and government services.

705.3 Economic innovation is taking many different forms, ranging from new industries created by regulatory reform to experiential retail models and technology-oriented service delivery. The common thread among these businesses is that innovation draws on forward-looking and diverse sources of inspiration that are connected to changes in the business environment. These changes are often driven by increased information access, communication, and global commerce. They are also propelled by the District’s robust arts and cultural environment, which injects valuable sources of creativity. These forces align to leverage emerging growth opportunities created by increasing access to low-cost goods and services, which has increased demand for human interaction and products that are authentic to a place or community.

705.4 In 2017, DC’s Economic Strategy identified six opportunity areas for innovation: the impact economy, smart cities and civic solutions, professional services innovation, hospitality innovation, security technology, and data science and analytics. Each of these fields presents opportunities for economic expansion through entrepreneurship and career development. They are also important safeguards against changes in federal policy that may impede the District’s economic growth through increased national distribution of federal employment and reduced federal procurement spending. Supporting innovation in the District’s economy helps ensure that the tax base continues expanding to finance critical investments, including affordable housing production, environmental protection and sustainability, and transportation improvements.

705.5 Since 2006, innovations such as coworking, smartphones, and 4G telecommunications have changed work, travel, and social interactions. These changes are likely to intensify as new technologies such as autonomous vehicles, 5G telecommunications, and artificial intelligence become widely used. The net impacts of these technologies are likely to be positive, though businesses and many individuals in the workforce will face challenges adapting to shifts in the business climate and nature of work.

705.6 The District is a leader in advancing equity and inclusion, particularly in technology-driven industries, through its educational, entrepreneurial, and business development programs. Technology-driven innovation is likely to be a leading facet of the District’s economic growth. However, there are major equity challenges to address—namely, ensuring that business and workforce development programs employ comprehensive strategies to identify and eliminate institutional barriers, and are designed to eliminate structural inequities preventing District residents from attaining employment and business opportunities. An equity focus on business and workforce development programs is imperative because increased automation and legacy business disruption will likely result in reduced employment opportunities in some industries and occupations.

705.7 In addition, Washington, DC’s environmental sustainability leadership is another driver of economic innovation. In 2019, Washington, DC adopted the Clean Energy Omnibus Act, which is landmark legislation that will transition the District to 100 percent renewable electricity by 2032. This comprehensive legislation places the District of Columbia on the cutting edge of energy policy nationally. By taking this bold step toward greater resilience and sustainability, Washington, DC is also catalyzing valuable opportunities for economic growth by stimulating innovation in architecture, engineering, and the construction trades, among other fields.

705.8 Economic innovation is a critical component of building Washington, DC’s economic resilience as national and global economics undergo a period of accelerated change. While the District advances these growth opportunities, it is also important to monitor and adjust job training to keep pace with changing employment opportunities and occupational requirements.

705.9 Policy ED-1.3.1: Technology-Intensive Industries

Aggressively pursue technology-based and creative industries, such as computer systems design, information services, smart cities, clean energy, efficient building construction and renovation, and cybersecurity. Promote the development of space that is attractive for these industries, both in new and existing buildings. Such space should include buildings with good access to transportation, high-quality architecture, a mix of uses, and attractive urban design.

705.10 Policy ED-1.3.2: Media and Design

Capitalize on the success of established broadcast media and design companies by continuing to grow these industries, and by growing related industries such as web design and multimedia content.

705.11 Policy ED-1.3.3: Incentives

Provide performance-based incentives, marketing efforts, and workforce development tools to attract and retain technology and creative industries. Take full advantage of federal incentives, such as research and development tax credits to attract such firms. Link incentive performance to advancing equitable economic development and increased capital within communities of color.

705.12 Policy ED-1.3.4: Leveraging and Adapting to Technological Change

The District supports economic resilience by aligning workforce development and small business development with economic development to ensure that residents, and particularly lower-income residents with less educational attainment, benefit from economic growth driven by technological innovation.

705.13 Policy ED-1.3.5: Leveraging Environmental Policy for Economic Growth

Leverage the District’s environmental sustainability policies for economic growth by aligning them with business attraction and workforce development programs. These efforts should focus on expanded opportunities for historically underrepresented populations, including communities of color.

See also the Environment Element for more information about policies and actions that link environmental sustainability with economic and workforce development.

705.14 Policy ED-1.3.6: Equitable Opportunities in Industries Enabled by Regulatory Reform

Facilitate opportunities for locally owned small businesses and historically underserved populations to participate when new industries are enabled by regulatory reform.

705.15 Action ED-1.3.A: Branding Washington, DC as a Creative Hub

Maintain and grow a marketing and branding campaign that establishes a stronger identity for the District as a center for creativity and innovation, capitalizing on established institutions, such as museums, think tanks, arts establishments, universities, and media industries, as well as the District’s rich local history and culture, such as Go-Go music.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for policies on arts and the economy , and the Educational Facilities Element for policies and actions on educational partnerships.

705.16 Action ED-1.3.B: Link Federal Research and Enterprises

Launch a program that connects District entrepreneurs with technology transfer and commercialization opportunities associated with the federal government’s research institutions in the metropolitan region.

705.17 Action ED-1.3.C: Support Emerging Entrepreneurs

Directly, or through partnerships with private entities, establish a fund or funds to help local entrepreneurs grow investment-ready businesses. To reduce existing inequities, take steps to build capacity in entrepreneurs of color and women to be investment-ready, and ensure access and transparency in any grant processes or procurement opportunities. Emphasize increasing access to capital, particularly among lower-income entrepreneurs in emerging fields, such as the impact economy, urban innovation/smart cities, hospitality and professional services innovation, data, and security tech.

705.18 Action ED-1.3.D: Foster Technology Careers for District Students

Create programs that help District students connect with careers in technology fields. These should include targeted training and opportunities for internships that provide direct experience in technology businesses.

705.19 Action ED-1.3.E: Support and Promote Inclusive Technology Business and Workforce Opportunities

Support and promote inclusivity in the District’s technology economy through workforce development, business development, and public-private sector collaboration. These efforts emphasize increasing the diversity of the workforce serving technology industries, as well as the ownership of technology-oriented businesses.

705.20 Action ED-1.3.F: Planning for Technology-Based Businesses

Explore the benefits of aligning business attraction for technology-based firms with next-generation information technology infrastructure, such as 5G telecommunications networks.

705.21 Action ED-1.3.G: Monitor Changes in Technology

Monitor changes in the technology industry and its impact on jobs, commerce, and workforce development. Washington, DC will use this information to update workforce development approaches to respond to these impacts.

705.22 Action ED-1.3.H: Gig Economy Workers

Analyze the characteristics of the District’s workforce that is employed in the gig economy, which refers to the portion of the workforce that connects a series of on-demand employment opportunities to form a significant source of individual income. The analysis should make recommendations to increase awareness of the limitations, costs, and responsibilities of this type of work. It should also make recommendations to increase access to programs and support resources, such as health insurance. Additionally, explore approaches to reduce worker misclassification.

705.23 Action ED-1.3.I: Assess Incentives

Assess existing and proposed incentives for performance and efficacy. In particular, assess tax and other incentives intended to benefit historically underserved or low-income residents or communities of color to determine if they are advancing equitable development.

705.24 Action ED-1.3.J: Racial Equity Toolkit

Develop a racial equity toolkit to assist in reviewing existing small business and workforce development programs through a racial equity lens.

##### **10-A DCMR § 706** ED-2 THE SPATIAL IMPACTS OF THE JOB MARKET {#sec-10-a706 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A706}

706.1 The forecasted addition of 247,100 jobs between 2015 and 2045 will create demand for office, retail, hospitality, institutional, and industrial space. Estimates of floor space needs for the 30 -year period vary from around 50 million to 94 million square feet, depending on the mix of jobs and space utilization trends. This real estate development will take place across the District with a variety of building types. However, accommodating this growth will require more challenging real estate development techniques, including lot assembly and/or extensive redevelopment of existing facilities, because the District is a mature city.

706.2 Different sectors of the economy will generate the demand for different types of space. The federal government, professional/technical services, and member associations will drive the demand for office space, especially in Central Washington. However, shifts toward hoteling and telework are changing when, where, and how employees work. The education and health care sectors will drive demand for institutional space, typically on campuses. In other areas, growth of the maker economy is generating demand for production, distribution, and repair space. The arts, education, and recreation sector and the accommodation and food services sector will rely on retail, hotel, and cultural space in Central Washington and elsewhere.

706.3 The following sections of the Economic Development Element explore the impact of projected job growth on each of these market segments. The policies and actions are intended to accommodate long-term economic growth needs by coordinating land use and transportation decisions and to make the District’s economy more inclusive and equitable by maximizing access to employment for residents. These policies are supplemented by the job training and development policies that appear later in this element, and by the commercial and industrial land use policies in the Land Use Element.

##### **10-A DCMR § 707** ED-2.1 THE OFFICE ECONOMY {#sec-10-a707 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A707}

707.1 The District has one of the largest inventories of office space in the nation. In 2006, there were 112 million square feet of office space, which grew over the next 10 years to over 142 million square feet. Among American cities, only Manhattan has a larger inventory of Class A office space within a central business district. By most indicators, the District’s office market is performing well. Its vacancy rate is competitive with other growing office markets but historically high at 11.4 percent in 2018. The average asking rent was above $60 per square foot, which is among the highest in the nation, only trailing the New York City and San Francisco Bay Area office markets.

707.2 Central Washington includes a number of submarkets, each providing different amenities and locational advantages. The largest of these submarkets are downtown (traditionally defined as the area east of 16th Street and south of Massachusetts Avenue)and the Golden Triangle (extending from 16th Street west to Foggy Bottom and north to Dupont Circle). Smaller office districts exist in Georgetown, on Capitol Hill, along the avenues of Upper Northwest Washington, and around L’Enfant Plaza. The fastest growth rates within the District’s submarkets has occurred in the Capitol Riverfront and North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa) areas. The large geographic expanse of the District’s office market has been driven at least partially by building height limits and the sizeable area dedicated to federal uses and open space in the heart of Washington, DC.

707.3 Washington, DC’s long established business districts, such as downtown and the Golden Triangle, are entering a phase of remodeling and redevelopment. As a result, office development is pushing east toward Union Station and NoMA areas, and south into Capitol Riverfront . Almost five million square feet of office space is now under construction in Washington, DC, much of it in these areas.

See also the Central Washington Element for more information on the Golden Triangle/K Street Area.

707.4 Although the District’s commercial land supply is adequate to accommodate forecasted job growth through 2045 , the market faces a number of challenges to its continued high performance. Absorption has been modest with an average of 635,000 square feet per year between 2011 and 2016. Over this period, office space has become more intensively used with less dedicated space-per-employee, less on-site document storage, and fewer in-building facilities, such as legal libraries. Denser office configurations are driven by demand for trophy-class office space by businesses seeking newer office formats that feature higher-quality interior architecture and more generous shared space. These newer office configurations accommodate significantly more people per square foot than their predecessors. As a consequence, these new office building formats are contributing to higher vacancy rates, as the District’s office market accommodates significantly more employees while adding modest amounts of net new office space. Telework trends, accelerated by the work-from-home restrictions of the pandemic, are also reshaping office space needs.

707.5 At the same time, some of the existing space in Central Washington has reached the end of its economic life and is in need of renovation or replacement. The Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program, which has generated new office districts such as Capitol Riverfront, has been one of the most significant drivers in the District’s office market since 2006. Going forward, there will be a need for strategies to retain existing office tenants and to attract new tenants through creative marketing.

707.5a Text Box: The Impact of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)

The Department of Defense periodically reorganizes America’s military infrastructure to more effectively and efficiently support its operations. This may result in the redeployment of personnel to new sites, the development of new facilities, and the closure of military bases across the United States. The latest round, announced in 2005 closed the Walter Reed Hospital campus, located between Georgia Avenue NW and 16th Street NW. Additionally, operations at Washington Navy Yard and Bolling Air Force Base were significantly realigned.

707.5b The indirect impacts of BRAC have been even greater than the direct impacts. Specifically, updated Department of Defense security standards required millions of square feet of space in Arlington and Alexandria to be vacated; contractors and federal tenants moved to secure facilities at Fort Belvoir and elsewhere.

707.5c These closures have had a destabilizing impact, but it is also clear that they will generate positive impacts. For example, land transferred from federal ownership to the District is creating new economic development opportunities for the District at sites such as the former Walter Reed campus. Additionally, in 2018, Amazon announced that it would locate its second headquarters in Crystal City, where it will repurpose buildings vacated by BRAC to host at least 25,000 employees. Securing the second headquarters in Northern Virginia is expected to strengthen the region’s economic diversification by attracting, growing, and retaining technology-oriented businesses.

707.6 Policy ED-2.1.1: Office Growth

Plan for an office sector that will continue to accommodate government agencies and growth in government contractors, legal services, international business, trade associations, and other service-sector office industries. The primary location for this growth should be in Central Washington and the adjoining office centers, including NoMa, Capitol Riverfront, Buzzard Point, St. Elizabeths, and Poplar Point.

707.7 Policy ED-2.1.2: Corporate Headquarters

Promote the qualities that favor the District as a headquarters or branch setting for multinational corporations, including its economic, social, political, and locational attributes. Focus on companies that contract with the federal government but are currently headquartered elsewhere and companies that would benefit from proximity to regulators. Construct performance-based incentive packages to encourage large corporations to locate and maintain their offices in the District.

707.8 Policy ED-2.1.3: Signature Office Buildings

Emphasize opportunities for build-to-suit/signature office buildings in order to accommodate tenants and users such as corporate headquarters that require premium office space.

707.9 Policy ED-2.1.4: Diversified Office Options

Diversify the tenant base by attracting premium , mid-range, and low-cost office space users, and by supporting a range of office space types. Recognize that many firms may prefer low-cost space over premium office space.

707.10 Policy ED-2.1.5: Infill and Renovation

Support the continued growth of the office sector through infill and renovation within established commercial districts to more efficiently use available space while providing additional opportunities for new space.

707.11 Policy ED-2.1.6: Local-Serving Office Space

Encourage the development of small local-serving offices and coworking facilities within neighborhood commercial districts throughout Washington, DC to provide relatively affordable locations for small businesses and local services (such as real estate and insurance offices, accountants, consultants, and medical offices).

707.12 Policy ED-2.1.7: Lower-Cost and Flexible Office Space

Support innovations such as shared office space, hoteling, and incubators as methods to support lower-cost office space and reduce office vacancy rates. Consider techniques such as tax incentives and regulatory flexibility.

707.13 Action ED-2.1.A: Marketing Programs

Implement marketing strategies for the District’s commercial space, working collaboratively with local economic development organizations such as the Washington, DC Economic Partnership, Greater Washington Partnership, Federal City Council, Greater Washington Board of Trade, and DC Chamber of Commerce. The program should be conducted on an ongoing basis, focusing on companies that are headquartered elsewhere but conduct extensive business with the federal government, including legal firms, national membership organizations, technology-intensive industries, and the domestic offices of international firms.

707.14 Action ED-2.1.B: Support Low-Cost Office Space

Explore the feasibility of financial or regulatory support to encourage the development of lower-cost office space, including coworking space for small or nonprofit businesses in underinvested commercial districts outside downtown.

707.15 Action ED-2.1.C: Supporting Entrepreneurship

Facilitate entrepreneurship, including through mentorship, technical assistance, incubators, and pro bono partnerships that will help aspiring entrepreneurs access resources and increase the likelihood of establishing a successful small business.

707.16 Action ED-2.1.D: Anchor Commercial Expansion

District agencies leasing new space will give priority to locations in Wards 7 and 8, where they can anchor commercial development, including fresh food retail. OP and the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) should support the location of District facilities in these areas through analysis of land use plans and public lands.

##### **10-A DCMR § 708** ED-2.2 THE RETAIL ECONOMY {#sec-10-a708 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A708}

708.1 The retail sector has generated significant tax revenue that provided employment and income for residents, enhanced the vitality of Washington, DC, and improved shopping, dining, and entertainment choices for District neighborhoods. In recent years, the range of retail options in the District has been increasing. Between 2006 and 2017, nearly six million square feet of retail space has been constructed, with another one million square feet under construction, and an additional six million square feet in the development pipeline.

708.2 New and remodeled retail space has been a leading component of community revitalization throughout Washington, DC, including in CityCenterDC, Gallery Place, Columbia Heights, Logan Circle, Barracks Row, Brookland, H Street, NE, and U Street NW, which have reemerged as major shopping, entertainment, and dining destinations. At the same time, established retail districts such as Friendship Heights, Dupont Circle, Cleveland Park, Georgetown, and Adams Morgan are drawing fewer patrons, as the District’s retail landscape continues to diversify by expanding south and east across the District. Importantly, this expansion is returning retail to Washington, DC’s eastern quadrants, where residents without automobiles have had significantly reduced access to household goods. Some of the communities in the eastern quadrants undergoing retail growth include Fort Lincoln, Fort Totten, Anacostia Gateway, and Skyland.

708.3 The retail economy is important to the tax base, and new retail options are anticipated to capture more consumer spending from residents, workers, and visitors, which strengthens the tax base. Retail expansion has occurred in numerous neighborhood commercial areas across the District and in the Central Employment Area. Since 2006, District-wide retail growth has dramatically reduced the District’s retail leakage as a proportion of resident spending, which was estimated at $1 billion per year in 2006. Between 2009 and 2016, retail sales and use taxes were up 36 percent, and retail employment was up 28 percent.

708.4 In the District, strong retail growth has been driven by robust demand from the food and beverage segment. Nationally, the retail economy is experiencing major shifts in durable goods retailing, due in part to growth in online retailing. These changes are likely to reshape the regional retail landscape and may yield a mix of benefits and challenges for retail in the District. DOES anticipates that non-store retailers, which include online retailers, will be the fastest growing component of retail trade through 2026. This is a major shift that is anticipated to drive new retail business models that will change how retailers connect with customers and likely impact traditional brick-and-mortar stores.

708.5 Efforts are underway to expand retail choices and strengthen existing retail businesses, in both Central Washington, DC and in District neighborhoods. Continued planning and market assessment will help retail areas across the District adapt to changing market conditions. Since 2006, OP has conducted two major retail initiatives: the Retail Action Strategy and Vibrant Retail Streets Toolkit. These initiatives provide a foundation for communities and retailers to adapt to the changing retail landscape, where new retail formats that are experiential and blended with online sales are imparting major changes in retail business models, trade areas, and marketing techniques. These studies identified market potential for numerous retail areas and strategies to attract neighborhood-serving uses, such as grocery stores, home furnishings, and home improvement stores that are missing or underrepresented today. Additional studies may assess the potential for new retail formats, such as shared spaces that are paired with administrative and technical support that make entrepreneurship more accessible by efficiently using limited and expensive land. If the full market potential of retail is tapped starting in 2006, as much as seven to 10 million square feet of floor space might be accommodated by 2026.

708.6 Policy ED-2.2.1: Expanding the Retail Sector

Pursue a retail strategy that will allow the District to fully capitalize on the spending power of residents, workers, and visitors, and that will meet the retail needs of communities across the District and particularly in underserved communities.

708.7 Policy ED-2.2.2: Downtown Shopping

Strengthen Downtown Washington, DC as a regional experiential retail destination in order to capitalize on its status as a transit hub and its historic role as the crossroads and central marketplace for the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Downtown should be tenanted and promoted as a regional experiential retail destination of choice, with multiple traditional and nontraditional retail anchors, a variety of consumer goods retailers, specialty shops, retailers unique to the Washington, DC region, and a wide variety of restaurants and entertainment venues.

708.8 Policy ED-2.2.3: Neighborhood Shopping

Create and support additional shopping opportunities in Washington, DC’s neighborhood commercial districts to better meet the demand for basic goods and services. Reuse of vacant buildings in these districts should be encouraged, along with appropriately scaled retail infill development on vacant and underused sites. Promote the creation and growth of existing locally owned, nonchain establishments because of their role in creating unique shopping experiences, as well as in generating stronger local supply chains that facilitate community wealth building.

708.9 Policy ED-2.2.4: Support Local Entrepreneurs

Support the efforts of local entrepreneurs who enhance the District’s economy by manufacturing and retailing goods within Washington, DC, which increases the local employment and tax revenue generated by consumer retail spending.

708.10 Policy ED-2.2.5: Business Mix

Reinforce existing and encourage new retail districts by attracting a mix of businesses, including local companies, regional chains, and nationally recognized retailers.

708.11 Policy ED-2.2.6: Grocery Stores and Supermarkets

Support and incentivize the development of new grocery stores and supermarkets, and prioritize stores in neighborhoods with existing food deserts, where residents currently travel long distances for food and other shopping services, and neighborhoods most affected by hunger and poverty to improve access to healthy, affordable food. Because such uses inherently require greater depth and lot area than is present in many commercial districts, consider adjustments to current zoning standards to depth and lot area to accommodate these uses, and explore new models like co-ops.

708.12 Policy ED-2.2.7: Planning For Retail

Coordinate neighborhood planning efforts with the District’s economic development planning and small business development programs to improve retail offerings by leveraging the Vibrant Retail Streets Toolkit. Evaluate techniques, such as consolidating retail near highly trafficked locations along major corridors (particularly near transit station areas). Consider strategies to increase a retail area’s market position, including by coordinating promotion. .

708.13 Policy ED-2.2.8: Innovative Retail

Identify and implement innovative retail strategies. This could include supporting pop-up or mobile retailers in neighborhoods with insufficient or unproven market demand for new stores. These strategies can help new businesses become established, or introduce new products and concepts, provide seasonal merchandise and services, and fill commercial buildings during short-term vacancies.

708.14 Policy ED-2.2.9: Clustered Retail at Transit

Cluster retail around areas of high foot traffic, including Metrorail stations, bicycle facilities, high-capacity transit stops, and other multimodal meeting points. Create strong, vibrant retail nodes of to effectively link retail and transit.

708.15 Action ED-2.2.A: Update Retail Action Agenda

Update the District-wide Retail Action Agenda. The agenda should include an evaluation of the current and projected amount of market-supportable retail, strategies for increasing retail offerings in historically underserved communities, submarket-specific retail positioning strategies, and an analysis of how changing retail trends and technologies, such as online retailing and automation, are likely to impact retail businesses and employment in the District.

708.16 Action ED-2.2.B: Retail Ceiling Heights

Determine the feasibility of developing zoning amendments that would permit higher ground floor retail ceiling heights in neighborhood commercial areas. Through processes including ZR-16, many zones have been revised to better accommodate the national standards for retail space, which has higher ceiling limits than typical office or residential uses. However, there may be an additional opportunity to make similar adjustments to zones used in neighborhood commercial areas. If these adjustments are feasible, better accommodating national retail space standards would help improve the District’s economic resilience.

708.17 Action ED-2.2.C: Update the 2005 Retail Leakage Study

Conduct an analysis of the District’s retail economy to assess the impacts from online retailing and opportunities to capture resident retail spending. The study should also assess opportunities to attract additional retail spending by visitors and residents of nearby jurisdictions.

##### **10-A DCMR § 709** ED-2.3 THE TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY ECONOMY {#sec-10-a709 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A709}

709.1 The District is a premier tourism, convention, and special events destination. Its array of attractions and cultural venues, particularly national museums and federal monuments, rivals that of other great cities around the globe. With 22 million annual visitors in 2017, the District is a leading destination for domestic travelers and foreign visitors. Away from the National Mall, an increasingly rich and diverse set of visitor amenities has been developed, including theaters, galleries, restaurants, nightclubs, historic trails, and historic home museums, which are enjoyed by visitors and residents alike. Added to this are the District’s expanded convention facilities and the associated increase in convention travel.

709.2 The economic impact of tourism includes both direct employment in the hospitality industry and spending by tourists and business travelers during their stays in the District. As of 2017, hotels, bars, and restaurants directly provide more than 67,000 jobs in the District. New hotels, such as the 1,150-room Convention Center Marriott Marquis, have added to the lodging choices in the District.

709.3 Future growth is expected in both the tourism and convention sectors. Attractions such as the National Museum of African American History and Culture and the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center will draw new visitors and repeat visitors to the capital. The MCI Center, now called Capital One Arena, anchored revitalization of Chinatown when it opened in 1997. Then Nationals Park opened in 2008, where it helped catalyze reuse of the Anacostia waterfront . Building on the momentum of Nationals Park, the new Audi Field and Entertainment Sports Arena at St. Elizabeths East are expected to draw more visitors and spending to historically underserved communities near and along the Anacostia River. In addition, features such as the African-American Heritage Trail; the Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks; the National Arboretum; Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens; and the Frederick Douglass Home offer an opportunity to explore Washington, DC beyond the monuments while also supporting neighborhood businesses and providing a better understanding of Washington, DC’s history and culture among visitors.

709.4 Meeting the increased demand for visitor services will require sustained efforts to expand the hospitality workforce, upgrade transportation capacity, increase awareness of the District’s public safety, and maintain public access to key attractions and amenities. It will also require proactive measures to address neighborhood concerns about motor coaches, parking, and other tourism impacts.

709.5 Policy ED-2.3.1: Growing the Hospitality Industry

Develop an increasingly robust tourism and convention industry, which is underpinned by a broad base of arts, entertainment, restaurant, lodging, cultural and government services. Strive to increase the total number of visitors to the District, the number of visitors staying in the District, and longer visitor stays in the District. Promote the District not only as the preferred base for exploring Washington, DC’s attractions, but also the preferred overnight base for visiting regional attractions.

709.6 Policy ED-2.3.2: Visitor Attractions

Encourage new and enhanced visitor attractions and entertainment venues in the District, particularly attractions that complement the traditional museums and monuments and draw more international visitors and young adults to Washington, DC. New attractions should create a clear identity for the District as the region’s major entertainment center.

709.7 Policy ED-2.3.3: Amenities Beyond the Mall

Promote the development of cultural amenities beyond the Mall in an effort to more fully capitalize on and distribute the economic benefits of tourism.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for policies on culture in every neighborhood, and the Historic Preservation Element for policies on heritage tourism.

709.8 Policy ED-2.3.4: Lodging and Accommodation

Support the development of a diverse range of hotel types, serving travelers with varying needs, tastes, and budgets. New hotels should be encouraged both within Central Washington and in outlying commercial areas of the District, particularly in areas that are underserved by hotels.

709.9 Policy ED-2.3.5: Federal Coordination

Continue to work with federal entities in the planning of visitor attractions, including new federal museums and memorials, so that the District can plan for complementary amenities and incorporate these features into its marketing programs. The District should also coordinate with the federal government to address security measures that may affect the accessibility and appearance of visitor attractions.

709.10 Policy ED-2.3.6: Gallery Place/Convention Center Entertainment District

Support the continued clustering of entertainment uses in the Gallery Place/Convention Center area to create a stronger and more visible destination for visitors, workers, and residents. Manage noise, lighting, signage, and event activity to appropriately address impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. Improve streetscape and transportation connections between this area and the National Mall to foster its continued growth.

709.11 Policy ED-2.3.7: Visitor Information Services

Provide effective visitor information services, including information on visitor attractions and services, transportation, lodging, dining, cultural, and entertainment options.

See the Transportation Element for additional information on improved signage to attractions and destinations within the District.

709.12 Policy ED-2.3.8: Spin-Off Industries

Promote the development of hospitality-supply industries and technological innovations within the District to capture a greater share of the employment and income benefits associated with this labor-intensive sector. Presently, many of the industries that provide supplies to local hotels and restaurants are located outside of the District.

709.13 Policy ED-2.3.9: Hospitality Workforce Development

Recognize the potential for the hospitality sector to generate entry-level jobs and opportunities for upward mobility for District residents by promoting career and job training and job placement initiatives in this sector, and by working with local hotels, the District of Columbia Hotel Association, the Washington Convention and Tourism Corporation, unions, and others.

709.14 Policy ED-2.3.10: Waterfront Destinations

Promote the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts as destinations for District residents and visitors in an effort to capitalize on the amenities and economic benefits of tourism in neighborhoods adjacent to the rivers.

709.15 Action ED-2.3.A: Promote Unique Assets

Investigate opportunities for further promotion of Washington, DC’s more esoteric attractions so that visitors may be drawn to new destinations in the District, thereby extending their stays and creating more economic benefits for Washington, DC. For example, consider tour packages that include “Undercover Washington” (featuring the FBI Building, the Watergate Hotel, the International Spy Museum, etc.), “Naturalist’s Washington” (featuring the C&O Canal, Dumbarton Gardens, the Anacostia River, Rock Creek Park, and the National Arboretum), “Washington, DC the Port City” (featuring the District’s reimagined ports at Georgetown, the Wharf, and Navy Yard), and “Washington, DC at War” (featuring the Fort Circle Parks and the war memorials).

709.16 Action ED-2.3.B: Economic Development Financing Tools

Review the potential of expanding commercial revitalization programs, such as tax increment financing, to include adjoining underused and historically disadvantaged commercial districts with an emphasis on areas in Wards 7 and 8.

709.17 Action ED-2.3.C: Test Challenge-Based Procurement

Test the feasibility of challenge-based procurement, which is a technique for procuring a solution rather than a specified product. Challenge-based procurement starts with defining a challenge in a request for proposals to prospective contractors who then propose solutions. This is a significant departure from traditional procurement where the solution is determined prior to procurement for predefined goods and services. This model has helped identify innovative solutions to public-sector problems that use technology-driven and evidence-based approaches.

See the Arts and Culture Element for additional actions relating to tourism.

##### **10-A DCMR § 710** ED-2.4 THE INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMY {#sec-10-a710 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A710}

710.1 The District’s institutional anchors—including colleges, universities, and hospitals—make a significant contribution to the local economy. As of 2017, colleges, universities, and professional schools accounted for 52,900 jobs in the District, representing nearly five percent of total employment. Of the District’s top 20 private organizations with the most employees, universities comprise a quarter of the largest employers, including the two largest employers, Georgetown University and George Washington University, according to DOES reports. DOES indicates this sector is likely to gain about 3,103 jobs between 2016 and 2026.

710.2 Several of the District’s universities also have affiliated teaching hospitals. These include Washington Hospital Center (a private teaching hospital affiliated with several DC universities), Georgetown University Hospital/Medstar Health, Howard University Hospital, and the George Washington University Hospital. These four institutions are the third, seventh, 13th, and 14th largest private employers in the District. Hospitals accounted for approximately 28,400 jobs in 2017, representing five percent of private-sector employment.

710.3 In addition, the University of the District of Columbia (UDC), including its community college, is the District’s public university, serving residents affordably through multiple points of entry, including workforce training; professional certifications; associate degrees; and bachelor, graduate, and law degrees.

710.4 Policy ED-2.4.1: Institutional Growth

Support growth in the higher education and health care sectors. Recognize the potential of these institutions to provide employment and income opportunities for District residents, and to enhance the District’s array of cultural amenities and health care options.

See also the Educational Facilities Element for additional policies related to colleges and universities.

710.5 Policy ED-2.4.2: Secondary Benefits

Promote the development of local businesses and enterprises that rely on the concentration of universities and health care institutions in the District, including both firms that provide supplies to these industries and firms that benefit from their knowledge and research capacity.

710.6 Policy ED-2.4.3: Higher Education and Health Care Linkages

Encourage continued linkages between the higher education and health care industries through incubator facilities co-located with medical schools, teaching hospitals, and medical research centers to generate new spin-off businesses from these institutions.

710.7 Policy ED-2.4.4: Public Higher Education for District Residents

Support UDC in its role as the District’s public institution of higher learning. Recognize that the community college and university expand employment and income opportunities for District residents. In addition, elevate the university as an important resource for building a workforce for growth industries that require highly trained employees.

710.8 Policy ED-2.4.5: Partnerships with Anchor Institutions

Enhance partnerships with anchor institutions, such as universities, hospitals, and other institutions, to generate business and employment growth in the research and development sectors, and to continue technology transfer programs for District businesses and entrepreneurs.

See also the portions of this element on Supporting Innovation in the Economy and Increasing Access to Employment for additional policies and actions relating to higher education. Also see the Educational Facilities Element for information on higher education facilities.

710.9 Action ED-2.4.A: Institutional Spin-off Business

Encourage District-based institutions, such as hospitals and universities, to establish or expand business incubators and accelerators that enable students and employees to develop and commercialize insights gained through the pursuit of an institution’s mission. Leading examples include the MedStar Institute for Innovation and the Sheik Zayed Institute for Pediatric Surgical Innovation at Children’s National Hospital.

##### **10-A DCMR § 711** ED-2.5 THE PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND REPAIR ECONOMY {#sec-10-a711 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A711}

711.1 Production, distribution, and repair (PDR) areas in Washington, DC play an important role in District operations, in addition to preserving space for industries that make, distribute, and repair goods. PDR industries include the construction trades, utilities, transportation, publishing, manufacturing, wholesalers, and service providers such as commercial laundries. When these industries are assessed collectively, they account for approximately nine percent of the District’s employment. PDR employment in the District has been broadly stable since 2006. Declines in some industries, such as publishing, have been offset by growth in other industries, such as food and beverage production.

711.2 PDR jobs are particularly desirable in the District, as they offer competitive wages to persons with limited education and academic credentials. An analysis by OP in 2014 found that the jobs created in PDR areas pay $4 to $7 more per hour on average than comparable jobs in retail, while requiring little to no training or education. In addition, they frequently provide opportunities for career advancement and on-the-job training. The ability to continue creating these types of jobs in the District is a key to growing inclusively. See the “Industrial Land Transformation Study” text box for more information.

711.3 As described in the Land Use Element, the areas that historically accommodated many of the District’s PDR jobs were the waterfronts and the railroad corridors. Since 1975, regulatory changes have allowed residential uses on nearly a third of Washington, DC’s industrial lands. Areas designated for PDR on the Future Land Use Map are some of the only parts of the District that exclude residential uses to facilitate municipal and private sector uses that are not well-suited for residential areas. Additionally, because PDR areas have restricted use, land values are typically lower than in other parts of the District, which supports uses that require larger spaces and that are cost-effective for PDR uses. Today, the demand for housing continues to grow, while the supply of PDR properties has become very tight, which is creating a tension between much-needed housing production and PDR activities in a land-constrained District.

711.4 The PDR sector plays an important role in supporting government operations and the broader economy. Without PDR areas, many private sector services and municipal operations could become less efficient and more expensive. The District needs PDR areas for municipal services, including trash collection, street sweeping, fleet storage, vehicle repair, and snow removal operations. Utilities and authorities need PDR lands to house key infrastructure, as well as for conducting repairs and maintenance. These areas serve a wide range of distribution needs. For example, all the alcoholic beverages sold in the District are warehoused and distributed from PDR areas, and same-day delivery services are seeking fulfillment centers in close proximity to customers. Entrepreneurs use facilities in PDR areas to operate creative businesses, including video production, food preparation, and beverage manufacturing. Preserving PDR areas supports industries that provide important services and economic diversification.

711.5 Currently, residential neighborhoods are emerging in and near PDR areas, such as Florida Avenue Market, Ivy City, Edgewood, and Buzzard Point. As of 2014, less than three percent of the District’s future land use was dedicated to PDR, which is low in the context of comparable cities, such as San Francisco and Boston. Due to this limited supply, the District recognizes the importance of PDR uses, which facilitate economic dynamism and support the delivery of municipal and other services. These areas are a limited resource that is important to many facets of Washington, DC’s economy, and they must continue to serve the needs of the District.

See also the Land Use Element for information on areas for PDR and industrial uses, the Environmental Protection Element for information pertaining to Environmental Justice and the Urban Design Element for information pertaining to buffering PDR facilities.

711.5a Text Box: PDR Uses in the District

PDR uses are evolving in the District. For example, in 2018 the District formed a partnership with Ford Autonomous Vehicles to pilot-test autonomous vehicle technology and begin training the workforce to support this new type of mobility. The partnership with Ford will develop a base of vehicle operations and maintenance in the District and establish a training program through the DC Infrastructure Academy to prepare residents for new jobs that will come with the broader introduction of autonomous vehicles. This partnership exemplifies how new types of technology-based businesses may transform PDR lands.

711.5a1 Text Box: Ward 5 Industrial Land Transformation Study

In 2014, OP commissioned a detailed study of the District’s industrial lands from a land use, economic, and market perspective. This work included:

Outreach to industrial land use stakeholders, community engagement, field surveys, and mapping of land use patterns and physical characteristics of each industrial area;

An opportunities and constraints analysis of the Ward 5 industrial areas based on outreach and analysis;

An analysis of the role that PDR businesses and jobs play in the DC economy; and

Identification of best practices and recommendations for key industries and submarkets.

The study also found that there is a limited supply of PDR land for municipal use, and that much of the District’s industrial land is either undevelopable because it supports infrastructure (e.g., water treatment and transportation infrastructure), has been rezoned to include housing and other incompatible uses, or is becoming more valuable than many users can afford, as the demand for PDR lands persistently exceeds supply.

711.5a2 The study provided recommendations regarding where industrial land should be preserved and how to better integrate PDR uses with residential communities by applying state-of-the-art environmental mitigation systems and well-designed buffers to reduce nuisances. Two groups of recommendations are provided. The first group are policy recommendations that provide guidance and protections for PDR businesses. The second group are place-based strategies for, nuisance abatement, municipal uses, and community amenities. Together, these recommendations provide clear expectations for how industrial facilities should be constructed and operated to minimize and offset adverse impacts on residential areas. These recommendations shape policies that balance the District’s need for industrial business and municipal services with community needs.

711.6 Policy ED-2.5.1: Support for PDR Areas

Support business attraction, business retention, and technical assistance targeted toward PDR areas. Partner with stakeholders to develop and implement initiatives.

711.7 Policy ED-2.5.2: Improve Environmental Stewardship

Improve the environmental performance of PDR areas by capturing and treating stormwater on-site, generating renewable energy on-site, implementing energy efficiency upgrades, and improving air quality.

711.8 Policy ED-2.5.3: Workforce Development

Encourage PDR businesses and training programs to link unemployed and underemployed residents to career pathways. PDR industries are particularly effective entry-level jobs for populations with barriers to employment.

711.9 Action ED-2.5.A: Industrial Business Association

Explore the formation of an Industrial Business Association to promote industrial tenant attraction and retention.

711.10 Action ED-2.5.B: Municipal PDR Needs Study

Explore a study to gain a better understanding of the District’s long-term real estate needs for municipal PDR functions. These functions include waste management, fleet storage, fleet maintenance, and infrastructure operations. The study should consider opportunities for co-location and the consolidation of municipal uses.

See also Land Use Element Section LU-3.1 for additional policies and actions related to industrial land retention and addressing impacts.

711.11 Action ED-2.5.C: Siting of Food Aggregation, Processing, and Production Facilities

Explore the feasibility of developing food hubs, central storage, and community kitchens to expand healthy food access, federal nutrition program participation, and economic opportunity in underserved areas. These sites should be co-located whenever possible with job training, business incubation, and entrepreneurship programs.

711.12 Action ED-2.5.D: Assess Innovations in PDR Uses

Explore how emerging trends in PDR uses—such as vertical distribution facilities, one-hour delivery, autonomous vehicle fleets, and maker businesses—are adapting to changes in urban PDR real estate markets.

##### **10-A DCMR § 712** ED-3 SUPPORTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT {#sec-10-a712 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A712}

712.1 The distinct characteristics of many of the District’s neighborhoods are expressed in their local shopping areas. Neighborhood business districts often reflect the ethnic heritage, building patterns, and architectural and social history of the communities that surround them. They provide places to interact with neighbors and, in many cases, a public domain with active street life and character.

712.2 From an economic development standpoint, the District’s neighborhood shopping areas generate property and sales taxes, provide jobs, and meet local needs for goods and services. The economic health of these areas varies widely across the District. In shopping districts that are thriving, the District promotes continued patronage, variety among retailers, and high-quality goods and services, while addressing issues such as aesthetics and access for suppliers, customers, and employees.

712.3 In shopping districts that are underserved or underperforming, the District promotes a range of solutions, including concentrating retail areas and converting some retail spaces to office or services uses (e.g., coworking) to address chronic challenges such as boarded-up storefronts, concerns about public safety, and difficulty competing with stronger commercial districts.

712.4 Small and local businesses have demonstrated strong capacity for anchoring community revitalization, which has been amplified through initiatives such as Made in DC and DC Main Streets, which have helped propel resurgence in the retail economy. However, many formerly economically thriving retail districts have experienced market position shifts from regional-serving toward neighborhood-serving as retailing has strengthened downtown and expanded eastward since 2006. To address challenges and target opportunities in retail submarkets, the District has conducted a series of studies—including the Retail Action Strategy, the Vibrant Retail Streets Toolkit, and the Great Streets program—that provide strategic guidance for the District, retailers, and community partners.

##### **10-A DCMR § 713** ED-3.1 STRENGTHENING RETAIL DISTRICTS {#sec-10-a713 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A713}

713.1 Part of growing an inclusive District involves improving access to basic goods and services for all residents of Washington, DC. Currently, some areas of the District lack basic amenities such as grocery stores, hardware stores, drug stores, and dry cleaners. In other parts of the District, these services exist but are poorly sited and do not provide a strong sense of community identity.

713.2 Commercial districts such as 14th and U Street NW have reemerged as walkable shopping areas, with new development reinforcing the traditional pedestrian pattern. Other commercial districts have not fared as well. This is especially true along long arterial streets, and in neighborhoods where certain commercial uses are in oversupply. The market feasibility of each commercial area is evaluated based on a number of factors, including architectural design and character, lot and block patterns, property ownership, surrounding uses, market competition, community support, accessibility, traffic and parking, and the mix of existing businesses.

713.3 To sustain viable commercial centers, it is essential that the District provide the police and fire protection, street and sidewalk maintenance, lighting, sanitation, and code enforcement services necessary to ensure the health and safety of merchants, residents, and shoppers. Transportation accessibility improvements are particularly important for increasing retail districts’ customer bases while minimizing neighborhood disruption. The District operates a number of programs with these objectives. For example, the Great Streets initiative is a multi-agency commercial revitalization initiative to support existing small businesses, attract new businesses, and transform emerging corridors. In addition, the DC Main Streets Program supports small business development through technical support.

713.4 Ultimately, the success of each neighborhood commercial district will depend on private investment, cooperation among merchants and property owners, and consumer support. Community-based organizations (e.g., Main Streets) and business improvement districts assist through the services they provide and the local business enterprises they support. The government assists by providing technical assistance, financial incentives, and support to merchant associations, and by coordinating its revitalization programs with those of the private and nonprofit sectors.

See the Framework Element (Generalized Policy Map) for additional information about the District’s commercial centers, including neighborhood centers, multi-neighborhood centers, regional centers, and Main Street mixed-use corridors.

See the Land Use Element for additional information about the District’s land use and development policies in neighborhood business districts.

713.5 Policy ED-3.1.1: Neighborhood Commercial Vitality

Promote the vitality and diversity of Washington, DC’s neighborhood commercial areas by retaining existing businesses, attracting new businesses, supporting a strong customer base through residential density, and improving the mix of goods and services available to residents.

See the Housing Element for additional information about the District’s housing policies.

713.6 Policy ED-3.1.2: Targeting Commercial Revitalization

Continue to target government economic development programs to areas of greatest need and historically neglected areas, including older business areas with high vacancy rates and commercial centers that inadequately serve surrounding areas. Commercial revitalization should focus on serving existing neighborhood residents and opportunities to support resident-owned businesses. Focus on equitably achieving critical mass to sustain viable neighborhood commercial centers, recognizing that critical mass may vary according to zoning and historical investments.

713.7 Policy ED-3.1.3: Commercial District Associations

Encourage business improvement districts, merchant associations, Main Street organizations, and other commercial associations that enhance economic development and commercial revitalization efforts, particularly in underserved or rapidly changing neighborhoods.

713.8 Policy ED-3.1.4: Assistance for Community-Based Development

Encourage a network of active and effective neighborhood-based community development organizations, particularly those serving communities of color. The District should assist these organizations in acquiring the necessary technical and financial skills to participate in neighborhood revitalization projects. It should integrate the work of such groups into the District’s overall planning and economic development initiatives.

713.9 Policy ED-3.1.5: Leveraging Private Investment

Leverage public resources to attract private sector investments through techniques including ground leases, design build contracts, maintenance and operations agreements, licensing agreements, and joint development on publicly owned land and redevelopment in areas considered to be high risks by investors. Support the involvement of local community development corporations in commercial development and revitalization efforts within these areas.

713.10 Policy ED-3.1.6: Revitalization Planning

Link commercial revitalization strategies to capital budget priorities and larger neighborhood and transportation investment plans, including programs to improve transit to neighborhood centers.

713.11 Policy ED-3.1.7: Community Equity Investment

Provide opportunities for community equity investment in local economic development projects. This may include methods of business financing that provide District residents with greater opportunities to acquire equity shares in new development. Emphasize opportunities for residents and communities that have not previously been able to access equity investments.

713.12 Policy ED-3.1.8: Neighborhood Retail District Identity and Promotion

Brand the distinct character of retail districts through signature promotional events, signage, streetscape, and district gateways. Additionally, encourage unique retail clusters where appropriate.

713.13 Action ED-3.1.A: Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization

Expand commercial revitalization programs such as tax financing structures, Great Streets, and the DC Main Streets Program to include additional commercial districts, particularly in the northeast and southeast quadrants of the District. Use the commercial revitalization programs to increase the stability of small and locally owned businesses by helping them adapt to demographic and market changes. Review District Main Streets and Great Streets programs from a racial equity lens to consider where they are located and barriers to start-up; who is, and who is not, served by these districts; and for those districts serving communities of color, any funding, grant allocation, or structural barriers.

713.14 Action ED-3.1.B: Integrating Cultural Events and Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization

Promote the vitality and diversity of the District’s neighborhood commercial corridors through heritage and cultural tours, festivals, and other events.

See also The Arts and Culture Element for additional information on placemaking.

##### **10-A DCMR § 714** ED-3.2 SMALL AND LOCALLY OWNED BUSINESSES {#sec-10-a714 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A714}

714.1 Small goods and services businesses are an important part of what makes the District’s neighborhood commercial areas work. They provide full- and part-time employment opportunities for Washington, DC residents and contribute to the District’s tax base. They help sustain the diversity of neighborhood shopping areas and enable the marketplace to respond to changing business conditions and consumer preferences. Washington, DC’s small business proprietors have initiated many of the District’s commercial revitalization efforts, driven by a desire and commitment to upgrade their businesses, properties, and neighborhoods.

714.2 Approximately 98 percent of the businesses in the District had fewer than 500 employees in 2015. These businesses represented 47 percent of the District’s private-sector jobs and they are an essential part of its economic base. Sectors with high numbers of small businesses include construction, wholesale trade, retail trade, and food services. In fact, the average retail business in the District has about 12 employees, and the average food service business has 22 employees.

714.3 The success of small businesses in these sectors and others is particularly important in Washington, DC’s underserved or underfunded communities. Small businesses in these areas can catalyze neighborhood renewal and provide local jobs. The availability of working capital and other forms of financial and technical assistance is important to promote their success.

714.4 One of the potential downsides of revitalization is the loss of small businesses as the cost of retail space increases beyond what many business models can support in the face of growing demand from new types of businesses, such as fast-casual restaurants that generate particularly high levels of revenue. This can result in the replacement of basic services with specialty retail and dining that is not affordable to as many residents. The District recognizes that neighborhood shopping areas should evolve in response to changes in consumer tastes and preferences, but it also recognizes the importance of avoiding displacement and economic hardship for the businesses that have anchored Washington, DC’s shopping areas for years.

714.5 New programs may be needed to increase opportunities for residents to own businesses in thriving commercial areas. Measures could include income and property tax incentives, assistance to commercial tenants seeking to purchase their buildings, commercial land trusts (which buy local commercial space and hold it in perpetuity for the benefit of the community), and relocation assistance programs for displaced businesses. Zoning strategies, such as development incentives to preserve local-serving small businesses, should be considered. There are also federal programs like the Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) and Small Business Administration (SBA) loans that can support local entrepreneurs. In addition, entrepreneurship training programs can help residents develop successful enterprises that have forward-looking business models that can become the next generation of local businesses that anchor communities.

714.5a Text Box: Employee-Owned and Controlled Businesses

Employee-owned and controlled businesses, such as worker cooperatives, are one form of small business ownership that produces an array of economic benefits for low-income communities that can effectively reduce economic disparities on a long-term basis. Employee-owned and controlled businesses tend to provide higher wages, more opportunities for skill development, greater job stability, and better benefits. This type of business is a proven community development practice that can help build economic equity by promoting living wages and reducing income inequality.

714.5b Promoting employee-owned and controlled businesses is an opportunity to build community wealth and support workforce development in concert with other programs to continue building an inclusive District. Connecting prospective employee-owned and controlled businesses with small business financing programs can improve the successful creation, implementation, and expansion of worker cooperatives.

714.6 Policy ED-3.2.1: Small Business Retention and Growth

Encourage the retention, development, and growth of small and minority businesses through a range of District-sponsored promotion programs, such as Made in DC and 202 Creates, as well as through technical and financial assistance programs.

714.7 Policy ED-3.2.2: Small Business Incubators

Support small business incubators that provide space for lease to small and emerging businesses at low cost with flexible terms, paired with business development advisory services. Encourage entrepreneurship and workforce development in maker industries, particularly for businesses of color.

714.8 Policy ED-3.2.3: Access to Capital

Expand access to equity, debt capital (including small business loans and lines of credit), long-term debt financing, and grants for small and medium businesses to support new and expanded business ventures. These tools should be used to leverage private investment in facility improvements, streetscape improvements, and other investments that help revitalize commercial districts and generate local jobs.

714.9 Policy ED-3.2.4: Partnerships with Major Employers

Promote collaborations and partnerships between small businesses and the District’s major employers to increase contracts for small and disadvantaged businesses (including federal outsourcing contracts), create new training opportunities, leverage corporate social responsibility initiatives, or otherwise collaborate on inclusive economic growth initiatives.

714.10 Policy ED-3.2.5: Innovation in Emerging Cross-Cutting Industry Clusters

Support ongoing efforts by the District’s colleges and universities to promote innovation in emerging fields. Provide technical and financial assistance to help local entrepreneurs and small businesses with an emphasis on the impact economy, smart cities, professional services innovation, hospitality innovation, security technology, and data science and analytics. These efforts should include small business clinics, incubators, and course offerings at institutions of higher education. These efforts should emphasize opportunities to serve women, communities of color, and low-income residents.

714.11 Policy ED-3.2.6: Commercial Displacement

Avoid displacement of small, minority, and local businesses due to rising real estate costs. Develop programs to offset the impacts of rising operating expenses on small businesses in areas of rapidly rising rents and prices. Also consider enhanced technical support that helps long-standing businesses grow their revenues and thrive in the strengthening retail economy.

714.12 Policy ED-3.2.7: Assistance to Displaced Businesses

While avoiding displacement where possible, assist small, minority, and local businesses that are displaced as a result of rising land costs and rents, government action, or new development. Efforts should be made to find locations for such businesses within redeveloping areas, or on other suitable sites within the District.

714.13 Policy ED-3.2.8: Certified Business Enterprise Programs

Expand opportunities for local, small, and disadvantaged business enterprises through programs, incentives, contracting requirements, and other activities.

714.13a Text Box: Small and Minority Businesses

Minority business enterprises represent an important subset of small businesses in Washington, DC. Their growth and expansion remain a particularly high economic development priority, and efforts should continue to streamline processes and provide innovative assistance. The DC Business Center is a one-stop online center to streamline regulatory information and make payments. The DC Business Center and DSLBD’s Center for Entrepreneurial Education and Development provide unified information from key agencies, including the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) and the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration (ABRA).

714.14 Policy ED-3.2.9: Employee-Owned and Controlled Businesses

Support the creation and advancement of employee-owned and controlled businesses. Consider techniques such as public funding to support the formation of cooperatives, prioritizing worker cooperatives in competitive contracting and procurement opportunities, aligning preferences for cooperatives with workforce and economic development initiatives, training partnerships with workforce development programs, and providing technical assistance, including financial and legal services.

714.15 Policy ED-3.2.10: Local Business Operational Planning

Promote the development of business operational plans to assess and build capacity of local businesses to prepare for, withstand, operate, and recover from identified threats and risks. The intent of business continuity plans is to implement safeguards and procedures that minimize disruptions during and after disasters, and to eliminate threats that can jeopardize the financial solvency of the small business.

714.16 Policy ED-3.2.11: Small Business Capacity Building

Promote capacity building for small businesses, including equity impact enterprises, that expand awareness of financial management, strategic planning, inventory management, legal requirements and risk management, and proven marketing techniques. Expanding awareness of these techniques will help small, minority, and local businesses grow along with the District’s economy.

714.17 Action ED-3.2.A: Anti-Displacement Strategies

Complete an analysis of alternative regulatory and financial measures to mitigate the impacts of demographic and economic market changes on small, minority, and local businesses. Measures to be assessed should include, but not be limited to, technical assistance, building purchase assistance, income and property tax incentives, historic tax credits, direct financial assistance, commercial land trusts, relocation assistance programs, and zoning strategies, such as maximum floor area allowances for particular commercial activities.

714.18 Action ED-3.2.B: Business Incentives

Use a range of financial incentive programs to promote the success of new and existing businesses, including HUBZones, the Inclusive Innovation Fund, Certified Business Enterprise set-asides, loans, loan guarantees, low-interest revenue bonds, federal tax credits for hiring District residents, and tax increment bond financing.

714.19 Action ED-3.2.C: Temporary Retail

Support temporary retail opportunities that would enable entrepreneurs and small businesses to open a shop in vacant commercial space at reduced costs.

714.20 Action ED-3.2.D: Small Business Needs Assessment

Conduct an assessment of small and minority business needs and impact evaluations of existing small business programs in the District. The assessment should include recommendations to improve existing small business programs and developing new, performance-based programs as needed.

714.21 Action ED-3.2.E: Neighborhood Commercial District Resilience Toolkit

Create a toolkit that builds on the Vibrant Retail Streets Toolkit to provide community-based economic development organizations tools to navigate changing markets. The toolkit will help organizations identify and leverage public space assets, build market strength, apply creative placemaking, and implement temporary uses.

714.22 Action ED-3.2.F: Study Employee-Owned and Controlled Businesses

Evaluate employee-owned and controlled businesses’ potential for inclusive economic growth. Research could include identifying successful programs and assessing the feasibility of support for employee-owned and controlled businesses through startup funding, technical assistance, and legal support.

##### **10-A DCMR § 715** ED-4 INCREASING ECONOMIC EQUITY {#sec-10-a715 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A715}

715.1 At the heart of Washington, DC’s economic development strategy is a goal to create good-quality jobs with livable wages and good benefits that are filled by residents. Good-quality jobs should offer stable employment with opportunities to advance. By improving the District’s educational system and job readiness programs, more residents will participate in the workforce and unemployment will decrease. By taking these steps, the District can build a more equitable economy.

715.2 According to employment projections prepared by the DOES, 61 percent of the jobs to be created by 2026 will require a bachelor’s degree or higher. District students need to be equipped with the education needed for these jobs so they can fully participate and benefit from economic growth.

715.3 The need to improve occupational skills, job training, and job placement is clear. In 2017, the region’s 3.8 percent unemployment rate was lower than other comparable regions but its job growth rate of 1.4 percent was one of the slowest among large metropolitan regions.

715.4 The District itself lags in key employment indicators. Its unemployment rate has been several percentage points above the region’s, and often it is more than 50 percent higher. In addition, its labor force participation rates for residents who have not graduated from college are 30 to 40 percent lower than for college graduates. Labor force participation is important because the unemployment rate is drawn from residents who are in the labor force. Together, these figures show that in 2015, 55 percent of adult residents whose highest level of educational attainment was a high school diploma were not employed, while only 18 percent of college graduates were not employed. These indicators show that the District’s residents have significant differences in their employment prospects.

715.5 To address these issues, comprehensive action is needed on multiple fronts to increase employment, particularly among residents with lower levels of educational attainment who are significantly more likely to be from historically underserved communities. Continued efforts are needed to improve education, job training, and job readiness so that residents are equipped with the education and skills necessary to enter and remain in the workforce in jobs and careers that provide sufficient wages. Job readiness requires more than just reading, writing, and arithmetic skills; it also requires essential life skills such as problem-solving, interacting with others, behaving responsibly, and organizing time effectively.

715.6 There is also a need to recognize that many of the job opportunities potentially available to District residents are located outside Washington, DC. In fact, 82 percent of the new jobs that are likely to be created in metropolitan Washington, DC between 2015 and 2035 are forecast to be in the suburbs. Many of these jobs will be service, repair, sales, and clerical positions suitable for entry-level employees or employees without advanced degrees. Thus, an important part of improving access to employment is improving access to the region’s job centers.

715.7 Equitable development can be built with greater access to career pathways. This access can be achieved through skill development and education programs that are tailored to the needs of growth industries with career pathways. These pathways link advancement to experience and skill development, enabling employees to earn increased levels of compensation as they progress. Some career pathways require higher levels of educational attainment to access, while others feature opportunities for on-the-job training or progressive certifications. Over time, education programs, workforce development programs, and investments in equitable development are expected to increase labor force participation and career opportunities for residents. The data, programs, policies, and actions described here must be developed in the context of addressing the significant challenges facing the District’s low-income residents and communities of color regarding education and employment outcomes. The District can accomplish this by using a racial equity lens to guide investments, set and measure racially equitable outcomes, and employ innovative and proven best practices.

##### **10-A DCMR § 716** ED-4.1 LINKING EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a716 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A716}

716.1 Washington, DC is making progress toward improved educational outcomes, but the District continues to face serious challenges with respect to literacy, high dropout rates, low test scores, truancy, and unsatisfactory student performance. By 2017, the number of adults in the District lacking high school diplomas or equivalents had declined from nearly 75,000 in 2005 to just over 48,000. However, job seekers without a high school diploma significantly and persistently outnumber employment opportunities at that educational level, which contributes to increased economic vulnerability among residents with the lowest levels of educational attainment. Looking forward, one of the District’s most significant economic development opportunities will be to improve its educational system to ensure that District residents obtain the skills necessary to secure and keep good jobs, especially in high-growth occupations.

716.2 This opportunity includes higher education, which is required for many of the best paid career pathways. In order to increase economic equity, the District and its educational stakeholders must continue to close the literacy and education gaps that have inhibited many residents from attaining higher levels of educational attainment and obtaining many of the District’s plentiful good-quality jobs.

716.3 As noted in the Educational Facilities Element of this plan, the District’s public schools have implemented extensive reforms to improve curricula and upgrade learning environments. Still, more far-reaching efforts are needed to create a supportive environment for learning outside the classroom, including strengthening services for families and resources for parents. Early childhood learning and development are critical, ensuring that the District’s youngest residents have healthy, stimulating, and supportive preschool years. It is also important to support adult learning and higher education programs that create pathways to opportunity, including those that can empower older residents to increase their skills and education to better connect with workforce opportunities. In order to adequately support curricula updates and student needs, extensive reforms must continue to prioritize the progress of at risk and the most vulnerable students.

716.4 In addition to strengthening basic curriculum and improving teacher quality, the District will support further efforts by the DC Public Schools (DCPS) and public charter schools to create career-oriented curriculum . As of 2017, DCPS has launched 19 Career Education Programs in 16 high schools. The programs provide distinct learning experiences, in some cases through business sponsorships, and give students a fast track into their chosen career. They emphasize achievement and performance, and encourage students to actively apply their skills and talents.

716.5 Although the work environment in Washington, DC is perpetually changing, it appears certain that living-wage jobs in all industries will require higher skill levels in the future than they have in the past. The District’s share of jobs requiring postsecondary education is among the highest in the nation at 70 percent, which is expected to increase to 76 percent by 2020. Conversely, positions requiring only a high school diploma currently represent 22.6 percent of the District’s jobs, compared to 40 percent at the national level. These educational characteristics are similar to the region’s occupational breakdown; the District’s workforce development programs can also help increase residents’ competitiveness for jobs regionally.

716.6 The District’s evolving economy requires increasingly advanced skills and knowledge, such as computer literacy, social media communications, and data analysis . Developing and implementing a 21st century workforce curriculum will be essential to meet these requirements. Although it may take years to completely close the Washington, DC’s educational gap, the District and all of its workforce development partners are committed to a more comprehensive and integrated workforce preparation system moving forward. This will require more resources for adult education, certificate and associate programs, a strong UDC, related workforce programs, and tighter integration and coordination with DCPS and DC public charter schools, enhanced by public-private partnerships with colleges and universities, as well as resources for K-12 schools.

See the Educational Facilities Element for additional policies and actions related to providing higher education facilities in every ward, including in Wards 7 and 8.

716.7 Policy ED-4.1.1: Educational Improvements

Continue collaborative efforts with the DCPS and DC Public Charter School Board to improve the quality of public education, increase graduation rates, and improve basic competency and skill levels among District youth. Every District child must have a safe and productive learning environment that promotes academic and personal achievement.

716.8 Policy ED-4.1.2: Career-Oriented Curriculum

Engage employers to develop curriculum and preparation for school programs designed to result in a career upon graduation. These efforts must include input from industry leaders regarding curriculum design and program validation at both magnet and traditional schools.

716.9 Policy ED-4.1.3: Certification and Associate Programs

Support the continued contributions of colleges and universities in providing career-building opportunities for District residents, including literacy and job training programs, as well as professional certificate and two-year degree programs. The District will strongly support the UDC as a public institution of higher learning, a place of continuing education, and a ladder to career advancement for District residents.

See the Educational Facilities Element for additional policies and actions related to UDC and improving access to higher education.

716.10 Policy ED-4.1.4: Adult Education

Support adult education and workforce development, career, and technical training for unskilled adult workers of all ages. Continue to innovate with programs that blend adult education and basic skills remediation with occupational skills and work experience.

716.11 Policy ED-4.1.5: Learning Outside the Classroom

Support greater opportunities for learning and student achievement outside the classroom, including tutoring and mentoring programs by the District’s major employers, nonprofits, and volunteers, and a full array of after-school programs.

716.12 Policy ED-4.1.6: Agency Coordination

716.13 Policy ED-4.1.7 Interjurisdictional Professional Licensing Agreements

Encourage and support professional licensing boards/commissions to adopt interjurisdictional agreements that enable workers licensed in domestic jurisdictions other than the Washington, DC to reasonably obtain licensure to work in the District.

716.14 Policy ED-4.1.8 Recognition of International Professional Credentials

Provide support to professional licensing boards/commissions for establishing equivalency between District licensing standards and foreign credentials. This support enables the District’s professional licensing boards/commissions to more easily credential foreign workers.

716.15 Action ED-4.1.A: Master Education Plan

Support implementation of a Council-approved Master Education Plan and the DC Public Schools Strategic Plan to improve the performance of Washington, DC schools and the expanded capacity of all District youth to successfully join the future workforce and access career pathways.

716.16 Action ED-4.1.B: Expanded Youth Services

Expand collaboration between Washington, DC’s education, human services, juvenile justice, and workforce development agencies to better serve the District’s youth, reduce barriers to employment, and connect District students with education and training opportunities that lead to career-track employment. Expand the DOES year-round jobs program and other job center services to effectively serve youth customers. In addition, continue to support the Marion Barry Summer Youth Employment Program for youth and young adults up to 24 years of age.

716.17 Action ED-4.1.C: Partnerships for Outside-the-Classroom Learning

Track the outcomes of mentoring, internship and tutoring programs offered by the District’s institutional and nonprofit organizations to better understand where there may be duplication and where there may be gaps. Gather qualitative feedback, in addition to quantitative program results, directly from mentees, interns or program attendees to receive first-hand accounts on the needs for these programs.

716.18 Action ED-4.1.D: UDC Certification as a Training Provider

Encourage UDC to be fully certified to provide workforce development training that will help more District residents gain the qualifications required to reach career pathways.

716.19 Action ED-4.1.E: Expand Job Center Services for Youth

Expand DOES job center services to effectively serve youth customers. These expanded programs will help increase youth employment and long-term participation in the labor market.

##### **10-A DCMR § 717** ED-4.2 INCREASING WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SKILLS {#sec-10-a717 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A717}

717.1 A competitive and marketable workforce is crucial to the District’s economic health. Workforce development strategies must combine public and private investment and initiatives to close the occupational skills gap that now exists in the District. The goal of these strategies should be to help District residents achieve economic self-sufficiency while providing a skilled labor pool that meets the needs of local employers.

717.2 The District’s Workforce Investment Council (WIC) is a private sector-led, 32-member board responsible for advising the Mayor, Council, and District government on the development, implementation, and continuous improvement of an integrated and effective workforce investment system. Members of the WIC include representatives from the private sector, local business representatives, government officials, organized labor, youth community groups, and organizations with workforce investment experience.

717.3 In 2016, the WIC released the District’s Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, Unified State Plan for 2016 through 2020, also known as the WIOA Plan. This plan is required by federal law, and it incorporates both strategic and operational planning to build an integrated workforce development system. The WIOA Plan details nine operational priorities that will be used to fulfill the plan’s goals. They include (i) unified client intake and tracking, (ii) integrating the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program into American Job Centers to improve service delivery, (iii) deploying a mobile one-stop job center, (iv) delivering improved job training, (v) forming interagency partnerships to reduce barriers to employment, (vi) improving opportunities for youth to pursue education and career goals, (vii) developing a unified business services plan, (viii) developing a vendor scorecard to help focus funding on programs with proven outcomes, and (ix) developing interconnected education and training pathways to help residents advance within high-demand sectors.

717.4 In addition, the District manages a job bank designed to match employers with job seekers. The DC Public Library (DCPL) is also helping residents become more employable by expanding digital literacy with technology access and training, as well as skills and development programs.

717.5 Despite these initiatives, there is room for improvement. Some of the District’s job placement and training services continue to have low success rates. Feedback from employers shows that reading skills, math skills, career readiness, and computer knowledge of some residents are still not at the level needed by business.

717.6 Presently, the District’s workforce development programs are administered through more than 20 federal and District agencies, including DOES and the District Department of Human Services (DHS). Many of these programs are operated through private and nonprofit organizations. The District itself operates a network of American Job Centers, each providing a range of job placement services.

717.7 The District also has created programs to support the hiring of local residents and local firms, particularly for District government contracts. For example, the First Source Program is a cooperative effort between businesses and the District to ensure that District residents have the first opportunity to apply for and be considered for jobs (see First Source Program text box). In addition, DC Law 15-295 requires contractors who perform construction and renovation work with District government assistance to initiate apprenticeship programs through the DC Apprenticeship Council. Construction apprenticeships offer one of the most accessible career pathways to good-quality jobs. There are also programs to eliminate discriminatory hiring practices.

717.7a Text Box: First Source Program

The First Source Agreement Program assures District residents priority for new jobs created by municipal financing and development programs. It mandates that all projects funded in whole or in part with District funds, or other funds which the District administers, shall provide for increased employment opportunities for District residents.

Each employer in the program must sign an agreement ensuring that:

All job openings created are listed with DOES; and

51 percent of new hires are District residents.

Employers who receive other District government benefits, such as Industrial Revenue Bonds, are also covered. The program:

Provides employment opportunities for Washington, DC residents;

Provides monitoring to ensure that employers are in compliance with the law;

Helps employers hire qualified District residents; and

Assists employers in meeting contractual commitments.

717.8 Pursuing the District’s goal to increase access to education and employment also includes providing opportunities for career advancement for residents. Many of Washington, DC’s entry-level jobs have high turnover, low job security, and few benefits. However, these jobs offer important initial employment opportunities. In addition, workforce development programs are needed to increase opportunities for upward mobility to good-quality jobs . Workforce development programs should prepare as many residents as possible for careers in industries with strong advancement opportunities, including construction, health care, higher education, and federal employment. These programs, in concert with the District’s planning and economic development efforts, help create good-quality jobs that enable more residents to earn living wages that support families and enable older adults to retire.

717.9 Policy ED-4.2.1: Linking Residents to Jobs

Promote measures that increase the number of District jobs held by District residents. According to the Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Program, 67 percent of the jobs in the District were held by non-residents in 2016. While recognizing that some imbalance is inevitable due to the relatively large number of jobs and small number of residents in Washington, DC , the District should work to increase the percentage of resident workers through its job training and placement programs.

717.10 Policy ED-4.2.2: Linking Job Training to Growth Occupations

Target job training, placement, and career programs toward core and growth sectors and occupations, such as hospitality, information technology, health care, construction, home health aides, and computer user support specialists. Seek opportunities to link the pipeline of potential employees from workforce development programs to small, locally owned businesses.

717.11 Policy ED-4.2.3: Focus on Economically Disadvantaged Populations

Focus workforce development efforts on economically disadvantaged communities, including communities of color, and particularly those with many unemployed or marginally employed residents. Assistance should also be focused on groups most in need, including persons with limited work skills, the LGBTQ+ community, persons with disabilities, single mothers, youth leaving foster care, returning citizens, and persons with limited English proficiency.

717.12 Policy ED-4.2.4: Neighborhood-Level Service Delivery

Emphasize the delivery of workforce development programs at the neighborhood level. Continue neighborhood faith-based and community-based initiatives that deliver job training and placement services to unemployed and underemployed residents. Consider programs that align with Business Improvement Districts’ clean and safe teams.

717.13 Policy ED-4.2.5: Business and Labor Partnerships

Facilitate communication and partnerships between business, labor, commercial associations, and educational institutions to improve the skill levels of the workforce, improve job training and placement resources, and improve the labor pool available to major employers. These partnerships could result in apprenticeship programs, pre-apprenticeship programs, entrepreneurial skills training, mentorship agreements, customized on-site job training, and career training.

717.14 Policy ED-4.2.6: Entry-Level Opportunities

Support the creation of entry-level career opportunities, particularly for lower-income youth and adults, and persons with disabilities. Recognize the need for complementary efforts to provide affordable child-care options, transportation, counseling, and other supportive services.

717.15 Policy ED-4.2.7: Living-Wage Jobs

Promote the attraction and retention of living-wage jobs that provide employment opportunities for unskilled and semi-skilled workers. Use marketing strategies and performance-based incentives to encourage the relocation of firms with such positions to the District.

717.16 Policy ED-4.2.8: Limited English Proficiency and Literacy

Promote collaboration between Washington, DC’s education, human services, juvenile justice, and workforce development agencies to better serve the District’s English Language Learners (ELL) and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) populations, reduce barriers to employment, and connect residents with education and training opportunities that lead to successful employment. Encourage English as a Second Language (ESL) programs and literacy training for residents in need of such services in order to overcome barriers to employment.

717.17 Policy ED-4.2.9: Upward Mobility

Encourage continuing education and career advancement programs to provide opportunities for upward mobility among the District’s workforce. Encourage the growth of businesses that have been shown to provide career advancement opportunities for employees.

717.18 Policy ED-4.2.10: Market-Responsive Programs

Maximize the use of technology and labor market data to help District residents find suitable employment, training, and education. Examples of such applications include DOES publications such as the Hot Job Report and the Industry Profile Handbook.

717.19 Policy ED-4.2.11: Innovation in Training

Support innovative training strategies to fill skill gaps in the local labor force, including partnerships with the private sector, industry associations, and individual government agencies. Examples of such strategies include the Cadet Training Program of the DC Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, the DC Infrastructure Academy, and trade organization apprenticeship programs.

717.20 Policy ED-4.2.12: Local Hiring Incentives

Maintain requirements for resident job training and placement for projects built or operated with any form of public subsidy/loan, grant, or other incentive. Support incentives for similar training and hiring programs for private sector facilities and businesses through mechanisms such as community benefits agreements.

717.21 Policy ED-4.2.13: Equal Opportunity Compliance

Enforce compliance with the DC Human Rights Act, which makes discrimination illegal based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, political affiliation, and disability. Additionally, the law makes discrimination illegal against the following traits in some areas: matriculation, family status, genetic information, source of income, place of residence or business, status as a victim of an intrafamily offense, and credit information.

717.22 Policy ED-4.2.14: Alternative Work Arrangements

Encourage increased opportunities for alternative work schedules, such as part-time employment, flextime, teleworking, and in-home employment to accommodate the needs of working parents and others with dependent care responsibilities or mobility limitations.

See the Land Use Element for additional policies related to home-based business.

717.23 Policy ED-4.2.15: Involvement of Educational Institutions

Seek the involvement of DCPS and public charter schools, the Board of Trustees of UDC, District agencies, and other educational institutions in the planning and implementation of workforce development programs. Encourage these entities to support the District’s training efforts through their basic and adult education programs.

717.24 Policy ED-4.2.16: Digital Literacy

Support digital literacy by improving access to technology, including providing internet access and training, through the DCPL system and through other resources to address and further close the digital divide. Increased internet access and technological skills are critical to the District’s workforce development programs. Prioritize the communities with the greatest need, including vulnerable populations and those with limited access to technology. Expand broadband access to the District’s broadband and Wi-Fi network, prioritizing communities with the lowest connectivity rates.

717.25 Action ED-4.2.A: Alliances with External Organizations and Entities

Use Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) to develop alliances, networks, and other relationship building strategies that enhance the success of workforce development initiatives. Such MOUs currently exist with organizations like the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL/CIO), Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA), and PEPCO.

717.26 Action ED-4.2.B: Labor Market Monitoring

Maintain accurate data on the job market to better connect job seekers with job opportunities in high-growth, high-demand sectors. Monthly data on employment, occupation, and income should continue to be compiled by DOES.

717.27 Action ED-4.2.C: Employer Needs Assessments

Conduct annual surveys of employer needs, particularly in high-growth industries. Using this report, develop new workforce training services and strategies to respond to the changing needs of employees and employers.

717.28 Action ED-4.2.D: Outreach to Residents and Employers

Distribute information on the District’s job training, skill enhancement, and job placement programs, particularly in communities with high rates of unemployment. Ensure that outreach strategies provide for persons with limited reading proficiency.

717.29 Action ED-4.2.E: Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act (WIOA)

Continue implementation of the WIOA, including programs for job training and placement systems. Measures to improve the coordination of job training programs that strengthen the workforce development system and more effectively target resources should be identified and implemented.

717.30 Action ED-4.2.F: Training Program Tracking

Track the effectiveness of job training programs. Use assessments of such programs to modify and improve them.

717.31 Action ED-4.2.G: Good Practices Report

Assess good practices for success in job training and readiness, and use the findings to evaluate and improve the District’s programs. Publish a good practices guide to hiring a diverse, inclusive workforce based on successful corporate and nonprofit models.

717.32 Action ED-4.2.H: Incentive Programs

Continue to offer incentive-based programs that encourage District businesses to hire job seekers who are disadvantaged and have barriers to employment.

717.33 Action ED-4.2.I: Wages and Working Conditions

Continue advancing programs, including apprenticeships and employer training, that help increase wages for lower-income residents while improving working conditions.

717.34 Action ED-4.2.J: Employment Barriers

Continue to study the capacity, need, and participation in programs that reduce barriers to employment for disadvantaged populations such as returning citizens and residents who speak English as a second language.

717.35 Action ED-4.2.K: Improved Training

Provide on-the-job training, customized training, incumbent worker training, and cohort-based training to promote existing employees, which produces new entry-level openings.

717.36 Action ED-4.2.L: Increase Access to On-The-Job Training and Workforce Development

Assess opportunities to work with government or private sector stakeholders to increase access to on-the-job training and workforce development through internships, fellowships, and apprenticeships. The assessment should prioritize opportunities for youth and young adults, as well as older adults navigating career changes that increase economic equity by establishing career pathways.

717.37 Action ED-4.2.M: DC Housing Authority Employment Opportunities

Explore opportunities to strengthen and expand employment opportunities for low-income and very low-income residents with the DC Housing Authority and its contractors through the federal Section 3 program.

##### **10-A DCMR § 718** ED-4.3 GETTING TO WORK {#sec-10-a718 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A718}

718.1 In 2016, 35 percent of all employed District residents worked in the suburbs. This percentage is fairly typical of large, older central cities. The comparable 2014 figures for Boston, Baltimore, San Francisco, and Philadelphia were 46, 53, 40, and 39 percent, respectively. However, the figure for the District was 22 percent in 1990, indicating fairly rapid growth in the number of reverse commuters in recent years. The District works diligently to connect residents with District jobs, which produces numerous benefits for individuals and the District. Fortunately, Washington, DC is part of a strong regional economy, and its residents are part of a regional labor pool where many find employment opportunities. For some occupations, entry-level and semi-skilled jobs in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs can be difficult to reach.

718.2 The District’s location at the center of the regional transportation network and Metrorail system provides good access to rail-served job centers like Bethesda and Rosslyn. However, there is limited transit service to some significant suburban employment centers, which increases financial pressure on lower-income residents who have less affordable and reliable access to employment in those areas. Even within the District, there are challenges to commuting resulting from crowded Metrorail trains and buses, congested roads, and costly parking for those who cannot conveniently use transit.

718.3 The extension of Metrorail to Tysons and Dulles Airport will improve transit access to the region’s job centers. Other solutions to improve access to regional employment centers that are not served by Metro include on-demand ride-hailing services, carpooling, and bus routes and shuttles. Such solutions must be forged through regional agreements and partnerships, working through entities such as the Greater Washington Board of Trade, WMATA, the DC Workforce Investment Council, and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.

718.4 Transit-accessible housing matching the needs of the workforce is imperative. As Washington, DC continues growing, its housing market is becoming more complex, characterized by increased segmentation of the market rate and affordable housing stock. As a consequence, this increased complexity necessitates closer alignment between economic development planning, housing planning, and transportation planning to ensure that growth is equitable and sustainable.

718.5 Policy ED-4.3.1: Transportation Access to District Jobs

Improve access to jobs for residents through sustained investments in the transportation system, particularly transit improvements between neighborhoods with high unemployment rates and the District’s major employment centers.

718.6 Policy ED-4.3.2: Links to Regional Job Centers

Continue to seek inter-jurisdictional transportation solutions to improve access between the District’s neighborhoods and existing and emerging job centers in Maryland and Virginia. These solutions should include a balance between transit improvements and roadway capacity improvements. They should also include transportation demand management initiatives, such as ridesharing and vanpooling.

718.7 Policy ED-4.3.3: Regional Job Connections

Support regional efforts to reduce unemployment, including partnerships with the region’s major employers and programs that link District residents to jobs in fast-growing suburban employment centers.

718.8 Policy ED-4.3.4: Regional Access to Central Washington

Provide sustained investments to the District’s transportation network to ensure that both District and regional workers can access the growing employment areas of Central Washington and the Anacostia Waterfront.

718.9 Action ED-4.3.A: Regional Initiatives

Actively participate in regional employment initiatives that link suburban employers with District-based providers of job training and placement, transportation, child care, and related support services.

See the Transportation Element for additional policies and actions on mobility, access to employment, and commuting to jobs.

718.10 Action ED-4.3.B: Increasing Access to Employment

Pursue opportunities to develop high-capacity transit corridors that connect low-income communities to major employment areas, both in the District and region.

718.11 Action ED-4.3.C: Housing a Thriving Workforce

Study how job growth and the District’s economic strategy will affect demand for market rate and affordable housing to inform the development of housing strategies that can meet the housing needs of a thriving workforce.

718.12 Action ED-4.3.D: Align Housing and Transportation Planning Regionally

Explore opportunities to align the District’s planning and policies for housing locations and employment access with regional initiatives, such as the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government’s Visualize 2045 plan.

### **10-A8** PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE

##### **10-A DCMR § 800** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A800}

800.1 This element addresses the future of parks, recreation, and open space in Washington, DC. It recognizes the important role parks play in recreation, aesthetics, health and wellness, neighborhood character, environmental quality, and resilience. The element also recognizes that parks have the potential to bring people together across social, economic, and racial divides. It includes policies on related topics, such as recreational facility development, the use of private open space, the creation of trails to better connect the District’s open spaces and neighborhoods, and the support of resilience through the restoration of natural systems. Finally, this element includes policies and actions that support the delivery of equitable access, great spaces, and exceptional experiences.

800.1a Text Box: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces in the District

Since the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, Washington, DC, has continued to enhance its parks, recreational, and open spaces. The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) now manages more than 900 acres of green space, 34 urban gardens and five partner urban farms, 375 parks, 12 dog parks, 95 playgrounds, 135 athletic fields, 336 courts, 76 recreation facilities, and 50 aquatic facilities and features. In 2018, Washington, DC, was ranked the third fittest city on the American Fitness Index0F and was ranked the fourth best park city.1F

800.2 The critical parks, recreation, and open space issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Coordinating and sharing stewardship between Washington, DC and the federal government on park and open space planning, design, and management to produce better outcomes for District residents;

Providing additional recreational land and facilities in areas of the District that are currently underserved and in newly developing areas, and improving access;

Maintaining, upgrading, and improving existing parks and recreation facilities as key features of vibrant neighborhoods in Washington, DC;

Increasing funding for capital improvements and operations through partnerships and creative strategies;

Fostering community health so that residents can seek healthier lifestyles regardless of income, ability, or employment;

Leveraging open space to support resilience, including flood mitigation, well-connected habitats on land and water, an increased tree canopy, and strong ecosystems for wildlife; and

Designing parks, trails, and recreational facilities to improve the safety of staff and visitors.

800.2a Text Box: Parks, Open Spaces, and Natural Resources

The Sustainable DC Plan envisions a District that has high-quality, well-connected habitats on land and water, and that provides strong corridors and ecosystems for wildlife. Washington, DC, will conserve and manage these natural resources to enhance biodiversity, control stormwater, reduce the urban heat island effect, become more resilient to changing climate conditions, and build people's connections to, understanding of, and appreciation for nature.

800.3 Washington, DC, is one of the few cities in the United States that was originally planned and designed around the framework of a park system. The L’Enfant Plan featured broad swaths of open land to frame iconic buildings and landmarks. Wide park-like boulevards were incorporated to preserve key views and vistas.

800.4 The 1901 McMillan Plan continued this legacy, using open space to accomplish social as well as aesthetic goals. The McMillan Plan made a conscious effort to extend the park system beyond the monumental core, connect existing parks with scenic roadways, and provide for the recreation and health of a growing population. The National Mall and Rock Creek Park that we know today are among that plan’s legacies. Many of the early plans prepared by the National Capital Parks and Planning Commission (NCPC) placed a similar emphasis on improving the District’s open spaces and parkways. Many of the District’s parks and recreational facilities established during this time were racially segregated and developed to different standards.

800.5 These historic plans have resulted in more than 7,800 acres of permanent open space and parkland in Washington, DC, and one of the highest ratios of park acreage per resident in the country. Nonetheless, when Washington, DC achieved Home Rule and set about developing its first Comprehensive Plan, a Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element was not included. This responsibility was left to the federal government. Today, 74 percent of Washington, DC’s parkland is still managed by the National Park Service (NPS) and is not under the District’s jurisdiction.2F The other 26 percent includes 10 percent managed by the District’s Department of General Services (DGS) and DPR, and 16 percent managed by other entities, including DC Public Schools (DCPS).

800.6 Including a chapter on parks, recreation, and open space in the District elements of the Comprehensive Plan is important for a number of reasons:

First, the District itself owns approximately 950 acres of parkland, and there is a need for a coordinated set of policies for its management.

Second, access to quality parks and open space is a top priority for District residents—regardless of who owns the land. The fact that most of the District’s open space is federally controlled suggests that joint policy planning for these assets is essential.

Third, Washington, DC is changing, which means recreational needs also are changing. Policies are needed to make sure that new park and recreational opportunities are provided and existing parks are improved to meet the needs of a changing and expanding population.

Fourth, parks are essential to many of the goals expressed elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan, including sustainability, resilience, improved public health, racial equity, and inclusion.

800.7 Parks are part of the foundation of what makes Washington, DC, a great place to live. They are where friends are met, and where people walk, play, and exercise. They contribute to personal wellness and the quality of the environment. They keep neighborhoods vibrant, enhance property values, and foster civic bonds. The policies in this element are aimed at sustaining parks as great public spaces while providing more equitable access to parks across the District. Achieving these outcomes requires different strategies for different neighborhoods. When investing in parks, District government and other stakeholders should consider a fair distribution, amount, and quality of parkland and facilities across the District—as well as other social factors, such as income and age, that may shape localized decisions in programming and design.

800.8 The Comprehensive Plan is supplemented by a more detailed set of planning documents for parks and recreation that address these issues, including master plans and a collaboration with the federal government, titled CapitalSpace. These companion plans establish bold visions for advancing the District’s parks and recreation goals, starting with an overarching master plan for parks (see text box entitled Parks Master Plan). In addition, the Sustainable DC Plan, completed in 2012 and updated in 2018, provides further guidance.

##### **10-A DCMR § 801** PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE GOAL {#sec-10-a801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A801}

801.1 The overarching goal for parks, recreation, and open space is to preserve and enhance parks and open spaces within Washington, DC to meet active and passive recreational needs through universal access, promote health and wellness, improve environmental quality, enhance the identity and character of District neighborhoods, and provide visual beauty in all parts of Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 802** PROS-1 PARK PLANNING AND LAND MANAGEMENT {#sec-10-a802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A802}

802.1 This section of the element focuses on parks that are owned and operated by the District. Policies also express the District’s perspectives on the federally-owned parks that serve residents.

802.2 The District manages 375 parks and open spaces, comprising approximately 950 acres. More than two-thirds of these properties are small open space triangles formed by the intersection of diagonal avenues and the District street grid. The remainder includes 17 regional parks, 86 neighborhood and community parks, 51 pocket parks, and eight natural areas. Figure 8.1 provides an overview of DPR-managed amenities.

802.3 For planning purposes, park activities are usually divided into two categories: active recreation and passive recreation. Active recreation is associated with sports or play activities and requires facilities such as playgrounds, ball fields, tennis courts, and swimming pools. Passive recreation emphasizes the open space aspect of a park or waterway and includes activities like hiking, picnicking, and kayaking. In Washington, the presence of District-owned parks and national parks provides a unique blend of active and passive recreational opportunities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 803** THE PARKS MASTER PLAN {#sec-10-a803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A803}

803.1 In 2006, DPR drafted its first Comprehensive Master Plan since its establishment in 1942. Building on this earlier work, DPR and the DC Office of Planning completed the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in 2014 (the Parks Master Plan).

803.2 The Parks Master Plan evaluates the existing park system, defines community priorities, and identifies a potential program of investments to make the park system more equitable and responsive to local needs. It is based on a detailed evaluation of conditions at all parks, recreation centers, and outdoor facilities; a comprehensive assessment of recreation programs; and an evaluation of service gaps based on public input, industry best practices, and objective standards.

803.3 The District is now at a stage where a new District-wide parks planning effort is needed to identify and prioritize the next round of major capital investments. Population and development pressures, changing recreational trends, and the opportunity, through recently passed federal legislation, to explore cooperative local management of federal parkland, all present new opportunities and realities that the District faces in meeting the recreational needs of it residents. In addition, there is a need to create a District-wide plan for funding and maintaining existing, as well as new, recreation centers and park sites. For all of these reasons, DPR will begin a new parks master planning effort in 2020 that builds on the work of the 2014 plan as well as the 2010 CapitalSpace plan.

803.4 The Parks Master Plan addresses seven key elements of the park system:

Parkland;

Recreation centers;

Aquatics facilities;

Outdoor facilities;

Programs;

Bikeways and trails; and

Environmental lands and natural areas.

803.5 For each element, the Parks Master Plan provides target benchmarks for service delivery. Specific outcomes of the Parks Master Plan include:

Comprehensive information on the recreational needs of District residents;

Projections of expected future needs, based on growth and demographics;

Information on customer usage and satisfaction;

Identification of current and potential shortfalls; and

Strategies for overcoming shortfalls, including land acquisition and programming changes.

803.5a Text Box: CAPRA Accreditation

In 2014, DPR became accredited by the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA). This designation “recognizes and requires standards of excellence in the parks and recreation field.”

##### **10-A DCMR § 804** PROS-1.1 DEVELOPING A PARK CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM {#sec-10-a804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A804}

804.1 Most large cities in the United States have adopted classification systems to guide the management of their parks and open spaces. In fact, the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) defines park classification as the basic element of the planning function. Classification provides a basis for deciding which activities and facilities are appropriate within each park. It also provides a means of analyzing where service gaps exist and where acquisitions and capital improvements may be required.

804.2 Until 2006, the District’s parks were loosely classified as large parks, neighborhood parks, recreation center grounds, and triangles. These categories are not consistent with national standards, making it difficult to evaluate the adequacy of parks or to compare the District with peer cities.

804.3 The 2006 Parks Master Plan recommended a new classification system to improve customer service and park management. Under this system, DPR would develop a park classification system with clear definitions of each classification based on a review of industry standards and best practices. This would allow the agency to develop more specific level of service standards based on each classification.

804.4 Figure 8.2 summarizes a sample park classification system. Map 8.1 shows the location of District-owned parks. The small open spaces are not shown due to the map scale and their small size.

804.5 Figure 8.1: DPR-Managed Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Amenities

830 acres of green space

375 parks

200 outdoor basketball courts

160 tennis courts

119 athletic and ball fields

94 playgrounds

76 recreation centers

35 gyms

34 community gardens

31 aquatic pools

25 spray parks

23 fitness centers

13 dog parks

7 wellness centers

7 boxing rings

5 urban farms

1 outdoor amphitheater

1 skate park

**History**
- *Source: DPR, 2017 804.6 Figure 8.2: Sample Park Classification System Park Type Description Typical Uses Service Area Small Park Pocket parks or triangles. Range from landscaped “islands” to places for socializing, playing chess, etc. Benches, seating areas, public art, landscaping ¼-mile radius Neighborhood Provide informal, centrally located setting for neighborhood-based recreational amenities, possibly including recreation centers Playgrounds, tot lots, basketball courts, open lawn areas for unstructured play, seating and picnic areas, community gardens, and interpretive or educational exhibits ½-mile radius Community Larger parks with more structured recreational opportunities, including recreation center buildings with a range of DPR programs Active play-oriented outdoor facilities, such as ball fields, athletic courts, playgrounds, indoor and outdoor swim facilities, natural amenities such as trails, natural areas, and picnic grounds One- to two-mile radius, with connections to bike and pedestrian trail networks Regional Large multiuse parks that draw users District-wide or from beyond adjacent neighborhoods Very large areas of open space, recreation centers, lighted athletic fields, group picnic areas, hiking, multiple activity areas District-wide Natural Resource Areas Parks established to conserve open space and sensitive natural resources or heritage assets. If adjoined by open, level areas, then recreational fields and play areas may be appropriate. Low-impact, passive activities, such as hiking and environmental education N/A—not demand driven Sports Complexes Programmed athletic fields and multiuse indoor complexes, custom designed for specific programmed uses Track and field, natatorium, softball, soccer, tennis, basketball, volleyball, racquetball, football, boxing, martial arts District-wide Special Use Parks dedicated to a single use, such as a zoo or amphitheater. Accommodate highly organized activities and provide economic as well as social and physical benefits. May have highly specialized management requirements. Golf courses, aquatic or spray parks, sculpture parks, dog parks, arboretums, historic homes, amphitheaters, skate parks, climbing centers, therapeutic facilities District-wide School Parks Public land on school property, developed with playgrounds and open fields, designed for student activities but also available for community use Running tracks, playgrounds, athletic fields, basketball courts ½-mile to two-mile radius Trails and Bikeways Hard or soft paved paths providing linkages within or between parks, facilitating access and exploration Paved or dirt trails, boardwalks, promenades ½ to ¼ mile to access point Some parks are nationally significant and serve an area larger than Washington, DC. 804.7 Map 8.1: Location of District Parks*
- *Source: DC Office of Planning, 2021 804.8 An important consideration in classifying Washington, DC’s parks is the role that federal lands play in the overall park system (noted in Policy PROS 1.1.2). In many parts of the District, federal land plays a crucial role in meeting park, recreation, and open space needs. Some of Washington, DC’s parks are part of a contiguous system of parks and open spaces, with different areas under different ownership and management. Such systems need to be cohesively planned and managed, and not treated as individual isolated neighborhood or community parks. 804.9 Policy PROS-1.1.1: Park Classification Adopt and maintain a classification system to guide the future use of District parks. Figure 8.2 provides the framework for this system. Follow general management prescriptions for each type of park, as defined by the official Parks Master Plan. 804.10 Policy PROS-1.1.2: Consideration of Federal Parkland Work with federal agencies to evaluate the role that federal lands play in meeting the recreational needs of District residents, particularly for regional parks and sports complexes. Because these properties are used by residents, they should be considered when identifying underserved areas and assessing the need for local park improvements. 804.11 Policy PROS-1.1.3: Park Diversity Provide a diverse range of recreational experiences in parks within Washington, DC, including a balance between passive and active recreational uses, and a mix of local-serving, region-serving, and national recreational uses. 804.12 Action PROS-1.1.A: Park Classification Complete the classification of each of the District’s 375 properties using Figure 8.1. Identify suggested (advisory only) classifications for federal parks as part of this process. 804.13 Action PROS-1.1.B: Parks Master Plan Implement the Parks Master Plan for the District of Columbia Parks System. Update the plan at least once every five years or as needed to reflect changing conditions and needs. Use the Parks Master Plan as the basis for the annual Capital Improvement Program request for park and recreational facilities. 804.14 Action PROS-1.1.C: Master Plans for Individual Parks Prepare master plans for large individual parks (such as regional parks) prior to major capital improvements as funding allows and use these plans to guide capital improvement and implementation processes. 804.15 Action PROS-1.1.D: Quality of Existing Park Spaces Develop an enhanced maintenance and improvement schedule to upgrade the quality of passive and active parklands and outdoor facilities, to make the most of existing District parks. 804.15a Text Box: New Parkland A 2014 DPR study estimated that 180 acres of new parkland will be needed to meet demands associated with increased population over the next 15-20 years.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 804*

##### **10-A DCMR § 805** PROS-1.2 CLOSING THE GAPS {#sec-10-a805 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A805}

805.1 At first glance, Washington, DC appears to have a more than adequate supply of parkland. There are 12.6 acres of parks per 1,000 residents, compared to 7.9 acres per 1,000 in Baltimore, 6.9 acres per 1,000 in Philadelphia, and 7.7 acres per 1,000 in Boston.3F However, most of the District’s parkland consists of passive federally owned natural resource areas. Neighborhood and community parkland is much more limited and amounts to less than one acre per 1,000 residents in many parts of the District. By contrast, suburban communities typically set standards of four or five acres of active parkland per 1,000 residents.

805.2 Even neighborhoods with abundant parkland may lack access to recreational amenities and facilities. Other neighborhoods have parks that are too small to meet local needs, such as relief from the impacts of increasing temperatures. For example, a lack of open space and accompanying vegetation can result in heat islands that reduce local health quality. Many of these neighborhoods include areas where significant growth is taking place, and the increased volume strains the ability of the facilities to meet neighborhood needs. Improved access to parks is also needed through improvements to bus service, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle routes, and better security. Figure 8.3 presents recommended benchmarks for delivery of parks and recreation services.

805.3 Recreational needs are also a function of demographics and density. The need for parks may be more critical in some areas of the District due to:

Limited mobility due to low rates of auto ownership;

Larger numbers of children, older adults, and/or populations with chronic disease;

Larger numbers of apartment dwellers living in housing without usable open space;

Denser development patterns without the aesthetic amenities, heat island mitigation, and stormwater management benefits afforded by open space; and

Larger concentrations of youth who may benefit from programmed recreational activities.

805.4 These factors suggest that special attention be given to increasing usable open space in the District’s densest neighborhoods, even where parks already exist. Special attention must be given to improving access, park capacity, and acreage for communities where access or acreage is poor.

805.5 Improved data collection will allow the District and its partners to plan for a healthier and more active community. More robust data will help improve facilities usage and participation measurement, master planning, capital investment, and programming decisions. The implementation of systems to track the work of DPR—such as maps to show progress in closing level of service gaps—and visitor data to observe trends in program participation are important for prioritizing projects and improving community outcomes.

805.6 Figure 8.3: Benchmarks for Delivery of Park and Recreation Services

Variable

Benchmark

Access to “Meaningful” Public Open Space (improved parks larger than 1/3 acre)

Within one-half mile of all residents

Public Open Space Land Area

4 acres per 1,000 residents in each neighborhood cluster

2 acres per 1,000 residents in greater Downtown DC (e.g., the Central Employment Area)

Access to Recreation Centers

Within one mile of all residents

Access to Aquatics Facilities

Indoor pool within two miles of all residents

Outdoor pool within 1.5 miles of all residents

Splash pad within one mile of all residents

Access to Outdoor Facilities

80 percent of all DC residents will rate their access to outdoor facilities as good or excellent

Program Options

25 percent of all DC residents will participate in a DPR program, and 90 percent will rate their experience as being good or excellent

805.7 Policy PROS-1.2.1: Closing the Gaps

Achieve a better distribution of high-quality parks in all neighborhoods of Washington, DC. Provide access to the natural environment or quality green space within a 10-minute walk of all residents. This will require a priority to improve or expand parks in:

More densely populated neighborhoods with limited open space;

Areas that are more than a half mile from a neighborhood or community park (or a federal park that serves an equivalent function);

Areas where substantial new housing growth is expected, based on the forecasts of the Comprehensive Plan;

Areas where the existing recreation centers and parks are in poor condition; and

Areas where social and economic conditions compel a greater investment in parks to improve health, public safety, and community well-being.

805.8 Policy PROS-1.2.2: Improving Accessibility

Improve accessibility to and within the major park and open space areas through pedestrian safety and street crossing improvements, wayfinding signage, bike lanes and storage areas, perimeter multiuse trails within select parks, and adjustments to bus routes where appropriate. All parks should be accessible by foot, and most should be accessible by bicycle. Seek to provide access within parks for all ages and abilities consistent with park use and recognize that paved trails are accessible to wheelchair users, whereas dirt, cinder, and wood chip trails can present challenges for these users.

805.9 Policy PROS-1.2.3: Responding to Community Change

Update and improve existing parks in response to changing demographics, cultural norms, and community needs and preferences. Parks should reflect the identity and needs of the communities they serve. Further, the parks and recreation system should evolve to offer a variety of facilities located within a reasonable distance of each resident and provide a range of programs in spaces designed to flex as residents’ needs and interests change.

805.10 Action PROS-1.2.A: Bus Routing

Consult with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and the DC Circulator to identify locations where additional bus stops are needed to serve neighborhood and community parks, particularly those with recreation centers.

805.11 Action PROS-1.2.B: Public Involvement

Consult with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and local community groups on park planning and development to understand and better address resident priorities.

805.12 Action PROS-1.2.C: Park Spaces on District Properties

Encourage shared-use agreements for green spaces owned by District government and DCPS so that these areas are available and accessible to residents for recreational purposes.

805.13 Action PROS-1.2.D: Temporary Activation of Underutilized Spaces

Identify underutilized spaces that can be programmed on a seasonal and temporary basis to advance public life. Focus on commercial corridors where park space is scarce. Consult with ANCs, local community groups, and local businesses to identify locations where on-street parking spaces, empty lots, or parking lots could be seasonally repurposed for outdoor recreational use.

805.14 Action PROS-1.2.E: Open Space Plan

Evaluate the need for a District-wide open space plan focusing on improving physical access to green space and the rivers.

805.15 Action PROS-1.2.F: Promoting Access

Promote access to biking and swimming facilities and programs, with an emphasis on underserved and underrepresented groups. Explore opportunities for roving park programming to serve residents in their communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 806** PROS-1.3 PRESERVING THE VALUE OF PARKLAND {#sec-10-a806 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A806}

806.1 A park often reflects a neighborhood’s vitality and character. However, too often, District parks have not been treated as the resource for revitalization and community empowerment that they should be. Some suffer from deferred maintenance, illegal dumping, and crime. Others face challenges accommodating competing needs within limited space. Previous plans have created hundreds of small pockets of green space, contributing to the uniqueness of the District’s character. Yet these spaces often pose a challenge in terms of programming and maintenance. In addition, the parks are not managed by a single government but by multiple entities. Collaboration and coordination are both necessary and often complex.

806.2 Washington, DC’s parks should be viewed as limited and precious resources, no less valuable than the neighborhoods they serve. But the purpose of park management should not be solely to preserve open space. Parks meet the recreation, education, and social needs of District residents. The tree canopy and green infrastructure parks provide can improve community resilience and sustainability through such activities as stormwater management, energy conservation, and carbon sequestration. They can support urban agriculture in areas with limited access to fresh produce. They can generate and support economic and social benefits, such as youth employment, business attraction, cultural activities, and community gathering space. The District should strive to realize these multiple and diverse benefits in the design of its parks and other public spaces.

806.3 Small open spaces (those less than one acre in size) are a significant untapped resource that can enhance the District’s neighborhoods, connect residents to their community through green networks, provide additional green space, and create a sense of place. There are 1,149 of these spaces in the District. They are controlled by multiple entities of the District government: DPR, DGS, and the District Department of Transportation (DDOT). Collectively, these spaces total over 148 acres. NPS manages additional small open spaces throughout the District. These combined small open spaces are triangle parks, circles, medians, paper streets, open spaces at interchanges, and narrow strips of green space running parallel to freeways. They are part of open space systems that contribute to the park-like character of the District and its neighborhoods, creating an urban environment that is distinct to Washington, DC.

806.4 Policy PROS-1.3.1: Balancing Competing Needs

Manage the District’s parklands to preserve and enhance their open space character while also accommodating a range of recreational, educational, and environmental functions. Park activities and facilities should be designed in a way that makes the best possible use of each space while minimizing conflicts between different recreational uses.

806.5 Policy PROS-1.3.2: Parks and Environmental Objectives

Use park improvements to achieve environmental objectives, such as water quality improvement, air quality improvement, wildlife habitat restoration, and tree canopy conservation and improvement.

806.6 Policy PROS-1.3.3: Preserving Small Open Spaces

Develop a coordinated approach for the improvement of small open spaces. Maintain the District’s small open spaces as neighborhood amenities supporting a range of recreational, ecological, cultural, and commemorative uses. These active and passive uses should vary based on the setting of each space and should range from planted islands to more active spaces. The spaces should be designed in a way that mitigates stormwater runoff and air pollution from adjacent corridors.

806.7 Policy PROS-1.3.4: Conversion of Parkland/Open Space

Preserve the basic function of District parks as public open spaces and prevent parkland conversion to other uses. On select park sites with active uses, complementary uses, such as concessions, may be considered as a way to generate the revenue needed to sustain and modernize recreation facilities and further activate such spaces.

806.8 Policy PROS-1.3.5: Park Buildings

Require any new structure on District-owned parkland to be sited to minimize impacts on existing recreational activities and facilities, avoid encroachment onto athletic fields, and retain as much of the site as possible as usable open space. Public facilities that do not relate to recreational needs should be discouraged from locating on District-owned parkland, especially in areas with parkland deficiencies.

806.9 Policy PROS-1.3.6: Compatibility with Adjacent Development

Design and manage park activities and facilities, including recreation centers, in a way that is compatible with nearby residential and commercial uses.

See also the Historic Preservation Element and the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions related to historic natural areas and the squares, circles, and triangles associated with the L’Enfant Plan. See the Infrastructure Element for policies on the siting of communication towers (in parks and elsewhere).

806.10 Policy PROS-1.3.7: Health and Wellness

Use Washington, DC’s parks, open space, and recreation spaces to help meet the District’s health and wellness priorities, which are linked to physical activity, public safety, healthy food access, psychological health, air and water quality, and social equity.

806.10a Text Box: Sustainable DC 2.0: One of the District’s most important resources is the health of its residents. The District consistently ranks at the top of lists of the country’s healthiest and fittest cities. Yet significant disparities in health exist along the lines of race, income, and geography. For example, residents in Ward 8 are four times as likely to have diabetes compared to residents in other wards in the District, and Black residents are almost 2.5 times more likely to have heart disease than White residents. Depending on which Ward a person lives in, life expectancy can vary by up to 10 years. Further, many District residents suffer from the negative effects of air pollution, lack safe places to exercise, and are disproportionately at risk for chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease. Climate impacts, like asthma and heat-related injuries, further compound these issues and often fall disproportionally and unfairly on low-income populations.

806.10b Sustainable DC 2.0, Washington, DC’s plan to make the District the healthiest, greenest, and most livable city in the United States, affirms that building a culture of health means thinking beyond hospitals and clinics as the main sources of personal well-being. The opportunity to make healthy choices starts in homes, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, and communities. Access to high-quality parks and open spaces and completing at least 150 minutes of physical activity per week are key components to achieving personal wellness.

806.11 Policy PROS-1.3.8: Multipurpose Infrastructure

Design parks and recreational facilities with infrastructure to serve multiple purposes, including flood risk reduction, urban heat island mitigation, and stormwater management.

806.12 Action PROS-1.3.A: Transfer of Small Open Spaces to DPR

Develop a strategy for small open spaces through a coordinated management approach among the various government agencies. The strategy should define the role of small open spaces in the larger park system, which will help agencies manage them more efficiently and promote system-wide investment of resources. Consider the transfer of maintenance responsibilities for small open spaces from DDOT and NPS to DPR to recognize their primary function as parkland stewards, where appropriate.

See also the Environmental Protection Element for policies related to preventing development on land adjacent to parks, which would hinder access, destroy views, or otherwise compromise the value of parkland.

806.13 Action PROS-1.3.B: Site Plan Review

Plans for the redesign of individual parks or the development of park facilities shall be reviewed by appropriate District agencies so that they advance the District’s goals for better public recreation facilities, environmental protection, open space preservation, historic preservation, public safety, accessibility, and resilience.

806.14 Action PROS-1.3.C: District-wide Ecosystem

Support a District-wide ecosystem consortium that will work to increase wildlife habitat and connectivity, especially among parks. The consortium can collectively identify, map, and protect wildlife and natural resources so that wildlife has access to high-quality habitat throughout Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 807** PROS-1.4 MEETING THE NEEDS OF A GROWING DISTRICT {#sec-10-a807 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A807}

807.1 The addition of thousands of new jobs and households over the next 20 years will increase demand for programmed parks, open space, and recreational activities. Existing parks will accommodate more users, particularly in neighborhoods where high-density infill development is planned. New parks will be needed to serve new and growing communities. Given the developed character of the District, finding land for such parks will be difficult and expensive. The District must seize opportunities for parkland dedication on its largest redevelopment sites and take steps now to promote park provision elsewhere as Washington, DC grows.

807.2 A 2014 DPR study estimated that 180 new acres of parkland will be needed to meet demands associated with increased population over the next 15-20 years. Additional recreation facilities and programs also are needed to close gaps in underserved neighborhoods. Many residents are more than a half-mile from a usable park or open space or live in a neighborhood where park acreage is low. New parks planned at Buzzard Point, Near Southeast, Poplar Point, Hill East, and elsewhere along the Anacostia River will meet some of this demand. Additional parkland will be needed to serve growth and development in the north central, northeastern, and southeastern parts of the District, where a substantial amount of additional housing is planned in an area with a dearth of public parks. Substantial areas for new parks should also be designated in the reuse plans for any large federal sites that are transferred to the District or used for private development in the future.

807.3 Creating new parks in built-up neighborhoods will be more challenging. There is competing pressure to use public land for other purposes, particularly revenue-generating uses like housing and office development, which tend to make potential new park sites more expensive. The District does not have a dedicated funding source for parkland acquisition (such as an impact fee) and capital improvement funds are typically used for new facilities rather than to acquire vacant land. Acquisition may occur through a variety of means, such as donations and grants, payment in lieu of taxes, tax increment financing, and public-private partnerships. Open space may also be set aside within new projects through development agreements and Planned Unit Development (PUD) amenity packages. Such open space should be usable, publicly accessible, and address open space needs of the area, including rooftops and courtyards. Business improvement districts (BIDs) also have a potential role to play. In 2012, the North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa) BID formed the NoMa Parks Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to securing additional park space in the neighborhood.

807.4 New and improved parks along the waterfront have contributed to the vitality of the District in three powerful ways: making the waterfront broadly accessible, adding economic value to new development as a neighborhood amenity through recreation and programming, and providing environmental resilience to mitigate flooding and the impacts of climate change. Canal Park, Yards Park, Diamond Teague Park, and the Wharf Park are linked to new developments and provide neighborhood amenities for existing and new waterfront residents, workers, and visitors. Additionally, long-standing federal park and open space assets—from Langston Golf Course to the National Arboretum, to Anacostia Park—are experiencing reinvestment, including plans for stronger connections to adjacent communities.

807.5 The increase in the District’s population means that there is a greater demand for commemorative parks under federal jurisdiction, such as Franklin Park, to serve residents. Additionally, the federal government has struggled to provide adequate funding to plan, develop, and maintain the range of parks and open space that it operates. Federal partnerships with local agencies and organizations—such as DPR, BIDs, and nonprofit groups—are key to developing strategies that improve the character and function of these parks, provide new visitor amenities, and better support their neighborhoods while still preserving commemorative and historic resources within the parks.

807.6 Policy PROS-1.4.1: Park Planning

Prioritize the creation of parks and recreation spaces through neighborhood planning and development review processes, particularly in areas where residents are not within a 10-minute walk of sufficient park space.

807.7 Policy PROS-1.4.2: Park Acquisition

Acquire and improve additional parkland to meet the recreational needs of existing and future residents. This should occur both through the expansion of existing parks and the development of new parks.

807.8 Policy PROS-1.4.3: Acquisition Methods

Use a variety of methods to acquire and improve parkland, including easements, donations, land purchases, strategic property transfers, long-term land leases, and park set-asides on new development sites. Recognize the impacts of new development on the need for additional park and recreational facilities and mitigate impacts through dedication of parkland or in-lieu payments.

807.9 Policy PROS-1.4.4: Parks on Large Sites

Include new neighborhood and/or community parks on large sites that are redeveloped for housing and other uses that generate a demand for recreational services. The potential for such parks to enhance the connectivity of parks and open spaces throughout the District should be an important planning and design consideration, particularly where multiple large adjacent sites are being redeveloped.

807.10 Policy PROS-1.4.5: Parks on Surplus Land

Acquire and convert abandoned or tax delinquent land, surplus rail or road rights-of-way, and other land not in productive use into recreational use where feasible and appropriate, particularly in parts of Washington, DC, that lack adequate access to parkland. Balance the need for additional open space with other District priorities, such as affordable housing.

807.11 Policy PROS-1.4.6: Park Amenities on NPS Land

Where consistent with other policies in the Comprehensive Plan and NPS plans, and supported by nearby neighborhoods and needs assessments, encourage federal government projects that would provide new recreational amenities—such as soccer fields, picnic areas, and trails—that increase equitable District resident access to national parkland.

807.12 Policy PROS-1.4.7: Parks in Employment Growth Areas

Provide new parks and open spaces in areas of expected employment growth. Small pocket parks, plazas, and other open spaces should be created in the vicinity of the NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro station, Buzzard Point, the east end of downtown/Mount Vernon Triangle, and the Near Northeast neighborhood to provide visual relief and space for active and passive recreation.

807.13 Action PROS-1.4.A: New Parkland Dedication or Park Impact Fee

Study a requirement for a dedication of new parkland—or a park impact fee in lieu of new parkland creation—for new development or redevelopment based on the size, use, and density of the new development.

See also the Educational Facilities Element for polices on the use of school recreational facilities and lands.

##### **10-A DCMR § 808** PROS-2 PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a808 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A808}

808.1 While the previous section of this element focused on park planning, this section focuses specifically on park facilities.

808.2 The District currently operates 76 recreation centers with a combined total of approximately one million square feet of floor space. It also operates over 50 aquatic facilities comprised of 11 indoor pools, 18 outdoor pools, four children’s pools, and 20 splash pads. The range of facilities have grown to include 34 community gardens, five skate parks, and over a dozen dog parks. There are more than 340 fields and courts, accommodating field sports, tennis, basketball, and other athletic activities. These facilities are used to provide recreational services to residents in all parts of the District. DPR activities range from aquatics, quilting, and environmental education to martial arts, personalized weight training, and even poetry slams. Many of the programs are targeted toward specific age groups, such as older adults and teens. Others are designed for persons with disabilities or for families.

808.3 Demand for recreational programs—and the facilities to accommodate them—is expected to grow in the future as population grows. Demand will also be affected by cultural changes, new technology, sports and entertainment trends, and demographic shifts. The growth of the youth and older adult populations, in particular, will influence recreational needs in the District over the next 20 years. The text box, The District Speaks Out on Parks, provides an indication of current recreational habits and trends in Washington, DC, based on a 2013 resident survey.

808.3a Text Box: The District Speaks Out on Parks

The Parks Master Plan process conducted in 2013-2014 engaged the community in a discussion about park needs in Washington, DC. Public input was solicited through stakeholder interviews, an advisory committee, staff workshops, focus groups, an online engagement tool, a recreation center survey, and a statistically valid mail-in survey. Major findings of the survey included:

Seventy-one percent of the respondents had visited any DPR park in the last 12 months. Of this total, 77 percent rated the visited park as good or excellent. Another 20 percent rated the park as fair, and only 23 percent rated the park as poor.

Twenty-eight percent of the respondents indicated they visited an indoor recreation center at least once a week.

Eighteen percent of the respondents had participated in a DPR recreation program in the last 12 months. Of this total, 82 percent rated the program as good or excellent.

The most frequently mentioned reasons for not using parks and recreation centers more often were lack of time (47 percent), lack of program awareness (32 percent), and absence of desired amenities (12 percent).

The facilities in greatest demand were trails (66 percent), small neighborhood parks (66 percent), indoor pools (59 percent), large community parks (57 percent), indoor exercise and fitness facilities (55 percent), picnic areas (54 percent), and outdoor pools (53 percent).

The programs in greatest demand were community special events (59 percent), adult fitness and wellness (52 percent), water fitness (40 percent), adult leisure learning (40 percent), and nature programs (40 percent).

808.4 The needs assessment during the 2013-2014 master planning process determined that:

The District’s strengths include a relatively large number of recreation centers and amenities, including some with state-of-the-art spaces. However, some facilities are underused because they are outdated or not well maintained.

There is a major need to improve and maintain existing facilities. Deferred maintenance is a problem at many recreation centers. Improvements need to be addressed in a prioritized, equitable, and efficient method.

There is a perception of inequity in parks and recreation services. This is partially due to the gap between high-quality new or recently modernized facilities and those that are older. Some parts of the District have better access to facilities than others.

The existing neighborhood-based model of providing services may not be sustainable and requires too many facilities to be built, operated, and staffed. Although consolidation would result in a smaller number of facilities, it may translate into higher levels of service, since these facilities could reach larger populations and be operated more efficiently.

##### **10-A DCMR § 809** PROS-2.1 ASSESSING RECREATIONAL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a809 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A809}

809.1 The 2014 Parks Master Plan identified three primary facility types in the District’s parks:

Recreation centers, which provide space for the delivery of indoor recreation services and support space for outdoor activities;

Aquatic facilities, including pools and splash pads; and

Outdoor facilities, including courts, playgrounds, fields, and similar park features.

809.2 The text and policies below provide general direction on how these facilities can be managed to meet future needs. In general, residents overwhelmingly favor enhancing existing assets to building new facilities. This focus should continue, particularly in areas experiencing subpar levels of service today.

809.3 The District has one of the highest ratios of recreation centers to residents in the country. The District’s ratio is substantially higher than ratios for the largest East Coast cities and several major West Coast cities. However, this benchmark does not consider the condition or size of the center, or the accessibility of recreational services to residents. Most of the District’s recreation centers meet basic expectations, but some need modernization. DPR and DGS are actively working to improve the quality and size of outdated centers.

809.4 As Map 8.2 indicates, there are still many parts of the District that may require additional recreation center space. Service gaps appear in Near Southeast, the far western and far northern parts of the District, and downtown.

809.5 DPR’s design guidelines identify four recreation center prototypes: neighborhood, community, District, and specialty. They are distinguished by their size, amenities, and service area. Criteria are provided for the functional relationship of interior spaces for each center type. There are also guidelines to recognize the historic significance of older centers and protect their historical integrity.

809.6 The District has one of the highest number of aquatics facilities per capita in the country. However, sometimes these facilities are not in locations that are easily accessed by residents in their service area or in the best condition, and sometimes they are not large enough to meet demand. To promote equitable access to and excellence in aquatics, continued investment in pools and other facilities is needed. Evaluations of potential new aquatic facilities, including those that can generate revenue and draw visitors from other jurisdictions, may be considered in the future. Other water-oriented activities, such as river canoeing, kayaking, and fishing, also will be supported through recreational programs.

809.7 Probably the most familiar function of a neighborhood or community park is to provide space for active outdoor recreation. District parks support hundreds of facilities, including softball and baseball fields, football and soccer fields, basketball courts, tennis courts, dog parks, and skate parks. In addition, an unprecedented number of playgrounds were renovated in 2013 and 2014, drawing thousands of children and other users to new equipment across the District. The District continues to work toward securing more outdoor facilities and modernizing existing facilities so they can be operated and maintained more efficiently. In some instances, this may require partnering with agencies such as DCPS and DDOT to creatively accommodate facilities on school grounds or in transportation rights-of-way. Given the limitations of the District’s compact geographic area and the varied amounts of space for outdoor facilities, recreation can become a component of new urban infrastructure projects in a number of settings.

809.8 Policy PROS-2.1.1: Recreational Facility Development

Improve the physical and psychological health of District residents by providing a variety of recreational and athletic facilities, including playing fields, tennis courts, swimming pools, basketball courts, trails and paths, art studio and exhibition spaces, boating facilities, docks, and open areas for other sports activities.

809.9 Map 8.2: Recreation Center Buildings

**History**
- *Source: DC Office of Planning, 2018 809.10 Policy PROS-2.1.2: Use of Service Standards Develop recreational facilities in an orderly way by using service standards and design guidelines that help identify local needs. Further, consistently apply the new classification system for recreation centers included in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Direct investment in new facilities to the areas with the greatest unmet needs and areas where additional demand is expected in the future. 809.11 Policy PROS-2.1.3: Quality and Compatible Design All park improvements should be of high design and construction quality, sensitive to the natural environment, respectful of historic structures and important cultural landscapes, sensitive to the needs of people of all ages and abilities, and compatible with surrounding land uses. 809.12 Policy PROS-2.1.4: Responding to Local Preferences Provide amenities and facilities in District parks that are responsive to the preferences and needs of the neighborhoods around the parks. Park planning should recognize that there are different leisure time interests in different parts of Washington, DC. To better understand these differences, the community must be involved in key planning and design decisions. 809.13 Policy PROS-2.1.5: Adapting to Changing Needs Allow the development of flexible facilities that respond to changing preferences and community needs in appropriate District parks, including dog parks, skate parks, tot lots, and water spray parks. 809.14 Policy PROS-2.1.6: Nature-Based Design New recreational facilities should incorporate nature-based design principles that value residents’ innate connection to nature and allow abundant opportunities to be outside and to enjoy the multisensory aspects of nature. Nature-based elements can include a visual connection with nature, the presence of water, the use of natural materials, and incorporation of dynamic and diffuse light. 809.15 Policy PROS-2.1.7: Alternatives to New Facilities Identify opportunities to meet outdoor recreational needs through existing public or private facilities, as an alternative to building new facilities. 809.16 Policy PROS-2.1.8: Project Development Process Maintain a well-defined and transparent project development process that includes public participation so that future park projects meet resident needs and achieve context-sensitive design solutions. Recreational needs should be confirmed through area plans, neighborhood plans, and plans for individual parks. 809.17 Policy PROS-2.1.9: Use of Emerging Technologies Support the use of emerging technologies, such as tech lounges and e-sports, to create interactive gathering spaces for residents, particularly youth and older adults. 809.18 Action PROS-2.1.A: Capital Improvements Regularly identify and update the cost of improvements needed to meet service delivery standards, including those for recreation centers, aquatic facilities, and outdoor facilities. Provide systematic and continuing funds for park improvements through the annual Capital Improvement Program, with investments prioritized for the facilities and communities that are most in need. 809.19 Action PROS-2.1.B: Needs Assessments and Demographic Analysis Conduct periodic needs assessments, surveys, and demographic studies to better understand the current preferences and future needs of District residents regarding parks and recreation. 809.20 Action PROS 2.1.C: Parks Restroom Inventory Conduct an assessment of the existing parks restroom inventory, considering park size and usage to determine the needs for additional public restrooms. See also the Community Services and Facilities Element for policies on the co-location of recreational uses with other public facilities. 809.21 Action PROS-2.1.D: Level-of-Service and Classification Systems Evaluate existing level-of-service standards by type of facility and amenity, and, where deemed necessary, develop facility-specific classification systems. 809.22 Action PROS-2.1.E: Improvement of Outdoor Recreational Facilities Systematically evaluate existing outdoor recreational facilities based on the Parks Master Plan design guidelines. Implement plans to eliminate deficiencies and close gaps through capital improvements. Typical capital projects might include turf restoration, addition of lighting and seating at sports fields, playground renovation, and resurfacing of basketball and tennis courts.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 809*

##### **10-A DCMR § 810** PROS-2.2 PROVIDING QUALITY SERVICE TO ALL RESIDENTS {#sec-10-a810 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A810}

810.1 Maintaining a quality park system requires a high level of facility maintenance, modernization, and repair. A 2009 assessment of 72 DPR facilities found that 10 were in poor condition, 11 were in fair condition, and 51 were in good condition. A supplemental assessment of 56 recreation centers was done by DGS in 2013. It found 11 facilities in poor condition, 17 in fair condition, and 28 in good condition.

810.2 On a per capita basis, the District spends less on park operations and maintenance than peer cities like Minneapolis, Portland, and San Francisco. Since 2003, however, the District’s annual expenditures on park capital improvements have been higher than expenditures in these cities. New facilities are replacing aging buildings and providing attractive new community centers. With more capital construction planned in the coming years, the District will need to dedicate additional funds to cover the higher expenses of operating and maintaining these facilities.

810.3 Similar efforts will be needed to address a wide variety of park planning issues, including the personal safety of park visitors, provisions for youth and residents with disabilities, staffing needs, and the coordination of service delivery with other agencies. A steady, reliable stream of funds will be essential to keep our parks safe and attractive, and to respond to future needs.

810.4 Programming is one of the core elements of recreational service delivery. DPR delivers over 400 programs a year at its facilities. Recent data indicates that fewer than 20 percent of DC residents participate in these programs. Detailed data on demographics, resident preferences, and user satisfaction can help create more responsive programming. There are also opportunities for better marketing and programming for targeted audiences like youth and older adults. In some cases, service delivery by other agencies or nonprofits may be the most effective option.

810.5 Looking ahead, new funding sources—such as public-private partnerships, grants, and concessions—may be necessary. A commitment to future funding should recognize the many tangible and intangible benefits that the District’s parks provide to neighborhoods.

810.6 Policy PROS-2.2.1: Maintenance and Renovation

Provide for the continuing maintenance, renovation, and upgrading of the District’s parks and recreational facilities to prevent their deterioration so that they continue to meet community needs. Prioritize the asset management of existing facilities during the capital improvement process.

810.7 Policy PROS-2.2.2: Park Safety and Security

Design parks, trails, and recreational facilities to improve the safety of visitors and staff. Avoid creating hidden and difficult-to-access areas, where security problems or vandalism could result. Lighting, fencing, building materials, and other design components should be selected to enhance the safety of park users. Park lighting should be compatible with adjacent residential neighborhoods.

810.8 Policy PROS-2.2.3: Program Diversity

Provide diverse recreational activities to promote healthy living for persons of all ages and cultural backgrounds. Such activities must be distributed equitably in all parts of the District. Coordinate activities and offerings with other service providers, including DCPS and community-based organizations such as wellness centers for older persons, to maximize the effectiveness of service delivery and minimize redundancy.

810.9 Policy PROS-2.2.4: Data-Driven Programming

Collect and analyze data on recreational program participation and use this data to shape decisions on future programs and operations. Programs should reflect local and national trends in recreation and regular surveys of District residents, with a focus on meeting the needs of underserved populations.

810.10 Policy PROS-2.2.5: Youth Recreational Services

Provide recreational services that are particularly responsive to the special needs of the District’s youth, using recreation and athletics to promote self-esteem, responsibility, and leadership skills among youth.

810.11 Policy PROS-2.2.6: Special Needs

Increase efforts to meet the needs of underserved population groups, particularly older residents and persons with disabilities. Provide barrier free access by modifying existing facilities to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities and modifying existing indoor and outdoor facilities and parks to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities. Explore the use of alternative participation styles and formats in the program curriculum so that activities can be easily adjusted to allow persons with disabilities and residents needing additional accommodations to participate.

810.12 Policy PROS-2.2.7: Physical Activity in Everyday Spaces

Prioritize community-driven strategies to support physical activity in non-traditional, everyday spaces across the District. Childhood play is essential to physical, cognitive, creative, social, and emotional development. However, many children face barriers to play, such as a perceived or actual lack of safe spaces. District government and its partners should provide additional opportunities for play in everyday locations where kids and families already spend time, including bus stops, grocery stores, and sidewalks.

810.13 Policy PROS-2.2.8: New Funding Sources

Seek out and pursue new forms of local, federal, nonprofit, and private financial support to acquire, develop, and operate the District’s park and recreational facilities. Streamline the process for accepting private donations of parks-related goods, services, and facilities.

For more information, see PROS-4.1 on public-private partnerships.

810.14 Policy PROS-2.2.9: Park Stewardship

Encourage volunteer assistance and stewardship in the maintenance of the District’s parks, particularly the triangle parks along major thoroughfares. Local community organizations should be encouraged to donate goods, services, and time to help in the oversight and upkeep of such spaces. Stewardship should be viewed as a way to increase environmental awareness, reduce maintenance costs, and build civic pride in parks.

810.15 Policy PROS-2.2.10: Fiscal Impact of Park Improvements

Evaluate proposed park facilities to determine their ability to generate revenue and help recover operational and maintenance costs. When developing new facilities, assess the projected operation and maintenance costs prior to requesting capital funding approval.

810.16 Action PROS-2.2.A: Facility Assessments

Conduct regular facility condition and utilization studies and use this data to determine if there is a need for improvement, reconstruction, closure, or expansion. A comprehensive facility condition assessment should be performed for each recreation center at least once every five years.

810.17 Action PROS-2.2.B: Maintenance Standards

Create official maintenance standards based on industry best practices, such as Sustainable SITES Initiative (SITES) or an equivalent system, to improve the effectiveness of current maintenance and service levels for recreational buildings, facilities, and landscaping. Both maintenance contractors and the District should adhere to these standards.

810.18 Action PROS-2.2.C: Adopt-a-Park

Continue to encourage community groups, businesses, and others to participate in the District’s Adopt-a-Park/Adopt-a-Playground program and publicize the program through signs, advertisements, websites, and other media. Support Friends of Parks groups in stewarding, advocating, and hosting fundraising events for park sites to help maintain grounds and buildings and assist in the planning process.

810.19 Action PROS-2.2.D: Data Tracking

Establish a system to maintain and regularly update data and maps on parks, recreational facilities, and programming offered by DPR and affiliated providers to measure improvements in levels of service and document achievements.

810.20 Action PROS-2.2.E: Marketing and Branding

Develop a marketing plan to increase public awareness of programs and to more firmly establish an identity for Washington, DC, parks.

See also policies in the Environmental Protection Element about green maintenance and green building practices, including requirements that future recreation centers meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver standards.

810.21 Action PROS-2.2.F: Integration of Federal and District Athletic Fields

Better integrate federal and District athletic fields under the jurisdictions of NPS, DPR, and DCPS.

810.22 Action PROS-2.2.G: Design Standards

Create District-wide parks and recreation facility design standards for outdoor facilities. Design parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities to reflect the preferences and culture of the local population, to accommodate a range of age groups and abilities and to improve the safety of visitors and staff. When renovating playgrounds and parks, design new infrastructure for active recreation, including workout equipment, for all ages and abilities.

810.23 Action PROS-2.2.H: Hospital and Clinic Partnerships

Explore partnerships with hospitals and clinics to increase the number of doctors prescribing parks and recreational activities to patients of every age.

810.24 Action PROS-2.2.I: Performance Monitoring

Provide the necessary hardware and software to track customer use and evaluations, determine gaps in programming and facilities, and identify opportunities to improve the overall performance of the parks and recreation system.

810.25 Action PROS-2.2.J: Recreation Program Action Plan

Develop a recreation program action plan that elevates, standardizes, and expands the quality of DPR program offerings. The plan should help DPR to prioritize program investments while promoting broader goals of health, fitness, artistic expression, and community building.

810.26 Action PROS-2.2.K: Public-Private Partnerships

When using a public-private partnership model to fund park acquisitions or improvements, incorporate programming and maintenance plans.

810.27 Action PROS-2.2.L: New Kiosk Development

Amend the zoning regulations to allow temporary and permanent kiosks at residentially zoned parks, where appropriate. Kiosks would be owned by the District and revenue from the kiosks would be used to support park maintenance and operations.

##### **10-A DCMR § 811** PROS-3 OPEN SPACE NETWORKS {#sec-10-a811 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A811}

811.1 Washington, DC, is characterized by four outstanding and distinct networks of open space:

The Monumental Core, including the National Mall and adjacent areas in East and West Potomac Parks;

Rock Creek Park and the linear parks along its tributary streams, extending from the Potomac River to the Maryland border;

The Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, forming a ring of open space approximately five miles out from the center of the District; and

The Anacostia and Potomac parklands, including linear parks along tributary streams.

811.2 Each of these areas is profiled in more detail below. Together, they comprise 6,700 acres of parkland, or about 18 percent of the District’s land area. Because almost all of this land is under the control of NPS, the policies presented here are intended to express the District’s aspirations for the land’s long-term management. They are statements of the District’s values and priorities, to be consulted by our federal partners as they plan and manage these important properties.

811.3 In addition to the four open space networks described above, there are other important chains of interconnected open space across the District. Among the most significant is the corridor of District, federal, and institutional lands extending from McMillan Reservoir on the south to Fort Totten on the north.

811.4 This section of the Comprehensive Plan includes a special focus on park and open space planning for Washington, DC’s waterfronts. The need to improve connectivity between open spaces through trails and greenways also is addressed. Policies on these topics are supplemented in Section PROS-4.0 with information on functional open spaces that may augment this network and further contribute to community needs, environmental quality, and economic value.

811.5 Figure 8.4 compares the total parkland acreage within Washington, DC, to other high-density U.S. cities, using data from a recent analysis by the Trust for Public Land.

811.6 Figure 8.4: Parkland Open Space, Washington, DC Compared to Other Cities

**History**
- *Source: Trust for Public Land, 2016*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 811*

##### **10-A DCMR § 812** PROS-3.1 SUSTAINING AND ENHANCING THE FEDERAL OPEN SPACE SYSTEMS {#sec-10-a812 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A812}

812.1 Although Washington, DC, does not have jurisdiction over the National Mall and the adjoining open spaces in East and West Potomac Parks, these are arguably the most visible and high-profile parklands in the District. They project the image of Washington, DC, to the world and attract millions of visitors each year. The future of the landscaped glades between the U.S. Capitol and the Potomac River is the focus of national debate, as the need for new monuments and memorials is balanced against the need to retain the Mall’s historic form, sight lines, and open quality. Under statehood, the National Mall and environs would be preserved as the core of the federal district. In addition, the prospect of sea level rise threatens the continued viability of recreational uses at East Potomac Park and Hains Point. The Mall serves local, national, and international communities. It is integral to Washington, DC’s history. The National Mall should remain an inclusive space that allows users to recognize history while balancing the need to draw visitors to the District. The National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) has prepared several important plans on these issues, including the Legacy Plan and the Memorials and Museums Master Plan. Both plans seek to preserve the historic proportions of the Mall, recognize its multiple functions as a passive and active open space, and expand the open space network to new areas along South Capitol Street and the Anacostia River.

812.2 Several planning initiatives for the National Mall have been completed. In 2000, NPS completed a Comprehensive Design Plan for the White House and President’s Park. The approved plan provides the management framework and flexibility needed to manage and preserve the site for the presidency and the public. In 2001, NCPC released the Memorials and Museums Master Plan, which identifies 100 potential locations for memorials and museums, and provides general guidelines for their development. In addition, in 2004, the nonprofit organization National Mall Coalition launched the National Mall Third Century Initiative (3C Initiative). The mission of the 3C Initiative is to renew the vitality of the Mall through creative public use, wise stewardship for the next century, and appropriate expansion. The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) is also involved in planning and design decisions on the Mall.

812.3 Rock Creek Park is the largest contiguous open space within the District, encompassing over 2,000 acres along the Rock Creek Valley and its tributary streams. The park’s scenic landscapes provide a respite from the cityscape of Washington, DC. Each year, more than two million people visit the park to hike, picnic, play, and enjoy its rugged beauty. More than 12 million people a year use the park roads for commuting or scenic driving. In 2005, NPS completed a General Management Plan (GMP) for the largest unit of Rock Creek Park, providing guidance on how to best protect natural resources and manage visitor services. The goals of the GMP are to preserve and perpetuate the ecology of the Rock Creek Valley, protect archaeological and historic resources, provide for education and exploration, and create opportunities for recreation that are compatible with the park’s natural and cultural setting. The GMP itself includes management prescriptions that will guide future land use decisions and issues regarding road closures and traffic management.

812.4 At the start of the Civil War in 1861, a series of fortifications was built around Washington, DC, to protect the nation’s capital from a Confederate invasion. Among the fortifications were Fort Stevens, site of an 1864 battle; Fort Reno, highest point in the District; and Fort Dupont, the largest park in Ward 7 or 8. After the Civil War, most of the 68 forts and 93 batteries were dismantled, and the land was returned to its pre-war owners. Before they disappeared completely, a number of fort sites were purchased by the federal government and developed as parkland. An envisioned Fort Circle greenbelt featured prominently in the McMillan Plan of 1901, and with the advent of the automobile, the greenbelt was proposed as a 23-mile circumferential parkway around the growing District (the Fort Drive).

812.5 NPS prepared a GMP for the Fort Circle Parks in 2003. The GMP’s primary objectives include protection of ecological and historical values and accommodation of local recreational interests. The GMP seeks to remedy issues such as the deteriorated state of the parks’ historical earthworks, concerns about visitor safety, and the lack of visitor services and interpretive facilities. Among the planned improvements are a new hiking trail linking the forts through existing parkland, new recreational features, coordinated signage, and new public access points.

812.6 The Potomac and Anacostia rivers and their associated tributaries, such as Watts Branch and Pope Branch, provide an important link in the District’s open space network. They provide protection for sensitive natural habitat, scenic beauty, and water-oriented recreation for District residents and visitors. Washington, DC’s waterfront open spaces encompass an area larger than all of Rock Creek Park.

812.7 Investments in infrastructure have started to provide a connected waterfront, so that the Anacostia River no longer divides neighborhoods, although further connections, many in planning, are needed. State-of-the-art multimodal projects are enhancing mobility and public access to and along the waterfront, such as the nearly 20-mile Anacostia Riverwalk Trail and the local 11th Street Bridge, which now serves pedestrians and cyclists. When constructed, the planned Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge will continue this momentum along with the planned pedestrian and cyclist bridge spanning the Anacostia River and additional new miles of bike paths linking underserved communities.

812.8 In addition, the Anacostia waterfront has emerged as a cultural center complementing the Mall with cultural venues, sports arenas, and museums. These amenities enliven the waterfront’s shores with millions of annual visitors and reinforce the District’s unique cultural heritage. There are also new developments and neighborhoods that serve as destinations themselves, such as the Wharf, and that are changing the image of the District and its relationship with the water through unique public spaces and programming. From Nationals Park and Audi Field to new museums, music venues, future monuments, and the planned 11th Street Bridge Park, the Anacostia waterfront is adding to the cultural energy and dynamism of Washington, DC. Despite these successes, significant environmental, urban design, and infrastructure challenges remain.

See the Environmental Protection, Urban Design, and Infrastructure elements for more information about these issues.

812.9 Policies for the waterfront are presented in the Section PROS-3.2 of this element.

812.10 Policy PROS-3.1.1: District Open Space Networks

Coordinate with NPS and other relevant organizations to restore the environmental health of the District’s open space networks, including tree cover and habitat, and to help more residents experience these areas through nature programs and trails.

812.11 Policy PROS-3.1.2: Monumental Core

Preserve the integrity of the National Mall open space, and advocate for federal plans and programs that protect this area from inappropriate or excessive development.

812.12 Policy PROS-3.1.3: East and West Potomac Parks

Work with the federal government to protect and enhance the great open spaces of the Monumental Core beyond the National Mall, such as Hains Point and the Tidal Basin parklands. In efforts consistent with the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, support the use of these areas for outdoor cultural events and celebrations, and for recreational activities and amenities that serve District residents and visitors. Planning for these areas should provide opportunities to expand the National Mall and better integrate East Potomac Park with the Southwest Waterfront across the Washington Channel. Planning for these areas should also seek to mitigate sea level rise through nature-based design solutions where possible.

812.13 Policy PROS-3.1.4: Rock Creek Park

The District’s land use and transportation decisions should support the conservation of Rock Creek Park as a national scenic resource. Actively participate in discussions about the management of park resources—including roadways and recreational facilities—and environmental quality.

812.14 Policy PROS-3.1.5: Tributary Parks

Maintain the scenic open space qualities and ecology of the District’s stream valley parks, including tributaries to the Potomac and Anacostia rivers and tributaries to Rock Creek. Create and maintain hiking and walking paths along tributary streams as appropriate to preserve habitats, minimize erosion, and preserve trees. Ensure that development adjacent to stream valley corridor parks does not compromise visual and ecological values and access to natural and forested areas.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional policies on stream preservation.

812.15 Policy PROS-3.1.6: Fort Circle Parks

Protect and enhance the Fort Circle Parks as an integrated network of permanent open spaces that connect neighborhoods, provide scenic beauty and historic interest, and offer a variety of recreational activities. Recognize these parks as an important District and national resource. Prevent District and federal actions that would harm historic and ecological resources in the Fort Circle Parks, and strongly support actions that would improve their maintenance, connectivity, visibility, accessibility, and safety.

812.16 Policy PROS-3.1.7: Compatibility with Parklands

Maintain and design public and private development adjacent to the edges of open spaces and parks to be compatible with these parklands and improve park access and safety.

812.17 Action PROS-3.1.A: Participation in Federal Planning Park Efforts

Support and participate in NPS and NCPC efforts to plan for parks and open spaces in, and adjacent to, the Monumental Core. Encourage resident participation in these efforts.

812.18 Action PROS-3.1.B: Monument and Memorial Siting

Actively participate with the appropriate federal agencies, commissions, and others in discussions and decisions on the siting of new monuments, memorials, and other commemorative works on open spaces within Washington, DC.

812.19 Action PROS-3.1.C: Implementation of General Management Plans

Support federal efforts to implement the Comprehensive Design Plan for the White House and President’s Park and the GMPs for Rock Creek Park and the Fort Circle Parks.

812.20 Action PROS-3.1.D: Fort Circle Park Trail

Use land acquisition and/or easements to complete the Fort Circle Park Hiker-Biker Trail and to provide additional Fort Circle Park signage and historic markers.

812.21 Action PROS-3.1.E: Fort Circle Partnerships

Actively participate in interjurisdictional and public-private partnerships to preserve, enhance, restore, and complete the Fort Circle Parks.

812.22 Action PROS-3.1.F: Park Land Transfers

In cooperation with appropriate federal agencies, identify park resources, including triangle parks, in federal jurisdiction that could potentially be transferred to the District, as well as District jurisdiction parks that could potentially be transferred to federal jurisdiction, for conservation or recreational purposes only.

##### **10-A DCMR § 813** PROS-3.2 RECLAIMING THE WATERFRONT {#sec-10-a813 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A813}

813.1 The contrast between the District’s two waterfronts—the Potomac and the Anacostia—has been well documented. Virtually the entire Potomac shoreline north of Hains Point is publicly accessible, with such amenities as the Chesapeake and Ohio (C&O) Canal towpath, Georgetown Waterfront Park, Thompson Boat Center, and Theodore Roosevelt Island. The shoreline affords stunning views of the District’s monuments and picturesque vistas across the river to Virginia. On the other hand, much of the 22 miles of shoreline along the Anacostia River, while inaccessible, is natural and relatively undisturbed. In 2003, the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan set a visionary and ambitious agenda for the revitalization of the Anacostia waterfront as a world-class destination and the center of 21st-century Washington, DC. The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) set in motion a transformation that includes new mixed-income neighborhoods, environmental restoration, transportation infrastructure, enhanced public access, new connected parks, and cultural destinations. Fifteen years after the AWI Plan, the turnaround of the Anacostia waterfront is a national model for urban rivers in terms of environmental restoration, public access, economic development, and inclusive growth.

813.2 Along the Potomac, the District’s priority is conserving the federal parklands, retaining public access, and improving access where it does not exist today. Along the Anacostia, the District has created a system of interconnected and continuous waterfront parks that establish access to the river for recreation, from signature locations like Yards Park to improved facilities like Kenilworth Recreation Center, all joined by the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail. However, despite these significant achievements, several recreational and open space improvements have yet to be realized. Map 8.3 provides an overview of completed and ongoing projects along the Anacostia waterfront. The Area Elements should be consulted for additional detail.

813.3 Policy PROS-3.2.1: Preserving Waterfront Open Space

Recognize the importance of Washington, DC’s waterfronts for recreation, public access, ecological protection, and scenic beauty.

813.4 Policy PROS-3.2.2: Connecting Neighborhoods to the Rivers

Develop open space linkages between the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers and adjacent neighborhoods using stream tributaries such as Watts Branch and Pope Branch as a framework for linear parks between the shoreline and nearby residential areas.

813.5 Map 8.3: Overview of Completed and Ongoing Projects along the Anacostia Waterfront

**History**
- *Source: DC Office of Planning, 2018 813.6 Policy PROS-3.2.3: Linking Residents to Waterfront Park Spaces Establish stronger multimodal linkages between the waterfront and adjacent upland neighborhoods, including Deanwood, Mayfair, Kenilworth-Parkside, River Terrace, Fairlawn, Twining, Kenilworth, Historic Anacostia, Carver-Langston, Kingman Park, Hill East, Capitol Hill, Barney Circle, Southwest, and Buzzard Point. Maximize public access to the waterfront from these areas through the development of a continued riverwalk and shoreline trail, natural shorelines, green infrastructure along streets, improved public transportation, redesigned bridges and freeways, additional pedestrian access routes, and the extension of neighborhood streets and avenues to the water’s edge. 813.7 Policy PROS-3.2.4: Waterfront Visibility and Accessibility Improve access to the shoreline parks from across Washington, DC, and reduce barriers to waterfront access created by railroads, freeways, and non-water-dependent industrial uses. However, no freeway or highway removal shall be undertaken prior to the completion of an adequate and feasible alternative traffic plan that has been approved by the District government. 813.8 Policy PROS-3.2.5: Water-Oriented Recreation Provide for a variety of water-oriented activities—including fishing, boating, kayaking, and paddle-boarding—on the District’s rivers. Recognize both the Anacostia and Potomac rivers as vital aquatic resources than can accommodate kayaking, canoeing, sculling, fishing, and other forms of water-oriented recreation. 813.9 Policy PROS-3.2.6: River Facilities Coordinate with federal and private partners to create a network of facilities along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers that provide water access, recreational equipment, educational space, and other amenities. These amenities must be equitably distributed along the rivers and easily accessible from nearby neighborhoods. 813.10 Policy PROS-3.2.7: Shoreline Access On waterfront development sites under District jurisdiction, require public access to the shoreline unless precluded by safety or security considerations. Incorporate natural shorelines where appropriate. 813.11 Policy PROS-3.2.8: Waterfront Park Design Waterfront parks shall be designed and planned to maximize the scenic and recreational value of the rivers. Features such as parking lots and park maintenance facilities should be located away from the water’s edge, and environmentally sensitive resources should be protected. 813.12 Policy PROS-3.2.9: Upper Potomac Waterfront Partner with NPS and other federal agencies to conserve open space along the Potomac waterfront and to protect the wooded and scenic qualities of the Potomac Palisades and adjacent islands and shoreline. Support efforts by NPS and partners to restore, reimagine, and revitalize the C&O Canal National Historic Park. 813.13 Policy PROS-3.2.10: Lower Potomac Waterfront Support additional public access to the Potomac waterfront from the mouth of the Anacostia River southward. While general access is currently restricted due to existing uses (such as that by Bolling Air Force Base), the District should identify long-term opportunities for shoreline open space and recreation, in the event that federal needs and use of this land change. See also the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions related to shoreline development and aesthetics and the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Element for additional information about the planned shoreline parks. 813.14 Action PROS-3.2.A: Anacostia River Park Improvements Work collaboratively with the federal government, the private sector, and community and nonprofit groups to implement the open space improvement plans of the AWI. Planned improvements include: A major destination park at Poplar Point; Restored natural areas at Kingman and Heritage islands; New parks, including recreational fields, around RFK Stadium; Continuous bicycle and pedestrian trails along the waterfront and new pedestrian crossings on the upper reaches of the river; New neighborhood parks and athletic fields within redeveloping areas along the waterfront, including the Southwest Waterfront, Buzzard Point, Near Southeast, and Hill East; and Enhancements to the existing waterfront parks. For more details on these planned parks, see the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Element and the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Framework Plan. 813.15 Action PROS-3.2.B: Signage and Branding Work with NPS to develop and implement a consistent system of signage and markers for the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts. 813.16 Action PROS-3.2.C: Anacostia River Boating Develop additional marine facilities, including rowing centers, appropriately scaled boathouses, boat slips, and piers along the banks of the Anacostia River as recommended in the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan. All new marinas should become Clean Marina Partners. Implement boating access improvements utilizing the Boating Access grants from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration Program. 813.17 Action PROS-3.2.D: Anacostia Riverwalk Construct new sections of the Anacostia Riverwalk according to the Buzzard Point Vision Framework’s riverwalk design guidelines. Work with Fort McNair to extend the Anacostia Riverwalk along the Washington Channel and design it to include co-benefits, such as enhanced security and flood protection for the base and ecological restoration features, thereby completing a key piece of the District-wide riverwalk system.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 813*

##### **10-A DCMR § 814** PROS-3.3 OTHER SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE NETWORKS {#sec-10-a814 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A814}

814.1 The District’s formal open space networks are complemented by several smaller open space systems. These networks may be lesser known due to fragmented ownership and multiple functions, but they are no less important—particularly to the communities they serve.

814.2 A unique open space network comprised primarily of major federal facilities, cemeteries, and institutional uses is located just north of Washington, DC’s geographic center, in an area otherwise lacking in public parkland. The network includes McMillan Reservoir, the Armed Forces Retirement Home, Rock Creek Cemetery, Battleground National Cemetery, and Glenwood, Prospect Hill, and St. Mary’s cemeteries. This area was already established as a major recreational ground for Washington, DC, in the 19th century. Its role was confirmed by the 1901 McMillan Plan, which recognized the dual purposes of these lands as functional facilities and passive open spaces. While public access to many of these properties is restricted today, their presence as an open space corridor is plainly visible on aerial photos of the District.

See the Upper Northeast Element for more information on these properties.

814.3 Several sites along the path of the McMillan to Fort Totten open space network are currently under consideration for development. As detailed plans are developed for these sites, the District should take an active role in conserving the connected open space network as a historic, ecological, aesthetic, and recreational resource.

814.4 Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr.’s Highway Plan for the District created two kinds of boulevards and parkways that are part of a larger park and open space system. Some broad boulevards—including Nebraska Avenue, South Dakota Avenue, and Minnesota Avenue—connect parks to the Potomac and Anacostia rivers. Winding parkways along ridges, in valleys, or other roadways leading into large parks include Reno Road, Arkansas Avenue, and Alabama Avenue. These boulevards and parkways, enhanced by circle and triangle parks, should be preserved and maintained as elements of the larger park and open space system. Additionally, although parkways were not intended or designed to be major transportation arteries, they also currently function as primary transportation routes.

814.5 Continued enhancement and preservation of open space networks in other parts of the District are also important. These networks include the forested greenbelt along Oxon Run, the woodlands and wetlands around Oxon Cove (extending south into Maryland), and the wooded areas extending from Westmoreland Circle to the Potomac River (including Dalecarlia Reservoir).

814.6 Policy PROS-3.3.1: North-Central Open Space Network

Preserve and enhance the historic open space network extending from McMillan Reservoir to Fort Totten. As land use changes in this area, an integrated system of permanent open spaces and improved parks should be maintained or created.

814.7 Policy PROS-3.3.2: Other Open Space Networks

Recognize the recreational, scenic, environmental, and historic value of other interconnected or linear open spaces in the District, including Oxon Run, Oxon Cove, and the Dalecarlia Reservoir area.

814.8 Policy PROS-3.3.3: Small Park and Open Space Cluster Improvements

Prioritize improvements of small open spaces in areas with limited access to parks and open space, and a growing population. Apply common themes, such as sustainability, placemaking, or connectivity to plan, enhance, and maintain the small parks as a system.

See the Environment Protection Element for more information on the use of pollinator gardens in small parks and open spaces.

814.9 Policy PROS-3.3.4: Small Parks Database

Develop a shared database of small parks, as defined by the CapitalSpace Plan, to inform coordination efforts between agencies and with the public. The database should include data on ownership, size, location, function, level of use, historic or cultural value, commemorative elements, programs, and condition. Assess existing agency jurisdiction for certain small parks so that each parcel is managed effectively to meet District and/or federal objectives and clarify the responsibilities of the managing agencies.

814.10 Policy PROS-3.3.5: Boulevards and Parkways

Balance the transportation needs and safety standards of modern roadways with the preservation of resources and of scenic parkway goals to minimize impacts on viewsheds and natural and cultural resources that comprise the parkway landscape.

See the Urban Design Element for additional information on parkways.

814.11 Policy PROS-3.3.6: Enlivening Cemeteries

Explore using cemeteries for passive open space. Collaborate with cemetery administrators to reconnect the burial grounds to the surrounding neighborhoods for greater public access.

814.12 Action PROS-3.3.A: Creating Washington, DC’s Central Park

Work with the federal government and institutional and open space landowners to create a linear system of parks and open space extending from Bryant Street on the south to Fort Totten on the north. This system should be created from existing large publicly owned and institutional tracts, as well as adjacent triangle parks, cemeteries, and rights-of-way.

See the Rock Creek East and Mid-City elements for additional information on this network.

814.13 Action PROS-3.3.B: Boulevards and Parkways

Preserve and maintain boulevards and parkways as elements of the larger park and open space system. Proposed improvements and maintenance projects along trails and parkways should minimize impacts on viewsheds and be sensitive to the natural and historic qualities that make them significant.

##### **10-A DCMR § 815** PROS-3.4 CONNECTING THE DISTRICT THROUGH TRAILS {#sec-10-a815 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A815}

815.1 Trails and linear parks are an important part of the open space network. They link the District’s open spaces to one another and provide access between neighborhoods and nature. In some cases, they provide stream buffers or visual edges within communities. There are many different kinds of trails serving a range of recreational and transportation functions. Recent trail planning efforts have focused on improving bicycle mobility and waterfront access, and on showcasing the District’s cultural, historic, and scenic resources. Trail planning is an integral part of park and open space planning. It is a means of improving access to parks and developing new trails within parks.

815.2 Key trail-building initiatives include the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail and Fort Circle Parks Hiker-Biker Trail (both referenced in the previous section), the Metropolitan Branch Trail between Union Station and Silver Spring, the Watts Branch Trail, the Georgetown Waterfront Trail, the Broad Branch Road NW connection between the Western Ridge Trail and Soapstone Valley Trail, and the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail (PHNST). The PHNST is of particular interest, as it is one of the country’s 22 scenic national trails and includes multiple strands extending from the Chesapeake Bay to western Pennsylvania. Several of these strands pass through Washington, DC.

815.3 The Bicycle Element of moveDC, released in 2014, includes many recommendations to improve bicycle facilities and infrastructure, such as expanding and upgrading the network of shared-use paths to eliminate bicycle network gaps, and facilitating and supporting development of regional and national trail routes. Additional details on the Bicycle Element of moveDC may be found in the Transportation Element of this Comprehensive Plan.

815.4 Figure 8.5: Trail Improvements Recommended by moveDC

Anacostia Park Trail/Prince George’s County’s Colmar Manor Park Trail

Gallatin Street NE Trail/Prince George’s County’s Trail Connection to West Hyattsville Metrorail Station

Long Bridge Trail/Mount Vernon Trail in Arlington County

New York Avenue NE Trail/Prince George’s County’s Colmar Manor Park Trail

Oxon Run Trail/Prince George’s County’s Oxon Run Trail

Pennsylvania Avenue SE Trail/Prince George’s County’s Pennsylvania Avenue Bicycle Lane/Trail

Rock Creek Park (Beach Drive NW) Trail/Montgomery County’s Rock Creek Trail

Suitland Parkway Trail into Prince George’s County

South Capitol Street Trail into Oxon Hill Farm and Prince George’s County

815.5 Policy PROS-3.4.1: Trail Network

Develop a network of trails, paths, and linear parks to link the District’s open space areas and improve access to open space. Trails and paths should provide a safe and convenient way for residents to experience Washington, DC’s scenery and natural beauty on foot or by bicycle.

815.6 Policy PROS-3.4.2: Linear Park Connections

Work with the federal government to improve connections between the open spaces within the District of Columbia through land acquisition and park dedication, particularly where gaps in the District’s open space network exist. Attention should be given to acquisitions that better connect the Fort Circle Parks and improve shoreline access.

815.7 Policy PROS-3.4.3: Preserving Natural Features

Preserve the scenic qualities of trails and the parklands they traverse. This includes designing trails to reduce erosion and tree removal and preserving the integrity of the settings that make each trail unique.

815.8 Policy PROS-3.4.4: Trails in Underutilized Rights-of-Way

Develop multiuse trails in underutilized rights-of-way, including surplus railroad corridors, undeveloped street rights-of-way, and possibly alleys.

815.9 Policy PROS-3.4.5: Trail Dedication

Require trail dedication, as appropriate, on privately-owned development sites along the District’s streams, waterfronts, and linear parks.

815.10 Policy PROS-3.4.6: Trails and Rivers

New development along the Anacostia and Potomac rivers should provide public right-of-way for trail connections and extensions where needed, and to construct trails according to applicable design standards and guidelines.

815.11 Policy PROS-3.4.7: Trails and the Environment

Limit the effects of trails on natural areas and open space by using environmentally responsible building materials, paving to prevent erosion where necessary, and locating new trails in areas that will minimize the degradation of sensitive environmental areas. Recognize that trails have broader environmental benefits, such as reducing vehicular traffic and emissions.

815.12 Policy PROS-3.4.8: Multijurisdictional Coordination

Work closely with other jurisdictions and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) to provide a regional system of trails. Continually seek to connect District trails with those in bordering jurisdictions and complete a regional system of trails.

815.13 Action PROS-3.4.A: Bicycle Trail Implementation

Initiate focused trail planning and construction efforts to eliminate gaps in the bicycle trail network and to improve substandard trails, as itemized in moveDC. Coordinate with NPS on trails for which both DDOT and NPS have responsibility. Support District and federal agencies, including DDOT and NPS, in developing, funding, and building multiuse trails within select parks that can connect to the District-wide trail system. Work with NPS to align District planning and implementation efforts with the NPS National Capital Region Paved Trails Study (2016), which calls for coordination with local jurisdictions to advance trail projects that contribute to the success of the regional trail network.

815.14 Action PROS-3.4.B: District-wide Bicycle Network

In support of Sustainable DC, continue to develop a District-wide 100-mile bicycle lane network. Prioritize bicycle connections to parks and recreation facilities.

815.15 Action PROS-3.4.C: Signage and Parking

Provide more consistent and unified signage along the District’s trails to improve their identity and accessibility. Provide secure bike parking at trailheads and key destinations.

815.16 Action PROS-3.4.D: Water Trails

Continue to develop designated water trails and water access points in the Potomac and Anacostia rivers for travel by canoe, kayak, and other paddlecraft.

##### **10-A DCMR § 816** PROS-4 MAXIMIZING ASSETS {#sec-10-a816 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A816}

816.1 The Parks and Recreation Master Plan estimated that meeting the projected parks and recreation needs of the District would require $1.2 billion in capital funds over the next 20 years. The District government has neither the land nor the dollars to completely fill parkland gaps and meet future recreational needs on its own. In addition to capital costs, competing budget needs make it difficult to deliver optimal levels of services, maintenance, and programming. In 2015, the District spent about $162 per capita, per year on its park system. While this was slightly above the average for large U.S. cities, more resources may be required to meet District goals for quality and equity. Through increased investment, collaboration with the federal government, and community partnerships, non-traditional forms of support can be leveraged to dramatically improve access to open space and recreational services. It is important to foster agreements with the federal government, public and private schools, local colleges and universities, major employers, and others in the private sector in support of the District’s efforts to broaden recreational choices for all residents.

816.2 Maximizing assets also means redefining open space to include more than just parkland. Broadly defined, open space includes cemeteries, golf courses, reservoirs, institutions, parkways, military bases, and even private lawns and backyards. In this context, the value of open space may be its contribution to the District’s form rather than its use for recreation. Preserving a balance between development and open space is important in all District neighborhoods and essential to the health of the community. Similarly, provisions for high-quality open space in new development—including amenities such as balconies, courtyards, and landscaping—is important to the psychological well-being of future residents and the aesthetic qualities of the District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 817** PROS-4.1 MAXIMIZING ACCESS THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS {#sec-10-a817 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A817}

817.1 The need for joint planning to coordinate federal and District open space planning has been mentioned throughout this element. In 2005, the District, NPS, and NCPC launched the CapitalSpace Initiative to increase access to green space for District residents and visitors (see the CapitalSpace text box). It focuses on improving access to parks in neighborhoods where they are in short supply, such as Central and Northeast DC. NCPC continues to work with partnering agencies to implement the plan’s recommendations, including the coordination of planning and management of small parks among the various park and planning agencies for efficiency and the promotion of investments across all small park resources. In 2017, NPS developed the Small Parks Management Strategies Plan, which lays out several management options to achieve that goal. In addition, NCPC maintains the Parks and Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital (Federal Elements), which includes policies for improved coordination between the federal and District governments. Similar joint planning and design exercises should be pursued with the District’s public schools and with other local governments in the region.

817.2 More recently, public-private partnerships have been recognized as a way to develop and operate new parks. Such partnerships can facilitate the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of park and recreational facilities, offering a win-win for local government and private partners. Typically, the private partner provides the capital funds or operating services in exchange for a return on investment over the life of the project. The public benefits by getting new facilities at a lower cost. Recent park improvements at the Yards and Canal Parks were completed in this manner, creating some of the District’s most popular recreation spaces and facilities. A number of ingredients are required for success, including a sound business plan, realistic revenue forecasts, a commitment to programming and maintenance, and sustained and equitable access for all District residents.

817.3 There are several different forms of public-private partnerships. Real estate development provides a range of opportunities, such as the renovation of aging recreation centers in exchange for allowing private development above it or adjacent to it. Allowing private concessions in parks or in recreation centers is another example. In other cases, recreation center hours might be extended to allow a third party to provide services. The District could also lease space in its recreation centers to nonprofit service providers with missions that are compatible with the mission of DPR, such as health and wellness organizations. In all of these cases, such partnerships must preserve the fundamental function of parks as open spaces and places for public gathering.

817.3a Text Box: CapitalSpace

Over 23 percent of Washington, DC’s land area is devoted to parks and open spaces, ranging from the formal circles and squares established by the L’Enfant Plan to neighborhood pocket parks, large, forested stream valley corridors, recreational centers, and waterfront parks. Planning, ownership, and management of these different areas are provided by different branches of the District government, the federal government, and, occasionally, nonprofit organizations.

817.3b DPR, NCPC, the DC Office of Planning (OP), and NPS joined together for the CapitalSpace Initiative to establish a shared planning framework to address all of the parks and open spaces within the District.

817.3c CapitalSpace is an opportunity to achieve a seamless system of high-quality parks and open spaces meeting both national and local needs; addressing the often-competing demands placed on these spaces; clarifying their appropriate uses; providing established and new neighborhoods access to adequate parkland; and developing strategies to best use scarce resources to design, program, and maintain parks and open spaces according to the highest possible standards.

817.4 The philanthropic community is another important partner. Foundations, “friends” groups, and other charitable or advocacy organizations offer significant potential for funding. Nonprofit service providers also provide recreational facilities and programs for District residents. Groups like the United Planning Organization, Friendship House Association, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, and the YMCA/YWCA fill gaps in local recreational services as they pursue their missions to foster the spiritual, mental, and physical development of individuals, families, and communities. Local colleges and universities also provide athletic programs and community services, many for free or at greatly reduced costs. These entities should not be viewed as competitors to DPR, but as partners that can help increase recreational access for all.

817.5 Building a world-class park system is not only a governmental responsibility. It is a collective effort that requires the contribution of private businesses, institutions, nonprofits, residents, and community organizations.

817.6 Policy PROS-4.1.1: National Park Service Partnerships

Promote expanded partnerships with NPS and other District agencies to broaden the range of recreational opportunities available to District residents.

817.7 Policy PROS-4.1.2: Joint Planning and Management Strategies

Develop joint planning and management strategies for all parks for which the District and NPS have overlapping responsibilities. Use coordinated standards for lighting, fencing, walkways, maintenance, and security in these areas.

817.8 Policy PROS-4.1.3: Greener, More Accessible Schoolyards

Work with DCPS to improve the appearance and usefulness of schoolyards and outdoor recreational facilities such as playgrounds and athletic fields. Strive to make such areas more park-like in character, with increased tree canopy, especially in communities without access to District-operated parks.

See the Educational Facilities Element for policies on joint-use agreements between the District government and DCPS.

817.9 Policy PROS-4.1.4: Nonprofit Recreational Facilities

Support the development of nonprofit recreational facilities, such as Boys & Girls Clubs, to meet the recreational needs of District residents and complement the facilities provided by the District.

817.10 Policy PROS-4.1.5: Regional Open Space Planning

Support federal, interstate, and multi-jurisdictional efforts to preserve open space and create interconnected greenbelts and hiking trails within and around the Washington region.

817.11 Action PROS-4.1.A: CapitalSpace

Complete implementation of the CapitalSpace Initiative, which provides a coordinated strategy for open space and park management between the District and federal government.

817.12 Action PROS-4.1.B: Expanding Partnerships

Provide an annual list of parks and recreation partnerships, including “friends” groups, program partners, inter-agency government partners, and sponsors that support District parks, recreation facilities, and programs. In concert with community members and agency staff, create an action plan to recruit new business, philanthropic, nonprofit, and governmental partners in the region to enhance park and recreation services benefitting residents and visitors.

817.13 Action PROS-4.1.C: Sponsorships and Foundations

Explore opportunities for financial sponsorship of park and recreation facilities by corporate and nonprofit partners, foundations, and “friends” organizations.

817.14 Action PROS-4.1.D: Joint-Use Partnerships

Consider alternative joint-use partnership models with DCPS and nonprofit service providers and select and implement the most effective approaches.

817.15 Action PROS-4.1.E: Cooperative Management Agreements

Develop a District-wide strategy for securing cooperative management agreements with NPS and other federal partners to update, operate, and maintain federally controlled parks in Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 818** PROS-4.2 RECOGNIZING THE VALUE OF FUNCTIONAL OPEN SPACE {#sec-10-a818 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A818}

818.1 Functional open space refers to undeveloped land used for purposes other than parks and conservation. Such space comprises hundreds of acres of public and private land in the District, including sites that are valued for their large trees, scenic vistas, and natural beauty. Some of these sites are regarded as public amenities, with features like hiking trails, lawns for picnics, and other forms of recreation. Such spaces are particularly important in neighborhoods like Brookland, where conventional parks are in short supply. There and elsewhere in the District, the grounds of seminaries, hospitals, and cemeteries are informally serving some of the functions usually associated with a neighborhood park.

818.2 Retaining public access to these assets is important to the well-being of surrounding neighborhoods. Even where public access is not possible, the role of these spaces in improving the physical environment and shaping the visual quality of District neighborhoods should be acknowledged.

818.3 Policy PROS-4.2.1: Institutional Open Space

Encourage local institutions—such as private and parochial schools, colleges and universities, seminaries, hospitals, and churches and cemeteries—to allow the cooperative use of their open space lands for the benefit of District residents. Explore funding and insurance mechanisms that would incentivize and preserve local institutions that choose to provide cooperative use. Ensure that cooperative uses recognize and respect institution missions and operations.

818.4 Policy PROS-4.2.2: Utility Open Space

Recognize the value of undeveloped land associated with utilities, reservoirs, and other infrastructure facilities in providing visual buffers for adjacent neighborhoods and opportunities for recreational trails.

818.5 Policy PROS-4.2.3: Parkways and Medians

Enhance the visual and open space qualities of Washington, DC’s streets and highways through the landscaping of medians, traffic islands, and rights-of-way. If sufficient right-of-way is available, consider use of these spaces for active recreation.

818.6 Policy PROS-4.2.4: Freeway Joint Use

Where compatible with adjacent land uses, support the use of land under or adjacent to freeways or other limited-access roadways for passive open space, public art, or other uses that enhance the usefulness and appearance of such land.

818.7 Policy PROS-4.2.5: Podium Parks

Consider the development of podium-type open spaces and parks in the air rights over below-grade freeways and urban federal highways, including I-395 through Downtown Washington, DC, the Southeast-Southwest Freeway near Capitol Hill, and the underpasses of North Capitol Street.

##### **10-A DCMR § 819** PROS-4.3 OPEN SPACE AND THE CITYSCAPE {#sec-10-a819 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A819}

819.1 Improving open space is part of the District’s broader vision of building green and healthy communities. The Sustainable DC Plan envisions a District with high-quality, well-connected habitats on land and water providing strong corridors and ecosystems for wildlife. The following policies seek to increase the amount of open space in Washington, DC, and preserve open space where it exists today. Although these spaces are often small, they collectively make an important contribution to the livability of the District.

819.2 Zoning provisions seek to retain open space by setting lot coverage limits and front, rear, and side yard requirements. The maximum area that may be covered by structures varies from 40 percent to 75 percent in residential zones and from 60 to 100 percent in commercial zones. Creation or preservation of open space is also defined as a public benefit or public amenity for the purpose of granting additional density in a Planned Unit Development (PUD).

819.3 Policy PROS-4.3.1: Open Space in the Downtown Landscape

Sustain a high-quality network of downtown pocket parks, courtyards, arcades, plazas, and rooftop gardens that provide space for recreation, scenic beauty, and outdoor activities for workers, visitors, and residents.

819.4 Policy PROS-4.3.2: Plazas in Commercial Districts

Encourage the development of high-quality, multifunctional, and publicly accessible outdoor plazas around Metro station entrances, in neighborhood business districts, around civic buildings, and in other areas with high volumes of pedestrian activity. Design plazas to reflect neighborhood preferences, to serve as gathering spaces, and to function as green infrastructure. Use the PUD process to promote such spaces for public benefit and to encourage tree planting, public art, sculpture, seating areas, and other amenities within such spaces.

819.5 Policy PROS-4.3.3: Common Open Space in New Development

Work with developers for new and rehabilitated buildings to include green roofs, rain gardens, landscaped open areas, and other common open space areas that provide visual relief and aesthetic balance.

819.6 Policy PROS-4.3.4: Preservation of Open Space in Multi-family Development

Recognize the implicit value of the lawns, courtyards, gardens, and other open areas that surround many of the District’s older high- and medium-density residential buildings. Discourage the practice of building on these areas if the historic proportions and character of the original buildings would be compromised.

819.7 Policy PROS-4.3.5: Residential Yards

Recognize the value of residential yards as a component of the District’s open space system and discourage increased coverage of such areas by buildings and impervious surfaces while balancing that value against other District priorities such as the creation of affordable housing.

### **10-A9** URBAN DESIGN

##### **10-A DCMR § 900** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A900}

900.1 The Urban Design Element addresses the District’s physical design and visual qualities. The element describes the ways in which different aspects of the District’s landscape, especially its buildings, streets, and open spaces, work together to define impressions of Washington, DC and its neighborhoods. The design and appearance of physical space can create connections or barriers. It can create a sense of safety or a sense of discomfort. Ultimately, urban design shapes perceptions of the District and contributes to the way people interact and experience the environment around them.

900.2 The critical urban design issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Affirming civic identity through a focus on the historic intention of the District’s design;

Strengthening neighborhood quality of life while accommodating growth and change;

Providing compatible infill development and appropriate transitions between varying uses and densities;

Supporting a vibrant urban life that enhances the accessibility, performance, and beauty of public streets and spaces; and

Realizing design excellence and innovation in architecture, infrastructure, and public spaces to elevate the human experience of the built environment.

900.3 The foundation of Washington, DC’s design and character is based on continuous and deliberate planning to create a capital worthy of the nation. The streets, reservations, and vistas in the District’s urban core collectively establish the historic L’Enfant City as the singular American example of a national capital conceived to physically express the ideals of a new republic. This historic plan serves as a significant urban design framework that both the federal and District governments have extended through subsequent generations of planning and the development of a signature system of public parks, lushly landscaped streets, and architecturally rich neighborhoods and buildings. Deeply rooted in the District’s form are also natural qualities like the topography, streams, waterways, and sweeping promontory views that continue to shape the human experience of Washington, DC in both subtle and formative ways.

900.4 As a growing District, and to remain vital for future generations, Washington, DC should respond to the evolving needs of its residents, workers, and visitors and be cognizant of how technology and innovation are transforming the way people engage with the public realm and built landscape. The continued planning efforts by the federal and District governments will build upon the planning legacy by shaping the District’s buildings, streets, and public spaces as places for people; celebrating the increasing diversity of people and institutions within the District; and elevating the nation’s capital as a sustainable and resilient place. By weaving the everyday experiences of people and contemporary design into the District’s historic plan, Washington, DC’s national image will be elevated.

900.5 Urban design objectives are interwoven throughout many of the Comprehensive Plan’s elements. In particular, the Land Use; Transportation; Environmental Protection; Historic Preservation; and Parks, Recreation, and Open Space elements all speak to the role that design should play in shaping the future of the District. The Comprehensive Plan as a whole recognizes the power of good design to transform and revitalize Washington, DC and its neighborhoods. The Urban Design Element includes diagrams to illustrate the principles suggested by its policies and actions. These diagrams are illustrative only.

##### **10-A DCMR § 901** URBAN DESIGN GOAL {#sec-10-a901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A901}

901.1 The overarching goal for urban design in the District is to enhance the beauty, equity, and livability of Washington, DC by reinforcing its historic design legacy and the identity of its neighborhoods and centers, harmoniously integrating new construction with existing buildings and the natural environment, and improving the vitality, appearance, and function of streets and public spaces.

##### **10-A DCMR § 902** UD-1 SHAPING A SHARED CIVIC IDENTITY {#sec-10-a902 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A902}

902.1 Washington DC’s civic identity is defined by a particular set of physical features, including the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, the topographic bowl around the original city laid out by L’Enfant and the rolling hills beyond, the open spaces and dense tree canopy of its parks and neighborhoods, and the wide diagonal avenues, rectangular street grids, and circles, squares, and triangular parks. The District is further defined by its built form, which includes a horizontal skyline punctuated by civic landmarks, park-like streets, and pedestrian-scale architecture.

902.2 The character of the District’s center has largely been shaped by the L’Enfant Plan, 19th century public space improvements, building height restrictions including the federal 1910 Height of Buildings Act, and the McMillan Plan. The L’Enfant Plan in particular is responsible for the radial arrangement of streets, wide streets, creation of signature views, distribution of public spaces, and many irregular and prominent building sites. Immediately beyond the District’s center, much of the Washington, DC urban pattern consists of walkable, compact communities within L’Enfant’s original grid of streets. A ring of more than a dozen well-defined neighborhoods lie within two miles of the edge of the National Mall and have the best features of traditional urbanism—housing near open space and transit, pedestrian-oriented shopping streets, and densities that create active street life. Beyond this ring, Washington, DC’s hills and valleys include many more neighborhoods that were shaped by the Olmsted Highway Plan and former streetcar lines; these neighborhoods are defined more by domestic-scale architecture, tree cover, and topography, and flank major gateways to the District.

902.3 The impact of past urban design decisions has not all been positive. The urban renewal and freeway building efforts of the 1950s and ’60s resulted in physical barriers between many communities and the displacement of primarily Black residents to other parts of the District. Future design decisions must help to reconcile some of the inequities that persist in the District and respond to varying conditions, changing the District’s image from that of a divided city to one that is much more inclusive and connected. In this regard, reinforcing the design of Washington, DC’s historic plan and access to natural features through exceptional urban design provides opportunities for achieving a shared civic identity.

902.4 The text below is organized to respond to the following topics, each related to the urban pattern and identity of the District as a whole:

Protecting the Integrity of Washington, DC’s Historic Plans;

Designing in Harmony with Natural Topography and Landforms;

Designing the Waterfront for the Next Century; and

Enhancing Thoroughfares and Gateways.

##### **10-A DCMR § 903** UD-1.1 BUILDING ON WASHINGTON, DC’S HISTORIC PLAN {#sec-10-a903 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A903}

903.1 Washington, DC’s historic plans are the backbone of the District’s architectural identity and urban form. As a deliberately planned city, the notion of future growth was built into the original L’Enfant Plan in a way that was both visionary and aspirational, anticipating a grander place that would take years to construct and speaking to the promise of a great nation. It would take over a century for the District’s population to reach 500,000 and begin to take on the monumental scale of the original vision. With the additional layers of the McMillan Plan, Olmsted Highway Plan, and various other planning initiatives, Washington’s urban form has proven to be both resilient at accommodating many of the changing physical and programmatic needs and demands of urban life.

903.2 L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington, with its generous rights-of-ways and network of parks and open spaces, has managed to incorporate, with varying degrees of success, the streetcar, the Metro, the automobile, bike lanes, security requirements, and other evolving layers of urban infrastructure. However, parts of the original plan have been altered and even transformed to accommodate change. Since 1896, 17 percent of the streets in the original L’Enfant Plan (as shown in Figure 9.1) are gone. Over the last 15 years, greater stewardship of the planning legacy has led to the reversal of some of these losses through projects like CityCenterDC and Waterfront Station. So far, approximately 1.7 miles of the original L’Enfant streets have been restored.

903.3 Figure 9.1: L’Enfant Streets Over Time

903.4 The District should continue to balance the need to preserve and honor Washington, DC’s distinctive urban and monumental heritage with the pressing needs of a growing population, equity, and long-term resilience. Looking at the strategies other historic capital cities have used to grow sustainably shows that, by respecting and building on these plans, greater density and careful incorporation of taller structures are possible (see Figure 9.2). A commitment to the design concepts and underlying principles of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington should underpin this growth and extend across and beyond the monumental core of the District with design decisions that reinforce the plan’s pattern of axial, radial, and diagonal streets; enhance the public spaces formed where these streets intersect one another; and build fine-grained character in the alley system (see Figure 9.3). Finally, the approach to urban design should allow for 21st century realities and aspirations: equitable access, a renewed District identity, and sustainable design are just a handful of the factors giving shape to this vision and forming the backdrop for the public life and cultural engagement of all residents.

903.5 Figure 9.2: Scaled Capital City Comparison

903.6 Figure 9.3: Key Thoroughfares

903.7 Many of the District’s public squares, circles, triangles, and public reservations (see Figure 9.4) are undervalued and lack distinction. They comprise a great design opportunity for the District to work with the National Park Service (NPS) and others to enhance these places as distinctive elements of the cityscape and important legacies of the earlier plans. Building placement is key to reinforcing the identity of the District’s corridors and open spaces and to emphasizing, and not obstructing, important vistas.

903.8 Figure 9.4: Key L’Enfant Public Spaces

903.9 Policy UD-1.1.1: National Image

Strengthen and enhance the physical image, character and outstanding physical qualities of the District, its neighborhoods, and its open spaces, in a manner that reflects its role as the national capital and its distinctive identity as a thriving urban community.

903.10 Policy UD-1.1.2: Reinforcing L’Enfant’s 1791 Plan for the City of Washington and Olmsted Highway Plans

Preserve and reinforce the Plan of the City of Washington, and Olmsted Highway plans to maintain the District’s unique and historic character, such as the grand avenues and connections to nature. This policy should be achieved through a variety of urban design measures, including restoration of previously closed streets, appropriate building placement, view preservation, enhancement of L’Enfant Plan reservations (green spaces), limits on street and alley closings and the siting of new monuments and memorials in locations of visual prominence. Restore obstructed view corridors and vistas, where contributing to a historic resource where possible.

903.11 Policy UD-1.1.3: Preeminent View Corridors

Reinforce the prominent role of views as a defining feature of the District’s character through careful planning of streetscapes and public parks to preserve and frame views of existing landmarks and significant structures and through consideration of the various types of view corridors when designing and planning public projects and streetscapes. Such views could include preeminent views of nationally symbolic architecture, important views of nationally or locally significant civic structures, landmarks, and parks and open spaces. (see Figure 9.5).

903.12 Figure 9.5: View Corridors within L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington

903.13 Policy UD-1.1.4: Siting and Design of Monuments and Memorials

Locate commemorative works in places that are relevant to the subject being memorialized, where possible. Design commemorative installations to be accessible to people of all ages and various degrees of mobility, and design them in a way that benefits public life. Explore new types of commemoration, including temporary installations.

903.14 Policy UD-1.1.5: Height Act of 1910

Protect the civic and historical character of the city, particularly the “horizontal” urban quality of Central Washington, by limiting building heights in accordance with the Height Act of 1910. Basic principles of the Height Act are shown in Figure 9.20.

903.15 Policy UD-1.1.6: Inclusive and Vibrant Civic Spaces

In coordination with federal and other stakeholders, enhance L’Enfant Plan reservations and other historic open spaces as key gathering and civic spaces of Washington, DC through appropriate redesign and programming compatible with historic qualities to attract a diversity of users, enhance user experience, and foster national and local identity. Design the visual qualities of the public spaces to reinforce the District’s grand civic character, as well as its creative culture.

903.16 Policy UD-1.1.7: Public Space Landscape

Continue and enhance the use of public parking regulations (see Figure 9.6) to promote a verdant park-like character of the District’s streets, with landscaped yards, generous tree canopy, and pedestrian-scaled retaining walls and fences. Maintain building restriction lines, limit below-grade building projections that detract from green space, and preserve the existing grades along a block or corridor in public space and building restriction areas.

903.17 Figure 9.6: Streets with Public Parking

903.18 Policy UD-1.1.8: Community Life in Alleys

Promote the use of the historic alleyway systems as multipurpose spaces that meet utilitarian needs and can provide additional housing, support community life, and use approaches such as green alley treatments, and controlled vehicular access. Strongly discourage the closure of alleyways for whole block development.

903.19 Figure 9.7: Community Life of Alleys

903.20 Policy UD-1.1.9: Reducing Railroad and Highway Barriers

Upgrade or rebuild railroad and highway overpasses and underpasses to maintain or restore the continuity of the historic street network for the comfort and safety of pedestrians and bicyclists and connect neighborhoods. In appropriate settings, such as Central Washington, explore longer-term solutions to addressing railroad and highway barriers, such as air rights development over tracks, sunken freeways, or conversion into boulevards.

903.21 Action UD-1.1.A: Siting of Commemorative Works

Enhance the District government’s approach to the siting and review of both local and national commemorative works. Use existing processes and as needed, establish new processes for better coordination among District and federal agencies and review bodies regarding federal and District commemorative work proposals. Develop a District-wide master plan for creating and siting District commemorative works and events throughout Washington, DC.

903.22 Action UD-1.1.B: Review of Public Parking Regulations

Conduct a review of public space regulations and standards. Update and refine the design standards for public parking areas, including appropriate materials for curbs, fences, and retaining walls. In addition, develop regulations to promote tree planting in areas without street trees.

903.23 Action UD-1.1.C: Alley Greening

Investigate the adoption of regulations that allow for resident greening and controlled vehicular access of alleyways to promote neighborhood community life.

903.24 Action UD-1.1.D: District-Wide Urban Design Vision

Produce a District-wide urban design vision that facilitates equitable and sustainable growth. The vision should elevate the quality of new building architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design, while conserving essential elements of Washington, DC’s traditional physical character. The vision should also strengthen District-wide systems, such as infrastructure, housing, and transportation to address contemporary community needs and improve the quality of life for all residents.

903.25 Action UD-1.1.E: View Corridor Study and Guidelines

Conduct one or more studies, in coordination with the NCPC, to inventory, analyze, and categorize important viewsheds to and from major public open spaces and important view corridors, and develop design guidance for preserving and enhancing views, strengthening the image of the capital city and the District, and improving the pedestrian experience.

903.26 Action UD-1.1.F: Small Open Spaces Inventory and Design Guidelines

Document existing small open spaces and reservations under both federal and District control and develop guidelines for restoring green space and enhancing their usability as recreation and community spaces.

##### **10-A DCMR § 904** UD-1.2 DESIGNING IN HARMONY WITH NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY AND LANDFORMS {#sec-10-a904 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A904}

904.1 The escarpments, ridges, hills, plateaus, rivers, and streams of Washington, DC’s topography are major components of the District’s identity. They shape neighborhoods and parks as well as essential elements of the District’s skyline, as shown in Map 9.1. This is particularly true for framing views of iconic buildings in the L’Enfant City. Natural features are also important for neighborhoods located on the hills, slopes, and ridges beyond the L’Enfant City, where the natural features frame views of grand prospects toward the Capitol building, panoramic vistas of the District from high elevations like Fort Reno, and street-level views of forested parks and stream valleys in many neighborhoods in Wards 7 and 8 and in Northwest DC.

904.2 Map 9.1: Topographic Bowl

904.3 Policy UD-1.2.1: Respecting Natural Features in Development

Respect and perpetuate the natural features of Washington, DC’s landscape as part of new development. In wooded or hilly areas, new construction should preserve natural features rather than alter them to accommodate development. Development in such areas should be clustered to protect topography and provide setbacks as needed to protect natural features, such as large trees, rock outcroppings, streams, and wetlands.

904.4 Policy UD-1.2.2: Protecting the Topographic Bowl

Consistent with the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, maintain the prominence of the topographic bowl formed by lowland and rim features of the L’Enfant City (see text box). This protective effort should include preserving the green setting of the Anacostia hills and maintaining the visual prominence of the Florida Avenue escarpment.

904.5 Policy UD-1.2.3: Ridgeline Protection

Protect views of prominent ridgelines from the monumental core, so as to maintain and enhance the District’s physical image and identity.

904.6 Policy UD-1.2.4: Significant View Protection

Recognize and protect significant views within the District, particularly characteristic views of landmarks and views from important vantage points (as shown in Figure 9.8). Recognize the importance of views to the quality of life in the District and the identity of Washington, DC and its neighborhoods.

904.7 Figure 9.8: Key Public Places with Panoramic Views

904.8 The historic center of Washington, DC occupies a low-lying bowl of river flats formed by the junction of the Potomac and Anacostia rivers. The bowl is surrounded by a ring of hills, ridges, and upland areas.

The flat topography of the area within the original L’Enfant City lends itself to radial boulevards terminating on monuments or far-reaching vistas. Such geometric road patterns would have been less effective on rolling hills. In outlying areas, where the topography is more varied, important landmarks are often closely related to features of the natural setting. The National Cathedral, for example, is sited on one of the highest ridgelines in the District, affording great visibility of the structure from many points in Washington, DC and beyond. Similar promontories exist in Wards 7 and 8on sites such as St. Elizabeths Hospital and along the Civil War Defenses of Washington, DC, also known as the Fort Circle Parks that offer viewing opportunities. As the District continues to develop, significant public landmarks may be built, contributing to Washington, DC’s varied and dramatic vistas.

904.9 Action UD-1.2.A: Public Space Regulations for Grading

Conduct a review of public space regulations and standards to assess limits and design requirements for protecting natural landforms, including changes to grade, retaining walls, fences, and landscaping. Recommend changes to these regulations as necessary to respect and enhance view corridors and the natural topography and landform.

904.10 Action UD-1.2.B: Creating View Plane Regulations

Conduct a study of significant views from key public spaces in the District, in coordination with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC). Identify public view locations, key components that define them, and recommendations for protecting and enhancing them. Create view plane diagrams and design guidelines.

##### **10-A DCMR § 905** UD-1.3 DESIGNING THE WATERFRONT FOR THE NEXT CENTURY {#sec-10-a905 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A905}

905.1 The confluence of the Potomac and Anacostia rivers determined Washington, DC’s location, contributing to the design and orientation of the Mall, monuments, central federal institutions, and original port settlements. Subsequently, the development of industry, the construction of railroads and highways, and the reservation of much of the shoreline for military and other federal uses eroded the District’s connection to the water. Restoring an urban design emphasis that embraces and reestablishes access to the water is key to strengthening the District’s civic identity. Over the last 15 years, both the Potomac and Anacostia rivers have seen dramatic progress toward connected, accessible waterfronts, with destination public spaces such as the Yards Park, the Wharf promenade, and Georgetown Park; a renewed connection to riparian ecology through the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail system and the restoration of Kingman Island; and the redevelopment of new and existing neighborhoods, including Historic Anacostia, Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard, Southwest Waterfront, and Buzzard Point.

905.2 Realizing a waterfront that is diverse, resilient, and integrated with established neighborhoods requires continued effort. It is critical to provide equitable access to the waterfront. Riverfront access must also reflect protection of sensitive habitat, and safety and security considerations. Currently, 30 percent of the Potomac and 31 percent of the Anacostia shorelines lack riverfront trails, and only 22 percent of streets physically connect to the water’s edge or waterfront public spaces, leaving many low-income neighborhoods along the Anacostia with sparse access to the river (as shown in Figure 9.9).

905.3 Figure 9.9: Waterfront Trails and Shoreline Access

905.4 Continuing the revitalization of the waterfront also means managing the growing challenges of coastal flooding, riverine flooding, and storm surge that threaten development along the waterfront as well as interior low-lying areas and areas developed along stream valleys. By 2080, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers predict up to 3.4 feet of additional sea level rise in Washington, DC. These trends threaten not only completed Anacostia waterfront development but also projects underway and planned in areas such as Poplar Point. Resilient and climate-adaptive design will be necessary to protect people and infrastructure in sensitive areas.

905.5 Policy UD-1.3.1: Diverse Waterfront Experiences along the Anacostia River

Strengthen Washington, DC’s civic identity as a waterfront city by promoting public and private investment along the Anacostia River waterfront and creating equitable and publicly accessible amenities for existing and new residents. Design a mix of new public parks and other natural areas to provide diverse waterfront experiences and help residents use the water as a community asset though programming and recreational amenities. Create continuous public access along both sides of the shoreline, integrate historic features and structures into new developments, preserve or restore habitat areas, and implement other design interventions to improve the physical and visual connections between the waterfront and adjacent neighborhoods.

905.6 Policy UD-1.3.2: Waterfront Public Space

Develop public gathering spaces along the Potomac and Anacostia waterfronts, including promenades, viewpoints, boating and swimming facilities, and parks. Such space should be designed to promote continuous public access along the rivers and to take full advantage of site topography and waterfront views. Design treatments should vary from hardscape plazas in urban settings to greener open spaces that are more natural in character, and spaces that provide access to outdoor recreation. Encourage the density and mix of land uses that enliven waterfront sites with pedestrian activity, provide a sense of safety, create visual interest, and draw people to the water.

See also the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element and the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Element for additional actions and policies related to providing continuous public access to the water’s edge and removing barriers to waterfront access.

905.7 Policy UD-1.3.3: Innovative and Resilient Waterfront Development

The design of new waterfront development projects should respond to the unique opportunities and challenges of being on the water. Incorporate nature-based design and flood-resilient building and site design methods. New buildings should be carefully designed to consider their appearance from multiple public vantage points along the Anacostia and Potomac shorelines, including from the shoreline and from the water.

905.8 Policy UD-1.3.4: Resilient Waterfronts

The design of each waterfront site should respond to its natural context and work with the natural processes of tidal rivers to be resilient to flooding from storm surge, sea level rise, and other sources. Design all buildings, structures, infrastructure, outdoor spaces, and shorelines to accommodate and mitigate flooding and to restore ecological systems and natural shorelines.

905.9 Figure 9.10: Extending Neighborhood Street Grids to the Waterfront

905.10 Policy UD-1.3.5: River Views

Protect and enhance street view corridors to the Potomac and Anacostia rivers by shaping the design of buildings to frame views and by encouraging sensitive tree planting and landscaping that preserves an open sky and strong visual access to the water. Public river views on bridges and piers should be enhanced through features such as lighting, seating, and strong pedestrian and bicycle connections. Design buildings and public spaces along the waterfront to provide accessible, pedestrian friendly environments that protect views from important sites. Figure 9.10 illustrates preservation of river views on waterfront development sites.

905.11 Policy UD-1.3.6: Waterfront Access and Connectivity

Improve the physical connections between neighborhoods and nearby waterfronts. Where feasible, extend the existing urban grid into large waterfront sites to better connect nearby developed areas to the shoreline. Greater access to the waterfront should also be achieved by reconfiguring roadways and other infrastructure along the waterfront to reduce access impediments for neighborhoods with limited access, and for pedestrians and bicyclists. Provide a consistent design treatment for waterfront trails (see Figure 9.11).

905.12 Figure 9.11: Neighborhood Street Connections to Rivers

905.13 Policy UD-1.3.7: Anacostia River Gateways

Improve visual design qualities and pedestrian access of the gateways to and from Wards 7 and 8 neighborhoods from the Anacostia River crossings, with landscape and transportation improvements along Howard Road, Martin Luther King, Jr Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, Randle Circle (Minnesota and Massachusetts SE), Benning Road, East Capitol Street, and Kenilworth Avenue.

905.14 Policy UD-1.3.8: Buzzard Point Vision Framework + Design Review Guide

Use the Buzzard Point Vision Framework + Design Review Guide to guide and review both public and private investments in Buzzard Point, in partnership with District agencies, the adjacent Southwest and Capitol Riverfront neighborhoods, the development community, Fort McNair, NPS, and other stakeholders.

905.15 Action UD-1.3.A: Anacostia Waterfront Initiative

Continue to implement the Framework Plan for the Anacostia River, restoring Washington, DC’s identity as a waterfront city and bridging the east and west sides of the river. Continue community and public engagement and pursue equitable development outcomes that provide opportunities and benefits for underserved neighborhoods.

See Section UD-1.3 for information about barriers to shoreline access.

905.16 Action UD-1.3.B: Waterfront Barriers

Continue to explore ways to address freeway and highway barriers along the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts. Study options for addressing the visual barrier presented by the Whitehurst Freeway, the physical barrier presented by the waterfront CSX rail line, and I-295’s physical and visual barriers.

905.17 Action UD-1.3.C: Natural Shorelines

Identify and map waterfront areas with potential to be converted to natural shorelines.

##### **10-A DCMR § 906** UD-1.4 ENHANCING THOROUGHFARES AND GATEWAYS {#sec-10-a906 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A906}

906.1 Grand and picturesque streets in the form of avenues, gateway corridors, and parkways, and long-established roads are defining elements of Washington, DC’s urban form (See Figure 9.12). They create dramatic points of entry into the District, wind through and define neighborhoods, and connect large parks and open spaces. Today, these thoroughfares are classified by their function as part of the transportation system, but they were created at various times and shaped by different forces. The avenues of the Plan of the City of Washington and the Olmsted Highway Plan establish a system of thoroughfares that have a sense of civic prominence, define neighborhoods, and frame views of the District. There are three types of thoroughfares with varying origins and purpose, each creating distinct places and experiences:

Avenues and gateway corridors, or the formal streets that originate in the District and extend into outlying areas, serve as entrances to the District, and have become part of the national identity of the District;

Parkways, or the streets with formal and natural characteristics that meander through and around the District, are lined with generous green space, and connect large parks and open spaces; and

Long-established roads, or the streets with irregular alignments that follow topography that pre-dates or was created very early in the District’s history to connect communities outside of the L’Enfant City.

906.2 Major avenues and gateways are shown in Figure 9.12.

906.3 Policy UD-1.4.1: Thoroughfares and Urban Form

Use Washington, DC’s major thoroughfares to reinforce the form and identity of the District, connect its neighborhoods, and improve its aesthetic and visual character through context-sensitive landscaping, tree planting, and streetscape design. Special attention should be placed on how public space, building restriction areas, and adjacent buildings contribute to each thoroughfare’s character. Focus improvement efforts on thoroughfares with limited amenities.

906.4 Figure 9.12: Thoroughfare Types in DC

906.9 Policy UD-1.4.2: District Gateways

Create more distinctive and memorable gateways at points of entry to the District and in neighborhoods, parks and open spaces, and neighborhood centers. Gateways should provide a sense of transition, orientation, and arrival through improvements in the form of landscaping, art work, commemoration, and roadway design. They should be designed to make a strong and positive visual impact.

906.10 Policy UD-1.4.3: Thoroughfare Vistas and View Corridors

Protect picturesque views and view corridors along avenues, parkways, and other major corridors, particularly along streets that terminate, connect, and frame important neighborhood and national institutions, memorials, and parks. Vistas along such streets should be accentuated by street trees and include distinct facades of high architectural quality along well-defined street walls and, if appropriate, maintain a park-like character.

906.11 Policy UD-1.4.4: Priority Avenues and Gateway Corridors

Focus the District’s avenue and gateway corridor design improvements on historically important or symbolic streets, including 16th Street, Rhode Island Avenue, North Capitol Street, Pennsylvania Avenue SE, and New York Avenue. Support federal efforts to preserve Constitution and Independence Avenues as major boulevards. Coordinate with NCPC to preserve and enhance the character of avenues and streets with shared federal and local interests that have important viewsheds and connections to federal and cultural structures and open spaces.

906.12 Policy UD-1.4.5: Grading of New Streets

The grade of new streets should respond to existing topography, the existing grading of nearby streets, and the broader urban context. Grading should reflect the function of the street within the broader Olmstead Highway Plan, such as winding streets in residential neighborhoods with topography, level streets and sidewalks in commercial areas, and formal and consistent treatment along boulevards and avenues.

906.13 Action UD-1.4.A: Zoning and Views

Conduct a study to determine the feasibility of special design controls that would apply to major thoroughfares and gateway streets to enhance important views and to upgrade the aesthetic quality of key thoroughfares.

906.14 Action UD-1.4.B: Boundary Streets and Entrances

Explore the feasibility of enhancing points of arrival into the District at the major Maryland and Virginia gateways to the District through signage, public art, landscaping, restoration and careful maintenance of historic boundary markers, road design and pavement changes, special treatment of boundary streets (Southern, Eastern, and Western Avenues), and related improvements.

See the Historic Preservation Element for more on protecting the special character of the L’Enfant Plan’s streets.

##### **10-A DCMR § 907** UD-2 DESIGNING THE LIVABLE DISTRICT {#sec-10-a907 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A907}

907.1 The shape of the District profoundly affects the quality of life of its residents, from physical and behavioral health to opportunities for having close friends and neighbors to even how likely it is to find and hold a job. The built environment influences the ability for neighbors to interact, the opportunity for communities to form, and the richness of social networks. It regulates how much everyday exercise is possible through walking and biking on District streets and contributes to reducing crime when buildings support active facades, and public spaces are designed to support civic life. Beautiful parks, architecture, and public places can relieve stress, and improve physical and emotional health.

907.2 A city’s livability is measured by the safety, health, and happiness it provides to all its residents, particularly to the most vulnerable members of society: children, older adults, and those who are economically or socially marginalized. Additionally, every individual in Washington, DC will have a distinct definition of what makes a place livable for them. To realize a shared vision of livability, the District should be designed to be a place where all residents feel safe in their neighborhoods and are socially connected to one another; where they feel closely linked to community services, employment, education, shops, public parks, leisure, and culture; where healthy and active lifestyles can be fulfilled; and where children grow and play with increased freedom.

907.3 This section of the Urban Design Element addresses four key design aspects of the livable District:

Streets for People;

Designing for Vibrant, Inclusive Neighborhoods;

Play Everywhere; and

The Accessible District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 908** UD-2.1 STREETS FOR PEOPLE {#sec-10-a908 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A908}

908.1 The District’s streets are more than just spaces for transportation: they are also spaces that the public inhabits, where residents, workers, and visitors alike can participate in urban life. While streets must bring people to their destinations, they also serve as the community backdrop of the District, where neighbors mingle, children play, and culture and ideas are exchanged. The physical design and layout of a city’s streets directly impact the human experience of the public realm in a variety of ways: the design of a tree-lined residential street can foster casual conversations between neighbors, whereas the bustling pace of a retail corridor can encourage patrons to pause at a sidewalk café or to window shop while passing through. As shown in Figure 9.13, currently 25 percent of the District’s retail corridors lack the pedestrian infrastructure of wide sidewalks, plentiful street trees, and minimal mid-block curb cuts to support enhanced pedestrian comfort and urban life. It is critical to focus on creating streets that are comfortable, walkable, interesting, and safe for pedestrians.

908.2 Figure 9.13: Pedestrian Comfort of the District's Main Streets

908.3 Policy UD-2.1.1: Streetscapes That Prioritize the Human Experience

Commercial streetscapes should be designed to be comfortable, safe, and interesting to pedestrians. At a minimum, commercial corridor sidewalks should be designed with clear, direct, accessible walking paths that accommodate a range of pedestrian users and facilitate a sense of connection to adjacent uses. Where width allows, corridors should have a generous presence of shade trees and café seating areas, as well as bicycle facilities. In areas with large pedestrian volumes, streetscapes should provide seating, drinking fountains, publicly accessible restrooms, and other infrastructure that supports increased frequency and duration of walking.

908.4 Policy UD-2.1.2: Neighborhood Streetscapes

Neighborhood streetscapes should be designed to visually reflect the character and level of intensity of the adjacent land uses. For instance, narrow sidewalks may be appropriate for narrow streets with low-scale buildings, while sidewalks with more trees and vegetation may be appropriate for large-scale development. Pedestrian-oriented lighting should be designed to enhance walkability for all users, as well as visually reflect the character of neighborhood.

908.5 Policy UD-2.1.3: Complete Streetscape Design

Co-locate multiple forms of transportation amenities such as bus shelters and bikeshare stations to better integrate them into a complete streetscape design. Design access for delivery trucks, valets, and rideshare services within the street and not at the expense of the pedestrian sidewalk or bike lanes.

908.6 Policy UD-2.1.4: Connections Between Public Spaces and Streets

Public spaces, such as parks and plazas, should have entry points that create clear and porous visual and physical connections to the adjacent public realm. Where possible, coordinate streetscape designs to create a continuous experience between parks and streets. Limit the installation of tall fences or grade changes that create boundaries between parks and public rights-of-way. Public gathering spaces should be incorporated directly into the streetscape through pedestrian amenities, such as benches, public art, spacing of shade trees, and gardens.

908.7 Policy UD-2.1.5: Intersection Placemaking

Incorporate urban design strategies as part of pedestrian and cyclist safety improvements at key neighborhood intersections. As appropriate, incorporate placemaking improvements such as installation of curb bump outs, raised crosswalks, artistic crosswalk markings, special paving, and other means of placemaking-oriented traffic calming.

908.8 Policy UD 2.1.6: Minimize Mid-Block Vehicular Curb Cuts

Curb cuts should be avoided on streets with heavy pedestrian usage and minimized on all other streets. Where feasible, alleys should be used in lieu of curb cuts for parking and loading access to buildings. Curb cuts for individual residences should only be allowed if there is a predominant pattern of curb cuts and driveways on the block face.

908.9 Policy UD-2.1.7: Streetscapes That Encourage Activation

Design new streetscape projects with public spaces that can be flexibly programmed to enhance public life with short- or long-term uses throughout the year to meet the needs of a wide variety of community members. Such spaces can be sites for creative placemaking efforts, block parties, festivals, markets, pop-up retail, or food trucks.

908.10 Policy UD-2.1.8: Special Streetscape Design Guidelines

Create tailored streetscape guidelines for new neighborhoods or large sites undergoing redevelopment to promote interesting pedestrian experiences and a unique and consistent design for the public realm.

908.11 Action UD-2.1.A: Retail Ceiling Heights

Develop zoning regulations to require higher first-floor ceiling heights in new buildings along main streets and other commercial/mixed-use areas.

908.12 Action UD-2.1.B: Streetscape Design by Neighborhood Type

Review current District-wide streetscape design regulations and policies to prioritize the pedestrian experience. As necessary, develop a typology for basic streetscape design standards that meet the unique needs of various types of neighborhoods in the District, including the downtown business district, commercial areas, and high- and low-density residential neighborhoods.

908.13 Action UD-2.1.C: Standards for Street Furniture

Produce standards for street furniture in public spaces, such as benches, trash cans, and bike racks, that designate spacing, layout, and other characteristics to promote socialization and interaction, as well as public health and well-being.

908.14 Action UD-2.1.D: Public Space Permitting of Street Furniture

Explore process improvements to the public space permitting process to reduce the time and complexity of reviewing and approving District-standard street furniture.

908.15 Action UD- 2.1.E: Public Restrooms in Streetscapes

Map the location of publicly accessible restrooms in the District and develop location recommendations for the installations of new restrooms. Investigate opportunities to install attractive, clean, and safe standalone public restrooms that are accessible at all hours.

908.16 Action UD-2.1.F: Sidewalk Widening

Conduct a corridor study to investigate widening sidewalks through a variety of means including the establishment of building restriction lines, reducing cartway width, or pedestrian bulb-outs.

908.17 Action UD-2.1.G: Placemaking and Vision Zero

Establish a pilot initiative to enhance roadway safety through placemaking at intersections at three locations. Incorporate green infrastructure, low-impact design, and public life design principles.

908.18 Action UD-2.1.H: Resilient Public Life Guide

Study and develop design guidance for how public spaces can be managed and designed to be more resilient during times of natural, security, and public health emergencies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 909** UD-2.2 DESIGNING FOR VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS {#sec-10-a909 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A909}

909.1 The sense of place in the District’s neighborhoods is a function of their cultural history, physical features, visual qualities, and resident mix. Those neighborhoods with a strong sense of place tend to share certain walkable and well-connected centers, well-defined edges, attractive streets, and character-defining architecture. This is most apparent in Washington, DC’s historic districts, but it is also true in non-designated row house neighborhoods and in single-family neighborhoods where particular architectural styles, setbacks, and building forms prevail. Especially in row house neighborhoods, the repetitive use of form, materials, color, and spacing creates a sense of solidarity that transcends each individual structure.

909.2 Significant population growth in Washington, DC is placing pressure on very neighborhood to grow and change. One challenge is how to design and incorporate new affordable housing at varying levels of affordability, along with more family-sized housing, throughout the District. Many neighborhoods in Washington offer solutions on how to incorporate different housing types while maintaining neighborhood character (see Figures 9.14 and 9.15). A close examination of neighborhoods like Columbia Heights, Glover Park, and historic Anacostia show that infill development can be added to the District’s historic neighborhoods. While overpowering contrasts in scale and height should be avoided, thoughtful design can make moderate variations in height and scale compatible. Encourage use of high-quality materials that are durable and rich in texture and incorporate character-defining details. Continue established alignments and landscaping elements.

909.3 Figure 9.14: DC Neighborhoods with Diverse Housing

909.4 Figure 9.15: DC Neighborhoods with Diverse Housing

909.5 Policy UD-2.2.1: Neighborhood Character and Identity

Strengthen the visual qualities of Washington, DC’s neighborhoods as infill development and building renovations occur by encouraging the use of high-quality and high-performance architectural designs and materials. In neighborhoods with diverse housing types, or when introducing more diverse infill housing types, use design measures to create visual and spatial compatibility.

909.6 Policy UD-2.2.2: Areas of Strong Architectural Character

Preserve the architectural continuity and design integrity of historic districts and other areas of strong architectural character. New development, additions, and renovations within such areas do not need to replicate prevailing architectural styles exactly but should be complementary.

See the Historic Preservation Element for additional policies and actions related to historic districts.

909.7 Figure 9.16: Encouraged Transitions in Building Intensity and Scale

909.8 Policy UD-2.2.3: Neighborhood Mixed-Use Centers

Undertake strategic and coordinated efforts to create neighborhood mixed-use centers that reinforce community identity and form compact, walkable environments with a broad mix of housing types, employment opportunities, neighborhood shops and services, and civic uses and public spaces. New buildings and projects should support the compact development of neighborhood centers and increase the diversity of uses and creation of public spaces where needed.

909.9 Policy UD-2.2.4: Transitions in Building Intensity

Design transitions between large- and small-scale development. The relationship between taller, more visually prominent buildings and lower, smaller buildings (such as single-family or row houses) can be made more pleasing and gradual through a variety of context-specific design strategies, such as a slender massing of taller elements, stepping back the building at floors above its neighbors’ predominant roof line, stepping a building’s massing down to meet the roof line of its neighbors, or strategic placement of taller elements to mark corners, vista terminations, or large open-space frontages.

909.10 Policy UD-2.2.5: Infill Development

New construction, infill development, redevelopment, and renovations to existing buildings should respond to and complement the defining visual and spatial qualities of the surrounding neighborhood, particularly regarding building roof lines, setbacks, and landscaping. Avoid overpowering contrasts of scale and height as infill development occurs.

909.11 Policy UD-2.2.6: Large-Scale Development

New developments on parcels that are larger than the prevailing neighborhood lot size shall be carefully integrated with adjacent sites. Structures on such parcels should be broken into smaller, more varied forms, particularly where the prevailing street frontage is characterized by small, older buildings with varying facades. Incorporate existing assets, such as historic buildings and significant natural landscapes, into the design of redeveloped large sites. For sites that were originally planned as integrated complexes of multiple buildings, historic groupings of structures should be conserved where possible. (see Figure 9.17 for examples of breaking up the massing of development on lots larger than the prevailing neighborhood lot size).

909.12 Figure 9.17: Development Massing

909.13 Policy UD-2.2.7: Preservation of Neighborhood Open Space

Ensure that infill development respects and improves the integrity of neighborhood open spaces and public areas. Buildings should be designed to minimize the loss of sunlight and maximize the usability of neighborhood parks and plazas. Buildings adjacent to parks or natural areas should orient their entrances or other community-serving functions toward these shared resources.

909.14 Policy UD-2.2.8: Planning for Large Sites

Urban design plans for large sites shall consider not only the site itself but also the context of surrounding neighborhoods, including the continuation of and connection to existing street grids.

909.15 Policy UD-2.2.9: Resilient and Sustainable Large Site Development

Site plan large sites to minimize the risk of flooding to buildings and extreme heat and other climate impacts. Preserve natural resources and implement stormwater management best practices, while maintaining active building frontages and pedestrian-focused streetscapes.

Also See Parks and Open Space, Land Use, and Environmental Protection elements for additional information.

909.16 Action UD-2.2.A: Scale Transition Study

Complete a Scale Transition Study to evaluate options for improving design compatibility between larger-scale and lower-scale areas. The study should respond to the varying situations where larger-scale development is (or will be) situated adjacent to lower-scale, predominantly residential neighborhoods. It should include design guidelines and provisions for buffers (including open space), stepping down of building heights, and solutions that reflect the different lot dimensions, block faces, and street and alley widths found in different parts of the District.

909.17 Action UD-2.2.B: Use Zoning and Other Regulatory Tools to Achieve Design Goals

Explore awards and incentives to promote excellence in the design of new buildings and public spaces. Recommendations should include incentives for facade features, window placement, courtyards, buffering, and other exterior architectural elements that improve the compatibility of structures, including roof structures, with their surroundings while promoting high architectural quality and allowing for innovative, contemporary design.

909.18 Action UD-2.2.C: High-Quality Affordable Housing Review

Conduct a review of the District's affordable housing policies, buildings, and zoning regulations to identify impediments that inhibit affordable housing from achieving high quality design. Produce a list of recommended changes to these codes, policies, and supplement with a form-based guide that outlines how new dwelling units can be better integrated into existing neighborhoods.

909.19 Action UD-2.2.D: Urban Design Strategies for Resilient Communities

Research best practices and develop recommendations and urban design and guidelines to mitigate manmade and natural hazards, such as flooding and climate threats, while meeting other urban design goals.

909.20 Action UD-2.2.E: Design Guidelines for Large Sites

Develop design guidelines as part of the review process for large site developments. These guidelines should address building appearance, streetscape, signage and utilities, parking, landscaping, buffering, protection of historic resources, compatibility of development with surrounding neighborhoods, and environmental sustainability.

See Land Use Element for additional policies, actions and definitions for large sites.

909.21 Action UD-4.2.F: Design Guidelines

Develop illustrated design guidelines for private residential areas and commercial uses addressing such architectural and resilient aspects as facade design, building texture and materials, lighting, detail, signage, and building- to-street relationship. Design guidelines should allow for flexibility and creativity, and in most cases should be performance-oriented rather than based on rigid standards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 910** UD-2.3 PLAY EVERYWHERE {#sec-10-a910 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A910}

910.1 Play is a universal experience that brings different people together, helps children learn, and promotes better physical and mental health for all residents. When play is thoughtfully designed into the public realm, it creates enriching, whimsical, and memorable public spaces and facilitates interactions and community-building among residents of diverse backgrounds and ages. Before the advent of the automobile, play largely happened on the neighborhood street, in the public square, and in the formal federal and ceremonial public spaces of the District, such as the National Mall. Over time, play slowly receded to private yards and public playgrounds. Today, play largely happens in safety-engineered playgrounds or the unique urban park with a splash fountain or playable sculpture.

910.2 Encouraging play in public spaces requires policies and actions that can address multiple challenges, both physical and regulatory. Structural barriers, such as the infrequent placement of public playgrounds, make it harder for 47 percent of District households to access playgrounds within a quarter-mile of their homes. Inadequate access is reinforced by social behaviors where many kids go to playgrounds only if accompanied by adults. Washington, DC has been addressing the structural challenges through the renovation and creation of more than 40 playgrounds in the last 10 years and the creation of new signature park spaces, such as Canal Park, with interactive, playable elements. The District will work further toward bringing play even closer to residents through a variety of local and small-scale play spaces that are built into the fabric of neighborhoods, streets, and schools.

910.3 Policy UD-2.3.1: Play for Every Age

Create appealing plaza spaces that incorporate play and welcome multiple generations, such as playable fountains, skateboarding facilities, climbable sculptures, chess tables, and other interactive elements. In particular, attention should be paid to elements that can encourage social play and interaction among community members, play between parents and children, and opportunities for engaging teenagers.

910.4 Policy UD-2.3.2: Playing in the Square

Encourage the use of formal public squares and parks as everyday play spaces and explore ways to incorporate design features that encourage play while respecting the park’s design and other purposes when redesigning signature public open spaces.

910.5 Policy UD-2.3.3: Play Everyday

Encourage the creation of play spaces in or near public and private facilities where people gather and receive services on a routine basis, such as transit stops, community-serving businesses, medical offices, and government facilities.

910.6 Policy UD-2.3.4: Streets and Corners as Play Spaces

Create mini-play destinations on neighborhood blocks to bring play closer to where people live and help encourage social interaction between neighbors. Encourage the installation of small-scale play features in landscaped public parking areas or along sidewalks in the tree zone.

910.7 Policy UD-2.3.5: Shared Play Spaces

Promote the incorporation of play spaces in the common outdoor areas of new multi-family buildings, with a focus on spaces for less mobile infants and toddlers. Courtyards, terraces, and roofs can serve as outdoor spaces for children’s play.

910.8 Action UD-2.3.A: Play Streets Guidelines

Develop guidelines for resident and civic organization activation of streets and other public spaces as temporary or permanent safe play spaces and investigate regulatory changes necessary to enable play streets.

910.9 Action UD-2.3.B: Playable Art

Complete permanent artistic play structures in small parks, street corners, or civic buildings to pilot the concept of playable streets.

##### **10-A DCMR § 911** UD 2.4 INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY SPACES {#sec-10-a911 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A911}

911.1 The needs of District residents are changing and becoming more diverse as families have more children, the number of older adults increases, and the population diversifies. As neighborhoods change demographically, new and existing residents may differ in how they use and appreciate community space. Design can be a crucial tool to make Washington, DC an open, inviting, safe, and delightful place for children, families, seniors, communities of color, and persons with disabilities However, the design of new neighborhoods and buildings does not entirely meet the needs of a growing and diverse population. Ninety-one percent of new housing growth between 2006 and 2018 has been in multi-family buildings that add considerable supply but tend to have units that are smaller in size and amenities and spaces that reflected tenant, rather than neighborhood, needs. Creating accessible, racially equitable, and inclusive spaces means examining the amenities that new and existing buildings and neighborhoods have, the way they relate to open space, and how they provide places for residents of all backgrounds to participate in a rich and full public life.

911.2 Policy UD-2.4.1: Inclusive and Diverse Neighborhood Spaces

Provide for neighborhood spaces that support a diverse array of users, particularly spaces that can be designed and inhabited by people who have typically been marginalized. Inclusive neighborhood spaces should be designed to enable social interaction among neighbors and to allow for community and cultural expression as the community’s needs evolve. These spaces should be inclusive for racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ populations, women, persons with disabilities, older adults, youth, immigrants/refugees, and pregnant women.

911.3 Policy UD-2.4.2: Design for All Ages and Abilities

Design public spaces for use by all ages and abilities, through the use of universal wayfinding and the highest standards of accessible design. During processes for designing public spaces, community involvement is critical, and teenagers, older adults, and persons with disabilities should be intentionally engaged and included in the design process.

911.4 Policy UD-2.4.3: Children Everywhere

Incorporate family and toddler/youth-oriented uses and accommodations into existing and new mixed-use projects, commercial projects, and public facilities. These may include special-purpose facilities, family bathrooms, and play-friendly waiting rooms.

911.5 Policy UD-2.4.4: Accessible Neighborhoods at Every Scale

Design large sites to facilitate good connections to District-wide and regional destinations by public transportation. Design streets and other aspects of the public realm to enable residents, workers, and visitors of all abilities the same level of access to public destinations.

911.6 Action UD-2.4.A: Design Guidelines for Higher-Density, Family-Sized Housing

Develop design guidelines for higher-density, family-sized housing with the intent to address key design issues at the scale of the neighborhood, site, building, and unit that relate to residential livability for families with children.

911.7 Action UD-2.4.B: Design Standards for Universal Wayfinding

Develop a standard template to enhance universal wayfinding integrated into public art, buildings, and streetscapes as well as signage. The template should be designed to be employed District-wide, yet customizable to showcase or promote the individual needs and character of various neighborhoods across the District.

911.8 Action UD-2.4.C: Toolkit for Inclusive and Intergenerational Public Space Design

Research, prepare, and implement a set of engagement strategies and design guidelines for inclusive and intergenerational public spaces in neighborhoods. These guidelines should include best practices for how to encourage community-led design efforts, successful ways to encourage community and cultural self-expression in the public realm (which includes streets, sidewalks, parks, plazas, and other public spaces), and incorporate accessible design principles, such as deaf space.

##### **10-A DCMR § 912** UD-3 FOSTERING A VIBRANT PUBLIC LIFE {#sec-10-a912 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A912}

912.1 The District’s public realm represents half of Washington, DC’s land area, with street rights-of-way alone accounting for more than 10,000 acres. The public realm provides spaces for residents to experience District life, recreate and relax, and socialize. Great public spaces are free and available to all. They have the capacity to create neighborhood pride, become places for cultural and civic events, encourage a more open and democratic society, and provide access for marginalized individuals and groups to express themselves. The District is fortunate to have a wealth of park spaces, squares, and pedestrian-friendly streets that can perform these vital roles. However, these parks and spaces can often be designed or programmed in ways that prevent public life from being fully realized, anything from a lack of seating to regulations that disincentivize community maintenance. Historically, public spaces and amenities have not been equally provided and maintained to serve residents of color, and today, real and perceptual barriers can make public space less inviting to various groups. Many streets have transportation demands that overwhelm the public life of the sidewalk, making spending time outside less enjoyable and discouraging cafe seating and outdoor retailing. The design of public space provides some of the best opportunities for the District to improve livability, enjoyment, and public life, and advance equitable development. It is often the quality of public space that defines the great cities and neighborhoods of the world.

##### **10-A DCMR § 913** UD-3.1 PUBLIC LIFE FOR ALL {#sec-10-a913 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A913}

913.1 A varied and vibrant public life is an important part of achieving an inclusive, equitable, and prosperous Washington, DC. Having a vibrant public life for all means that every neighborhood can realize spaces that encourage greater community use, interaction, and enjoyment. Parts of Washington, DC have a rich public life, but many parts of the District do not fully enjoy the benefits of public life. It is critical to promote many different forms and places for public life that reflect the varied cultures of the District’s residents and its neighborhoods. It is also important to design public spaces throughout the District in a way that equitably invites residents to use these common spaces as places to celebrate, relax, and mingle.

913.2 Evolving technology and digital tools can influence and maximize opportunities for a more robust and inclusive public life. The urban design of public places can leverage technology in a variety of ways, such as measuring the success of public spaces in ways that are both experiential and quantitative; merging physical elements of the public realm with virtual augmentation to create new and ephemeral experiences; and communicating information and wayfinding for increased efficiency, safety, and social interaction. The integration of technology into these aspects of public life should be balanced with a vision of people-centered urbanism anchored by real-life experience, equity, and urban vitality.

913.3 District and federal agencies should examine their regulatory systems for permitting public life activities, such as special events and festivals, farmers markets, vending, public art, and café seating so that residents have opportunities to create unique cultural activities (see Maps 9.2 and 9.3 for locations of existing permitted cafés and farmers markets).

913.4 Security has and will be a factor in the design and development of Washington, DC, particularly around government and military facilities. Washington, DC is home to major local, regional, and national events, including First Amendment gatherings, with security considerations. The continuing challenge is to accommodate safety and security needs to protect people and places, while ensuring accessible, welcoming, and attractive public spaces and a connected, thriving community. Coordination between District and federal agencies to address security and public space issues is critical.

913.5 Urban design is a key component in creating safe spaces for all, including communities of color and other groups that may have felt excluded, rather than welcomed, in public spaces. Security design approaches need to be flexible to address emerging threats, use temporary and permanent approaches appropriately, and work in concert with operational activities.

913.6 Map 9.2: Locations of Sidewalk Cafés

913.7 Map 9.3: Locations of Farmers Markets

913.8 Policy UD-3.1.1: Freely Accessible Public Space

All people, including communities of color, all ages, LGBTQ+ populations and people with disabilities, should have the ability to enjoy public life, express their culture, and feel safe in public space. There should be low barriers for peaceful assembly and free expression in existing public spaces, and new and existing public space design should be accessible, welcoming, and support a mix of activities and users.

913.9 Policy UD-3.1.2: Security Features in Public Space

Avoid the placement of security barriers within public space. Where necessary, security measures should be sensitively integrated into the permanent design of streets and public spaces to achieve pedestrian-friendly streets and animated public spaces that support the daily activities of District residents, workers and visitors. Examples include reinforced benches, bicycle racks, stairways and ramps, and planter boxes. Retractable vehicle barriers, guard booths, and long lines of bollards should be avoided. Consider safety and security needs from the beginning of the design process to develop less intrusive solutions. Encourage architectural design and site planning methods that minimize perimeter security requirements and reduce impacts on the public realm. Appropriately use temporary security features and remove promptly when no longer needed.

913.10 Policy UD-3.1.3: Public Spaces for Cultural Expression

Encourage the programming of streets and other outdoor spaces with cultural and community events and activities (such as open streets, performances, public art, festivals, and farmers markets) that stimulate street life and allow public expression of neighborhood culture.

913.11 Policy UD-3.1.4: Markets for Small and Local Businesses

Use public spaces to support the creation of temporary markets and vending to both expand opportunities for small and local businesses and encourage more active use of public spaces.

913.12 Policy UD-3.1.5: Sidewalk Culture

Encourage the use and expansion of sidewalk cafes throughout the District through more efficient and quicker permit processes, while discouraging the enclosure of sidewalk cafes that effectively transforms them into private indoor space. The design of sidewalk cafes should complement the street environment and not impede pedestrian movement.

913.13 Policy UD-3.1.6: Digital Public Life

Support the District’s urban design and public life goals through the use of emerging interactive technologies, and ensure adoption and use of technologies improves, rather than prevents, access and participation. Enhance community engagement through place-based interactive surveys. Improve resident knowledge of local architecture and heritage and expand information distribution for upcoming programming and events.

913.14 Action UD-3.1.A: Street Vending

Assess street vending, sidewalk café, and parklet usage to be responsive to the goals of creating lively and animated neighborhood streets and also adequately protect public safety and movement.

913.15 Action UD-3.1.B: Reduce Barriers to Permitting of Public Space

Reduce procedural barriers for neighborhood and civic-oriented uses of public space. Such uses may include both one-time and recurring events, such as festivals and farmers markets, and longer-term installations, such as parklets and plazas.

913.16 Action UD-3.1.C: State of Public Life Report

Create a report benchmarking the progress in expanding public life across

Washington, DC as part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle. The

report would track aspects of public life, including the annual number of

community and special events, outdoor café seating, free speech activities,

vending licenses, and use counts of major public spaces and streets. See

Figure 9.18 for an example of public life event data.

913.17 Figure 9.18: Public Life Dashboard of Permitted Events

913.18 Action UD-3.1.D: Digital Public Realm Initiative

As a pilot test, develop online tools to collect and share data about public life consistent with appropriate privacy protections. Leverage aggregated information from personal mobile devices and from smart-city infrastructure to better understand how the public realm is used to inform policies and actions that improve public space design, increase physical connectivity, improve access to amenities and local businesses, improve wayfinding, and disseminate real-time information to residents about events, public gatherings, and security concerns.

##### **10-A DCMR § 914** UD-3.2 DESIGNING THE ACTIVE DISTRICT {#sec-10-a914 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A914}

914.1 The design of a city can influence how its residents use it. Physical activity can be fostered by designing spaces and streets that encourage walking, bicycling, and other forms of active movement and recreation. Active urban design entails several strategies. Recent research has demonstrated that a diverse mix of land uses, a well-connected street system, and a good public transit system all tend to increase physical activity among residents. The organization and location of parks, playgrounds, and plazas can also make active recreation opportunities more accessible to children and their families. Placing food markets and other healthy food options throughout the District can increase convenient and equitable food access and promote healthy eating. Complete streets can encourage walking and bicycling among all ages by developing safe, vibrant, and accessible streetscapes. Furthermore, streets that are safe for all will encourage more active use. Many of these active design strategies will benefit not only the health of District residents but also the environment, as they spur fewer vehicle miles traveled and better air quality.

914.2 The following policy section offers several specific planning and design strategies that can promote physical activity. The policies address both public- and private sector projects, ranging from the design of neighborhoods to the design of streets.

914.3 Policy UD-3.2.1: Buildings that Enable Social Interaction

Residential building design should provide opportunities and spaces for interaction, such as open-air porch entrances, balconies, front stoops, and shared yards. Large multi-family buildings should prioritize individual, ground-level entrances to units that open up to the street in addition to interior access to units through a shared private lobby.

914.4 Policy UD-3.2.2: Social and Community Meeting Spaces

New planned unit developments (PUDs) and other large-scale developments should provide for a mix of social and third spaces—for example, schools, retail stores, cultural and community spaces, and recreational facilities.

914.5 Policy UD-3.2.3: Recreational Space Design for Large Site Development

Design open spaces conducive to physical activity as part of large-scale developments or create new recreation spaces (such as parks, walking paths, trails, and waterfront recreation) in neighborhoods lacking access to public open spaces.

914.6 Policy UD-3.2.4: Pedestrian-Convenient Transit

Incorporate design interventions to make transit stops friendly to users and encourage public life and pedestrian activity. Bus stop shelters should protect users from sun, wind, and rain; furnish adequate seating; and build connections between transit stops and adjacent plazas or parks.

914.7 Policy UD-3.2.5: Safe and Active Public Spaces and Streets

The design of the built environment should encourage public activity throughout the day and help minimize the potential for criminal activity. Design measures include active building frontages (such as windows, balconies, and frequently spaced entrances), adequate lighting that avoids glare and shadow, maintaining clear lines of sight and visual access, and avoiding dead-end streets. Where feasible consider closing streets to vehicular traffic to enhance pedestrian and cycling uses of streets.

914.8 Action UD-3.2.A: Security-Related Design Guidelines

Work collaboratively with federal agencies to develop design measures which accommodate public space security needs that support ground level activities and other public space amenities and special events.

See the Land Use and Transportation Elements for additional policies on street closures for security.

##### **10-A DCMR § 915** UD-3.3 PLACES FOR LINGERING {#sec-10-a915 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A915}

915.1 There are many great spaces for people in Washington, DC, such as Columbia Heights Plaza, Friendship (Turtle) Park, and Yards Park, but the vast majority of small parks and plazas are underused spaces that don’t fully serve the recreational or social needs of residents. This is most evident in the design of Metrorail (Metro) stations; a survey of Metro stations (shown in Map 9.4) reveals that only 45 percent have plazas that feature critical elements such as benches or artwork. It is vital that public spaces are designed to invite people to linger and share experiences. Safety, comfort, and pleasure are the key qualities present in all great public spaces and essential conditions for unlocking the potential of small parks and plazas and creating a vibrant public life. As new neighborhoods are built or existing public spaces are improved, these design parameters should be consulted to encourage socializing and recreating in the District’s open spaces

915.2 Map 9.4: Metrorail Stations with Plazas

915.3 Policy UD-3.3.1: Neighborhood Meeting Places

Provide places for neighborhood public life through the creation of public plazas at existing Metro stations or urban squares in new development. Encourage the activation of such spaces through the design of adjacent structures, including the location of shop entrances, window displays, awnings, and outdoor dining areas.

915.4 Policy UD-3.3.2: Small Parks for Recreation

Leverage small parks, including triangle parks, linear parks, and medians, to serve as places for recreation, community gathering, and play by encouraging greater resident and community design and management of these spaces through grant and partnership programs.

915.5 Policy UD-3.3.3: Plazas for Diverse Uses

Design plazas to accommodate physical activities like dancing or ball play, passive activities like sitting and chess, and cultural events like concerts, exhibits, and historical celebrations. Plazas can also provide space for cafe-style seating and farmers markets. When programming plazas, consider the needs of users with varying mobility levels.

915.6 Policy UD-3.3.4: Plaza Design for Weather Conditions

Design plazas to include sunny areas protected from the wind for use in the colder seasons, shaded areas for use in hot, sunny weather, and slick-proof surfaces with excellent drainage for storm events to facilitate year-round use.

915.7 Policy UD-3.3.5: Design for Safety

Design parks and plazas to promote safety from crime and injury through clear sightlines in and out of public spaces, maintaining a state of good repair of sidewalks and pathways, encouraging community stewardship, and inviting evening use through programming and well-designed lighting.

915.8 Action UD-3.3.A: Cross-Agency Small Parks Partnership Program

Develop a community partnership program that includes the DC Department of Transportation (DDOT), the DC Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), and the DC Department of General Services (DGS) to improve and activate small parks through a combination of landscaping, recreation amenities, signage, and street design that contributes to neighborhood recreation, definition, and identity.

915.9 Action UD-3.3.B: Small Park Management

Work with NPS to transfer, lease, exchange and/or enter into cooperative agreements or partnerships of key small parks in NPS’s jurisdiction as well as the District’s jurisdiction to enhance community use, programming, and stewardship.

915.10 Action UD-3.3.C: Design Standards for Public Space Design

Create public space design guidelines for District-controlled parks and plazas that highlight designing for diverse cultural uses, placemaking, and socializing.

##### **10-A DCMR § 916** UD-4 MAKING GREAT URBAN ARCHITECTURE {#sec-10-a916 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A916}

916.1 While a city is made up of more than its buildings, its image is often linked to its architectural expression. This is especially true in a capital city like Washington, DC, which must balance its roles as a national emblem and a city of neighborhoods. As an intentionally planned capital, designers have given a special emphasis to street corridors, axial vistas, and symbolic buildings, public space, and monuments to support the plan’s broader vision. A series of height acts and various zoning regulations gave Washington three-dimensional form and a distinct horizontality that emphasizes the more vertical prominence of civic landmarks. Washington, DC is more than a capital city of grand proportions and axial formality. Its architectural legacy includes multiple scales: the finer-grained expression of bay window projections, tower elements, varied storefronts, and smaller-scale institutional buildings shaped by time-tested building codes and public space regulations.

916.2 Washington has a long-standing civic design tradition. Moving forward, innovative, creative design should celebrate District public life, and embrace design excellence and sustainability. Civic buildings should be community icons, and transportation infrastructure inspiring. As development continues on waterfronts and signature sites, there are opportunities to create dynamic and contemporary places.

##### **10-A DCMR § 917** UD-4.1 THE DESIGN OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PUBLIC SPACES, AND INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a917 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A917}

917.1 The design of new civic architecture and infrastructure reinforces the District’s image as a forward-looking city that supports civic engagement and respects historic context while embracing change and innovation. Each library renovation, fire station addition, school modernization, park renovation, streetscape project, and recreation center construction project is an opportunity to create a great civic asset that contributes to neighborhood livability, collective resident pride in civic institutions, and the District’s status as a national capital. The District has intentionally worked over the last 15 years to equitably build award-winning civic buildings in all eight wards (see Map 9.5). The District can continue to lead by example by actively seeking an agenda of sustainable design excellence across all agencies.

917.2 Map 9.5 Award-Winning District Architecture

917.3 Over the next 20 years, transportation infrastructure projects will provide some of Washington, DC’s most important urban design opportunities through the reconstruction of transportation corridors, bridges, and upgraded systems. Within the District, Union Station is one of the world’s great train stations and the Metro system itself is an iconic piece of transportation architecture. The integration of new bicycle, high-capacity transit, and other modes into the transportation system, along with the reconstruction of connections across the Anacostia River and other physical boundaries, will shape the identity of the District and its neighborhoods for decades to come.

917.4 Policy UD-4.1.1: Capital Improvements and Urban Design

Use new capital improvement projects as opportunities to strengthen the District’s urban design vision. Important community-serving civic places, such as schools and libraries, should be designed as civic icons with a high level of architectural quality, enhancing neighborhood identity and promoting the pride of residents and the admiration of visitors at both the neighborhood and District-wide level.

917.5 Policy UD 4.1.2: Design Excellence

Promote design excellence contracting processes in District capital improvement projects for public buildings and public spaces to achieve a more attractive, functional, and sustainable environment in the District and its neighborhoods.

917.6 Policy UD-4.1.3: Design of New Public Transit

Design transit system elements as an important component of public architecture. Elements including transit shelters, waiting platforms, signage, off-board fare collection, bicycle-sharing facilities, and other improvements should contribute to meeting District-wide urban design goals.

917.7 Policy UD-4.1.4: Metro Station Entrances

Promote design improvements and public art at Metro station entrances and other transit hubs to provide a stronger sense of arrival and orientation for travelers and contribute to neighborhood identity.

917.8 Policy UD-4.1.5: Design of Bridges and Other Transportation Infrastructure

Promote high-quality design and environmentally advanced engineering that accommodates various modes of transportation and supports public life, natural ecology, and civic identity in all infrastructure projects, including bridges and other public works projects.

917.9 Policy UD-4.1.6: Infrastructure Reuse Projects

Continue to explore creative reuse of obsolete District infrastructure facilities, including transportation and utility structures, to address current needs for new types of public spaces and recreational facilities.

917.10 Policy UD-4.1.7: Design for Longevity

Public buildings and infrastructure should be designed to be aesthetically pleasing with the highest quality and durable building materials providing long-term appearance and functionality and to minimize energy usage and maintenance needs.

917.11 Policy UD-4.1.8: Small Area Plans

Integrate urban design considerations into small area plans and other applicable studies. Consider the use of illustrative design guidelines and place-specific urban design standards as part of these plans.

917.12 Action UD-4.1.A: Design Excellence Program for District Facilities

Develop a Design Excellence Program for architectural/engineering contracting processes for District government-controlled public buildings and public spaces based on the federal General Services Administration Design Excellence Program.

917.13 Action UD-4.1.B: Commission of Fine Arts Review of District Government Capital Projects

Develop guidelines for assisting the Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) design review for any applicable District building and infrastructure projects. These guidelines should reflect the District’s urban design goals.

917.14 Action UD-4.1.C: Excellence in Urban Design Initiative

Develop a District-wide Excellence in Urban Design Initiative for the District, including an award program and public education campaign, to make Washington, DC a nationally recognized leader in architecture, landscape, environmental design, historic preservation, and city planning.

##### **10-A DCMR § 918** UD-4.2 DESIGNING ARCHITECTURE FOR PEOPLE {#sec-10-a918 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A918}

918.1 Buildings and architecture have a direct impact on comfort, sense of safety, and emotional well-being; they form the physical fabric of the District. The quality of the District’s physical character should be designed to improve the experience of walking down its streets, create moments of joy and visual delight, and promote a sense of civic pride and order. To achieve this, the relationship of buildings to the human experience should be closely considered, including the size of buildings, their distance to the sidewalk, the treatment of ground-floor-level points of entry, and the impact of light and air.

918.2 Experiences are defined by limitations to senses: environments that relate directly to what is comfortably perceived elicit pleasant emotions, while environments that are disorienting or monotonous challenge the senses and can create isolation or discomfort. Humans interact with and understand the surrounding urban environment based on their inherent physical, sensory, and social capabilities:

Social: distance (intimacy of communication), group sizes, level of activity;

Physical: walking distances, material size, speed of movement; and

Sensory (visual, auditory, tactile, etc.): craftsmanship and texture, order (scale and hierarchy), visual limits.

918.3 Policy UD-4.2.1: Scale and Massing of Large Buildings

Design the scale, height, volume, and massing of large buildings to avoid monotony and enhance the human scale. Varied roof heights, facade widths, and more expressive massing can provide variety and visual interest. Massing should be articulated with a special emphasis placed on corners, especially along important view corridors or intersections. Patterns of architectural elements, expressive structure, or other design tactics can provide variety and visual interest.

918.4 Policy UD-4.2.2: Engaging Ground Floors

Promote a high standard of storefront design and architectural detail in mixed-use buildings to enhance the pedestrian experience of the street. Promote a high degree of visual interest through syncopated storefronts that vary every 20 to 30 feet, provide direct lines of sight to interior social spaces, provide socially oriented uses along the public street, and use tactile, durable materials at the ground level.

918.5 Policy UD-4.2.3: Continuity and Consistency of Building Frontages

Maintain the established frontage lines of streets by aligning the front walls of new construction with the prevailing facades of adjacent buildings. Avoid placing new construction that extends beyond the existing facade line unless it significantly benefits the public life of the street. Where existing facades are characterized by an established pattern of windows and doors or other elements, new construction should complement the established rhythm.

918.6 Policy UD-4.2.4: Creating Engaging Facades

Design new buildings to respond to the surrounding neighborhood fabric by modulating façade rhythms and using complementary materials, textures, and color, as well as well-designed lighting. Varying design tactics may be used to engage a building with its surroundings. In contexts with smaller lot sizes and multiple closely spaced building entrances, breaking up a building façade in the vertical direction is encouraged, along with strongly defined and differentiated bases, centers, and tops of buildings. In areas lacking a strong building-form pattern, the use of complementary or reinterpreted materials and colors could strengthen architectural identity see Figure 9.19 for recommended façade design strategies).

918.7 Figure 9.19: Creating Engaging Facades

918.8 Policy UD-4.2.5: Interesting Roof Lines

Design architecturally interesting roof lines to help articulate the massing of buildings and add visual appeal. Along commercial streets, tower elements at corners can help define intersections; in more residential neighborhoods, towers and penthouses can help scale and mass buildings to respond to surrounding building scale and mass.

918.9 Policy UD 4.2.6: Active Facades

Prioritize the placement of multiple entrances for new multi-family and mixed-use buildings across the length of a block rather than a single lobby entrance at one location. New residential developments should promote active facades with spaces for social activity, such as porches, stoops, or patios along public streets, to encourage more activity along the sidewalk and increase social interaction in a neighborhood.

918.10 Action UD-4.2.A: Designing the District for the People Reference Guide

Create a reference guide that catalogues principles of good urban design at a human level. This reference guide should articulate these concepts in a clear manner to be understandable to both the general public and members of the design profession.

##### **10-A DCMR § 919** UD-4.3 CELEBRATE WASHINGTON, DC’S UNIQUE DESIGN LEGACY {#sec-10-a919 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A919}

919.1 Every city has a built form and character that is specific to its sense of place. Like New York City’s tiered skyscrapers, San Francisco’s Queen Anne row houses, or Boston’s brownstones, Washington, DC has its own specific building traditions and character. They are the result of a long history of conscious design goals that have resulted in many defining features of the District. Recognizing their importance, intent, and value is critical to preserving Washington, DC’s design legacy, as well as continuing design traditions as the District develops and grows.

919.2 Washington, DC’s unique design legacy is far reaching and touches every aspect of the built environment:

A relationship of building heights to street width and setbacks for penthouses create a distinct scale along streets and avenues, as well as architectural opportunity for rooftop expression;

Public parking and building restriction lines establish a green and park-like area along residential streets;

Limits on building height give the District its consistent skyline and open look and feel;

Shop windows, awnings, and wide sidewalks are emblematic of active and inviting commercial areas; and

Building projections such as porches, bay windows, oriels, and towers embellish buildings and frame picturesque views.

919.3 This design legacy is the result of conscious efforts to shape the District and is created through a number of different regulatory controls, some established for a specific design intent and others for practical reasons. Although they have evolved over time in response to concurrent planning and architectural trends, it is their consistent application that is most important. Their continuous use and enforcement has greatly benefited the District and its residents by creating distinct places to live, work, and visit.

919.4 Policy UD-4.3.1: Recognize the Legacy of the Height Act

Utilize the basic principles for regulating building height by street width in the Height of Buildings Act of 1910 to guide the redevelopment of corridors and new large site developments, continuing Washington, DC’s historic design tradition of well-proportioned streets and consistent building heights (see Figure 9.20). Examine opportunities where enabling buildings to exceed zoning height restrictions can encourage better site massing and architectural design.

919.5 Figure 9.20: Height Act Diagram 9

919.6 Policy UD-4.3.2: Building Projections That Shape Urban Form

Design building projections to enhance the visual experience of the street and neighborhoods as a whole, as well as add distinct form to individual buildings. Projections should provide design embellishments while respecting the scale of the primary building façade, access to light and air for adjacent properties, view sheds, and the pedestrian experience of the street (see Figure 9.21).

919.7 Figure 9.21: Porches and Balconies

919.8 Policy UD-4.3.3: Building Setbacks and Rooflines

Maintain uniform building setbacks and roof lines to establish a consistent pattern along avenues and priority view corridors. Setbacks should create a consistent street wall rather than have abrupt disruptions with facades that are set back or extend in front of an established pattern. The treatment of roof lines, such as recessed penthouses or variations created by bay windows and towers, should respond to the predominant character of a corridor. See Figure 9.22 for an example of building setbacks and rooflines. 919.8

919.9 Figure 9.22: Building Setbacks

919.10 Policy UD-4.3.4: Rooftop Penthouses

Encourage new buildings to maximize the potential of penthouse regulations that allow for greater design flexibility and architectural expression of rooftops. Use penthouses to create shared recreation spaces for building users, using sculptural roof forms. Pay special attention to setback lines and tower projections in designing rooftop treatments. See Figure 9.23 for examples of dynamic rooftops.

919.11 Figure 9.23: Dynamic Rooftops

919.12 Policy UD-4.3.5: Building Projections that Promote Interaction

Encourage buildings with public parking along their frontage to use the flexibility of projection regulations for steps, porches, balconies, and awnings and create opportunities for in-between spaces that encourage social interaction and add visual interest to building facades.

921.13 Action UD-4.3.A: Washington, DC Urban Design Guide

Prepare an Urban Design Guide for Washington, DC that compiles the existing codes and regulations that play a role in creating the District’s urban design legacy.

919.14 Action UD-4.3.B: Update of the Projection Code

Conduct a comprehensive study and subsequent building code update to address issues of large projections on long building facades that detract from the public realm, view sheds, and monumental character of the District’s streets. The study should consider the role projections have played in shaping the form of Washington, DC and assess their intent and how they have evolved over time.

919.15 Action UD-4.3.C: Review Zoning Height Restrictions

Review the zoning code to determine where it may be more restrictive than the federal Height of Buildings Act to identify the potential capacity for more affordable housing and opportunities to expand inclusive neighborhoods (see Figure 9.24).

919.16 Figure 9.24: Zoning Height and Street Width

### **10-A10** HISTORIC PRESERVATION

##### **10-A DCMR § 1000** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1000}

1000.1 The Historic Preservation Element guides planning for the protection, revitalization, and preservation of Washington, DC’s valuable historic assets. It defines the District’s role in exercising preservation leadership, promoting awareness of Washington, DC history, identifying and preserving historic resources, and ensuring compatible design in historic neighborhoods. The element recognizes historic preservation as an important responsibility at all levels of government and as a valuable planning tool that provides an opportunity for community input, development collaboration, partnerships, and education. Historic preservation offers a sustainable urban development model that fosters a sense of community well-being and an appreciation of the multifaceted achievements of past Washingtonians.

1000.2 The critical historic preservation issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Welcoming new growth in the District while preserving its historic character;

Advancing cultural heritage planning that supports active use and appreciation of the District’s distinctive places;

Commemorating the sites of significant events and the places associated with individuals significant in District history;

Identifying appropriate means to preserve the historic character of District neighborhoods;

Expanding the reuse of historic buildings for affordable housing;

Increasing public access to information about historic properties and development plans in historic areas;

Developing more detailed and area-specific design guidelines that apply to historic buildings and sites;

Enforcing preservation laws; and

Increasing public education and awareness of the District’s heritage and the lasting contributions of District residents to its history.

1000.3 Washington, DC is both the nation’s capital and one of the world’s great planned cities. These conditions have profoundly influenced the course of Washington, DC’s development, shaping its culture and physical character.

1000.4 The nation’s founders selected a special place for the federal city. Both northern and southern, the site was a gentle flatland surrounded by a ring of hills interlaced with broad rivers and streams. Native Americans had inhabited this land for thousands of years, and for nearly two centuries it was an agricultural landscape. By the mid-1700s, as the District began developing, both Georgetown and Alexandria were its trading centers.

1000.5 The natural terrain and early trading centers enabled the creation of a brilliant geometric plan whose array of civic buildings would give the capital city its symbolic profile. The 1791 Plan of the City of Washington, drawn up by the French engineer Pierre Charles L’Enfant, envisioned a majestic seat of government embedded in a city of trade, commerce, and thriving communities. This intermixing of national landmarks with commercial buildings and new apartments still gives Washington, DC a distinctive historic character.

1000.6 How long this experimental District—or nation—would last was unclear. Amid the turmoil of Civil War, as Abraham Lincoln made completion of the new Capitol dome a symbolic goal, disruption laid waste to the District’s greenery and

few public adornments. Soldiers and freedmen streaming into Washington, DC burdened its limited resources. It was not until the massive public works program of the Reconstruction era that Washington, DC began to assume a civic dignity befitting its ambitions. As part of the beautification effort, District leaders created a system of privately maintained green space and regulated building projections that would enable sculptural building fronts and a continuous landscape along L’Enfant’s wide thoroughfares. This system is still in effect and continues to shape the design character of the District’s row house neighborhoods.

1000.7 The thirst for civic embellishment and picturesque settings prevailed in the capital through the end of the 19th century. National monuments rose in ornate parks, complementing the sculpted facades and tree-lined lawns along the District avenues. New parkland and a curvilinear tidal basin emerged from the Potomac River mudflats. As metal frame construction and elevators pushed buildings into the skyline, District leaders adopted the first height limits in 1894. In incremental steps, Victorian Washington, DC became a more comfortable, pleasant, and beautiful District. This legacy remains strong in the ring of neighborhoods around downtown.

1000.8 The District began to grow beyond its original boundaries, but after the first few subdivisions were platted in haphazard fashion, District leaders stepped in to ensure that this expansion would be consistent with the District’s planning traditions. Congress set aside the Rock Creek valley for a zoological park and nature preserve and mandated a plan to extend the spirit of L’Enfant’s geometry into the new suburbs. Realized in 1893 as the Permanent System of Highways, commonly known as the Highway Plan, this network of streets and avenues establishes the fundamental character of the District’s outlying neighborhoods.

1000.9 As the nation entered a new century with growing global confidence, the McMillan Commission Plan of 1901 envisioned an even greater city and capital. The plan’s authors reclaimed the legacy of L’Enfant while reinterpreting his vision on a more magnificent scale. The expanded seat of government became a civic precinct, less intermingled with the daily life of the city. The National Mall gained formal majesty, but with a loss of intimate ambience. This vast rearrangement took more than a half century to bring about, slowly evolving through two world wars and the Great Depression. It created the now-familiar heart of historic monumental Washington, DC.

1000.10 Often less recognized are other enduring urban design legacies of this era. The McMillan Plan converted the Civil War Defenses of Washington, DC to a ring of parks, known as the Fort Circle Parks, linking outlying neighborhoods. New playgrounds improved neighborhoods, and sewage-filled mudflats along the Anacostia were filled in for parkland. The architecture of classicism filtered through Washington, DC in houses of commerce downtown and homes with wide front porches in new neighborhoods. Lavish mansions of the social elite began to define elegant boulevards. Social reformers sought to provide better homes for low-income residents in modest housing.

1000.11 As the Great Depression brought many newcomers into Washington, DC, New Deal housing programs introduced garden city planning and better homes to relieve crowded housing, even as the New Dealers themselves sought the charms of living in old Georgetown. Recollection of the colonial past was meant to inspire a nation in hardship. It dominated the District’s civic architecture and home building, even as a heroic Public Works Administration (PWA) modern sensibility began to permeate the new federal buildings framing the National Mall.

1000.12 After World War II, growing suburbs, urban renewal, and modernist design ideas overtook the McMillan Plan as the main influences on Washington, DC’s development. Attractive residential neighborhoods spilled out far beyond the District’s boundaries, while modernist renewal destroyed most of the old Southwest neighborhood. New highways cut into Washington, DC’s fabric with little regard for its architectural beauty or historic plans. Resident activism in response made historic preservation a force in the District’s development.

1000.13 Home Rule in 1973 gave District residents more say in their daily lives and turnedattention to long-neglected inequities. New civic projects brought an era of hope and opportunity, and more inclusive planning. Civic leaders created a living downtown vision for a mixed-use District center guided by traditional urbanism. They also enacted one of the nation’s strongest historic preservation laws. Starting

along Pennsylvania Avenue NW, more than three decades of reinvestment have proven the wisdom of those decisions, as revival has spread well beyond the historic downtown, bringing new life to neighborhoods across Washington, DC. With the new century, that District-wide revival has been propelled by widespread renovation of historic landmarks and ambitious modernization of public schools and community facilities in every neighborhood.

1000.14 The District’s recent growth by 100,000 residents in a single decade parallels earlier booms during wartime and the Great Depression, when newcomers flocked

to Washington, DC seeking jobs and opportunity. Each of these spurts led to innovation and expansion, but also the challenge of providing adequate housing and services for new residents.

1000.15 With these challenges come new opportunities. This is an era of revitalized historic neighborhoods, vibrant new design ideas, and a more sophisticated appreciation of the role that preservation can play in rejuvenating Washington, DC. Reinvestment has built new homes and businesses, and adaptive reuse has put many older buildings back into productive use. Continuing use of historic building stock can advance sustainability goals, while thoughtful design helps new technologies fit within the context of historic communities. Washington’s historic districts offer distinctive character that provides context for new development and elevates the quality of public spaces. The policies in this element aim to lead preservation forward as an effective tool in achieving those goals.

1000.16 The preservation policies in this plan are premised on the following basic assumptions:

The preservation, protection, enhancement, and enjoyment of historic properties are established benefits to the public welfare. The District’s historic character distinguishes it and shapes its cultural heritage and identity.

Historic properties cannot be replaced if they are destroyed.

Protections should focus on what merits preservation, as measured by demonstrated significance under official designation criteria.

Historic properties were built for continued use, and a primary goal of preservation is to support Washington, DC’s vitality by adapting historic properties for modern needs.

Historic preservation can be an effective driver of economic development and growth. Preservation conserves usable resources, stimulates tourism and investment in the local economy, creates jobs, and enhances the value of the civic environment.

Preservation standards should be reasonable and flexible enough in their application to accommodate different circumstances and community needs.

With thoughtful planning and development, growth and changing conditions can occur without degrading historic character.

Preservation benefits and educates everyone, honoring and celebrating history.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1001** HISTORIC PRESERVATION GOAL {#sec-10-a1001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1001}

1001.1 The overarching goal for historic preservation is to preserve and enhance the unique cultural heritage, beauty, and identity of Washington, DC by respecting the historic physical form of the District and the enduring value of its historic structures and places, sharing responsibility for their protection and stewardship, and perpetuating them for the benefit of the residents of the District and the nation.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1002** HP-1 PLANNING FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1002}

1002.1 Washington, DC is fortunate in its historic assets and unique planning legacy: a wealth of historic buildings and neighborhoods, rich social history, a protected landscape setting, the national civic center, and a continuous urban fabric with relatively little disruption by freeways and industrial brownfields. These advantages set Washington, DC apart from most other cities in the United States.

1002.2 The District’s preservation planning should safeguard this inheritance by providing:

● Vision and guidance through a comprehensive historic preservation plan;

● Continuing surveys and research to identify and evaluate potential historic properties;

● Effective mechanisms to preserve historic properties through recognition, official designation, development review, and enforcement; and

● Public education and engagement that encourages community participation and support.

1002.3 Recent accomplishments have transformed the District’s preservation planning efforts. Immediate access to photographs and historical information on most buildings is available on the internet. An explosion of local history programs, websites, and publications boosted public interest. New and more engaging preservation plans and heritage guides have been created. The 2007 requirement for preservation review of District government projects has brought about better stewardship of the District’s public facilities. Every neighborhood can now enjoy civic architecture that exhibits high design quality and sensitivity to historic heritage.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1003** HP-1.1 PRESERVATION PLANNING {#sec-10-a1003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1003}

1003.1 The District’s State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) plans for historic properties in coordination with other agencies and the public. The SHPO maintains a comprehensive historic preservation plan, designed to engage residents, and inspire District communities, organizations, and individuals to action. The plan provides guidance for historic preservation policy and decisionmaking, and remains current through periodic updates that evaluate the status of historic resources and new preservation challenges.

1003.2 As part of the Office of Planning (OP), the SHPO contributes expertise to District-wide and neighborhood planning initiatives, and integrates preservation with the District’s comprehensive planning efforts. Through the District’s historic preservation plan, the SHPO seeks to ensure that the needs and concerns of residents and businesses, and Washington, DC’s goals for a vibrant and inclusive District, are not superseded by federal interests or an overemphasis on federal monumentality.

1003.2a Text Box: State Historic Preservation Office

SHPO carries out preservation programs established by the National Historic Preservation Act so that historic properties are considered at all levels of planning and development. Working with government, private organizations, and the public, the SHPO conducts historic resource surveys and nominates eligible properties to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The SHPO also administers federal grants, provides technical information, sponsors education and

training, and assists government agencies in carrying out their preservation duties.

1003.3 SHPO also assists federal agencies in carrying out their preservation planning duties. Each federal agency is responsible for preservation and appropriate management of historic properties under its ownership or control, consistent with an agency preservation program. The agency’s historic preservation officer ensures that agency preservation activities are carried out in consultation with the SHPO, other government agencies, and the private sector. SHPO coordination on major initiatives with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and other federal agencies is another mechanism for preserving the District’s interest in historic federal properties.

1003.3a Text Box: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

The ACHP is an independent federal agency that promotes the preservation, enhancement, and productive use of historic resources. ACHP is charged with encouraging federal agencies to act as responsible stewards of historic property and to factor historic preservation into the requirements for federal projects. In its role as policy advisor to the President and Congress, ACHP advocates full consideration of historic values in federal decision-making, recommends administrative and legislative improvements to protect the national heritage, and reviews agency programs and policies to promote effectiveness, coordination, and

consistency with national preservation policies.

1003.4 Policy HP-1.1.1: District of Columbia Historic Preservation Plan

Maintain and periodically update the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Plan according to the standards required by the National Park Service (NPS) for approved state historic preservation plans. Ensure that the Historic Preservation Plan remain consistent and coordinated with the Comprehensive Plan as both are updated. Keep the plan readily available to the public.

1003.5 Policy HP-1.1.2: Planning by Ward

Maintain and periodically update Ward Heritage Guides to complement the Historic Preservation Plan with information and analysis that supports preservation planning and awareness at the ward level.

1003.6 Policy HP-1.1.3: Neighborhood Preservation Planning

Give full consideration to preservation concerns in neighborhood plans, Small Area Plans, major revitalization projects, and, where appropriate, applications for planned unit developments and special exceptions. Promote internal coordination among District agencies and the SHPO at the earliest possible stage of planning and continue coordination throughout. Involve Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and community preservation groups in planning matters affecting preservation.

1003.7 Policy HP-1.1.4: Preservation Master Plans

Support public agency facility plans and campus plans as an opportunity to evaluate potential historic resources, identify eligible properties, promote their designation, and develop management plans for their protection and use. Establish

preservation goals in those plans for designated and eligible properties. Identify specific historic preservation concerns through consultation with the SHPO at an

early planning stage.

1003.8 Policy HP-1.1.5: Planning for Historic Federal Properties

Coordinate with federal agencies and citizen groups so that local planning initiatives and preservation goals are considered in federal project design and historic preservation planning.

1003.9 Action HP-1.1.A: Inclusive Preservation Planning

Integrate historic preservation in the preparation and review of proposed facility master plans, Small Area Plans, campus master plans, relevant planned unit development and special exception applications, and other major development initiatives that may have an impact on historic resources. Identify specific historic preservation concerns through consultation with the SHPO as an integral member of the planning team.

1003.10 Action HP-1.1.B: Local Significance of Historic Federal Properties

Recognize that the District’s historic federal properties define Washington, DC’s center for residents and are important for local history. Locally significant characteristics or qualities should be maintained.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1004** HP-1.2 THE DISTRICT’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM {#sec-10-a1004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1004}

1004.1 The mission of the District’s historic preservation program is to foster wise stewardship of historic and cultural resources through planning, protection, and public education. This is achieved through the identification and designation of historic properties, review of their treatment, and engagement with the public, using a variety of tools to promote awareness, understanding, and enjoyment of Washington, DC’s historic environment.

1004.2 The District’s preservation efforts benefit from the combination of local and state functions in a unified and comprehensive preservation program. With this integration, the SHPO also serves as the District’s local Historic Preservation Office (HPO).

1004.3 The foundation of the District’s local preservation program is the Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 (see text box Purposes of the Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978). This law established the District’s preservation review process and its major players, including the Mayor’s agent, Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB), and HPO.

1004.3a Text Box: Purposes of the Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act

of 1978 (DC Code § 6-1101[a])

It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of properties of historical, cultural and aesthetic merit are in the interests of the health, prosperity and welfare of the people of the District of Columbia. Therefore, this act is intended to:

Effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of improvements and landscape features of landmarks and districts which represent distinctive elements of the city’s cultural, social, economic, political, and architectural history;

Safeguard the city’s historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage, as embodied and reflected in such landmarks and districts;

Foster civic pride in the accomplishments of the past;

Protect and enhance the city’s attraction to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy thereby provided; and

5. Promote the use of landmarks and historic districts for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of the District of Columbia.

1004.4 The HPRB has responsibility for the designation of historic landmarks and districts, and for advising the Mayor’s agent on construction activities affecting historic properties. Through its regular monthly meetings, HPRB also serves an important role as a public forum for community and resident participation in the historic preservation process.

1004.4a Text Box: Historic Preservation Review Board

The HPRB is a group of private residents appointed by the Mayor to represent professional and community viewpoints in the historic preservation process. HPRB professional members meet the Secretary of the Interior’s preservation qualifications and represent expertise in architecture, architectural history, history, and archaeology. HPRB advises the Mayor under the District law and the SHPO on matters authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act.

1004.5 In some situations, notably in Georgetown, reviews under the preservation law are conducted by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA). Both HPRB and CFA make their recommendations to the Mayor’s agent for final action. In this role, the director of the OP oversees public hearings on demolition and, when necessary, balances preservation with other public goals.

1004.5a Text box: U.S. Commission of Fine Arts

Congress established the CFA in 1910 as an independent agency to advise the federal and District governments on matters of art and architecture that affect the appearance of the nation’s capital. The commission’s primary role is to advise on proposed federal building projects, but it also reviews private buildings adjacent to public buildings and grounds of major importance, including Rock Creek Park (under the Shipstead-Luce Act), projects in the Georgetown Historic District (under the Old Georgetown Act), and properties owned by the District government.

1004.6 Policy HP-1.2.1: District Historic Preservation Program

Maintain a combined District historic preservation program that meets both the federal requirements for state programs and the requirements under the District’s historic preservation law. Federal and local preservation programs should be coordinated under the HPO and HPRB.

1004.7 Policy HP-1.2.2: Interagency Cooperation

Develop and strengthen supportive working relationships between the HPO and other District agencies. Maintain the role of the HPO as an integral component of OP and as a resource to assist other District agencies in evaluating the effect of their undertakings on historic properties.

1004.8 Policy HP-1.2.3: Coordination with the Federal Government

Coordinate District historic preservation plans and programs with those of the federal government through processes established under the National Historic Preservation Act and through close coordination with federal landholders and key agencies, including the NCPC, CFA, NPS, and others involved in the stewardship of historic properties.

1004.9 Action HP-1.2.A: Governmental Coordination

Strengthen collaborative working relationships with federal agencies, including the CFA, NCPC, ACHP, NPS, and others involved in the stewardship of historic properties. Reinforce coordination between the HPO and other District agencies and establish new relationships as needed to address historic preservation concerns.

1004.10 Figure 10.1: Structures by Year of Construction.

1004.11 The maps above show the structures still remaining in the District today by their year of construction.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1005** HP-1.3 IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1005}

1005.1 The completion of a comprehensive survey to identify historic resources in Washington, DC has been a continuing long-range goal of the historic preservation program. Since the mid-1980s, community sponsors and professional consultants have surveyed many of the District’s older neighborhoods and property types with support from the District’s preservation program. Since 2000, HPO has taken a more direct role in survey projects, as new technology and data have transformed traditional surveys. Complete photographs of District buildings and streetscapes are now immediately accessible on the internet. HPO contractors and staff have compiled information from historic permits and other sources on most of Washington, DC’s 168,000 buildings, and that resource is available on the internet. Now the primary survey task is to use information already at hand to identify properties that should be evaluated further for historic significance.

1005.2 Policy HP-1.3.1: Historic Resource Surveys

Identify properties and sites meriting designation as historic landmarks and districts by analyzing existing data, with support from scholarly research and continuing thematic and area surveys that document the broad diversity of the District’s prehistory and history.

1005.3 Policy HP-1.3.2: Survey Leadership

Undertake HPO-sponsored surveys or provide professional guidance and financial support to assist government agencies and local communities in conducting their own historic resource surveys.

1005.4 Policy HP-1.3.3: Coordinated Survey Plan

Organize surveys and data analysis by historical theme or by neighborhood so that

survey efforts proceed according to a logical plan with clear priorities.

1005.5 Policy HP-1.3.4: Inclusiveness of Surveys

Surveys and data analyses should seek out not just buildings, but all types of potential historic properties, including sites of cultural significance, historic landscapes, and archaeological resources.

1005.6 Policy HP-1.3.5: Community Participation in Surveys

Encourage property owners, preservation organizations, ANCs, and community and neighborhood associations to participate in the survey process.

1005.7 Policy HP-1.3.6: Survey Priorities

Give priority to the survey and analysis of endangered resources and those located

in active redevelopment areas, such as Future Planning Analysis Areas, downtown and near Metro stations. As factors in setting priorities, consider the surpassing significance of some properties, the underrepresentation of others, and the responsibility of the government to recognize its own historic properties. Make survey results and the identification of eligible properties readily available to the public.

1005.8 Policy HP-1.3.7: Updating Surveys

Evaluate completed surveys periodically to update information and to determine whether properties that did not appear significant at the time of the original survey

should be reconsidered for designation.

1005.9 Action HP-1.3.A: Database of Building Permits

Expand HistoryQuest DC, the HPO digital database of information from the archive of 19th and 20th century District building permits to include major alteration permits and permits issued after 1949. Update internet access to this information as new data is compiled.

1005.10 Action HP-1.3.B: Survey of Existing Historic Districts

Complete comprehensive surveys of Anacostia, Capitol Hill, Cleveland Park, Georgetown, LeDroit Park, Takoma Park, and other historic districts where building-by-building information is incomplete.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1006** HP-1.4 EVALUATING HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE {#sec-10-a1006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1006}

1006.1 Evaluations of historic significance should encompass all areas and aspects of Washington, DC’s history, and evolution. Historic resources remain from prehistoric to modern times, and from many cultures and facets of life. Thus, a wide range of sites may be considered historically or culturally significant for very different reasons.

1006.2 In any community, some historic properties are more significant than others. Properties that meet the basic test of significance should be considered for designation under the preservation law, according to preservation planning priorities. Such priorities should not exclude attention to properties of more modest or localized value.

1006.3 Historic preservation also needs to respond as history evolves. As the pace of change in modern life accelerates, and as more modern properties are lost before their value is fully understood, there is growing awareness of the need to preserve the historic properties of the future. History is not static; part of looking forward is continuously redefining what was most significant about the past.

1006.4 Policy HP-1.4.1: Interpreting Significance Broadly

Adopt an encompassing approach to historic significance. Recognize the District’s social history as well as its architectural history, its neighborhoods and its individual buildings, its natural landscape and built environment, and its characteristic and exceptional living history.

1006.5 Policy HP-1.4.2: Cultural Inclusiveness

Celebrate a diversity of histories, tracing the many roots of the District and the many cultures that have shaped its development. Affirm the importance of local cultural identity and traditions and recognize the role that cultural recognition plays in supporting civic engagement and community enrichment. Recognize a diversity of culture and identity to support a more equitable understanding of the District’s heritage.

1006.6 Policy HP-1.4.3: The Recent Past

Anticipate the need to preserve the record of the recent past. Undertake scholarly research and documentation to inform evaluation of the recent past and expedite efforts to establish an objective historic context for structures and settings from the second half of the 20th century as communities grow and the District’s built environment continues to change.

1006.7 Action HP-1.4.A: District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites

Expand the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites to achieve a more comprehensive and balanced listing that represents all aspects of the District’s history, culture, and aesthetic heritage.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1007** HP-1.5 DESIGNATING HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND DISTRICTS {#sec-10-a1007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1007}

1007.1 Historic properties are recognized through designation as historic landmarks or historic districts in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites, Washington, DC’s official list of historic properties. Listing in the NRHP provides additional recognition by the federal government. Listed properties gain protection under District and federal preservation laws and are eligible for benefits like preservation tax incentives. Washington, DC’s historic districts are highlighted in Map 10.1, and its historic landmarks are highlighted in Map 10.2. Historic landmarks and districts in Central Washington are shown in Map 10.3.

1007.2 Figure 10.2: List of Historic Districts

1007.3 Map 10.1: Historic Districts*

1007.4 Map 10.2: Historic Structures (see next page for inset area)

1007.5 Map 10.3: Inset Map of Existing Landmark Structures and Sites 1007.5

1007.6 Today, Washington, DC has more than 700 historic landmarks and nearly 70 historic districts, about half of which are local neighborhoods. In all, about 30,000 properties are protected by historic designation. Historic landmarks include the iconic monuments and symbolic commemorative places that define Washington, DC as the nation’s capital, but they also include retail and commercial centers, residences, and the places of worship and leisure of thousands of residents who call the District home.

1007.7 Policy HP-1.5.1: Designation of Historic Properties

Recognize and protect significant historic properties through official designation as historic landmarks and districts under both District and federal law, maintaining consistency between District and federal listings.

1007.8 Policy HP-1.5.2: Evaluation Criteria

Maintain officially adopted written criteria for listing in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites and apply them consistently so that properties meet objective standards of significance to qualify for designation (see Figure 10.2). Use the criteria to evaluate the potential eligibility of properties for historic preservation planning purposes, as well as for designation. Apply the federal criteria of evaluation for listing in the NRHP when applicable.

1007.9 Policy HP-1.5.3: Leadership in Designation

Systematically evaluate and nominate significant District-owned properties for historic designation. Encourage, assist, or undertake the nomination of privately owned properties as appropriate in consultation with owners, ANCs, and community groups.

1007.10 Policy HP-1.5.4: Voluntary Preservation

Engage property owners and communities in designation efforts and encourage voluntary preservation. Seek consensus on designations when possible and apply designation criteria with sensitivity to the rights of property owners and the interests of affected communities.

1007.11 Policy HP-1.5.5: Historic District Designation

Use historic district designations as the means to recognize and preserve areas whose significance lies primarily in the character of the community as a whole, rather than in the separate distinction of individual structures. Ensure that the designation of historic districts involves a community process with full participation by affected ANCs, neighborhood organizations, property owners, businesses, and residents.

1007.12 Policy HP-1.5.6: Consulting the Public on Designation

Ensure that the views of property owners, ANCs, neighborhood organizations,

and the general public are solicited and carefully considered in the designation

process.

1007.13 Policy HP-1.5.7: Updating Designations

Evaluate existing historic landmark designations periodically, and, when appropriate, update older designations to current professional standards of documentation. Evaluate historic district designations as appropriate to augment documentation, amend periods or areas of significance, or adjust boundaries.

1007.14 Action HP-1.5.A: Nomination of Properties

Act on filed nominations without delay to respect the interests of owners and applicants, and to avoid accumulating a backlog of nominations. When appropriate, defer action on a nomination to facilitate dialogue between the applicant and owner or to promote efforts to reach consensus on the designation.

1007.15 Action HP-1.5.B: Nomination of National Register Properties

Nominate for historic landmark or historic district designation any National Register properties not yet listed in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites.

1007.15a Text Box: Designation Criteria for Historic Landmarks and Districts

Historic and prehistoric buildings, building interiors, structures, monuments, works of art or other similar objects, areas, places, sites, neighborhoods, and cultural landscapes are eligible for designation as historic landmarks or historic districts if they possess one or more of the following values or qualities:

Events: They are the site of events that contributed significantly to the heritage, culture, or development of Washington, DC or the nation.

History: They are associated with historical periods, social movements, groups, institutions, achievements, or patterns of growth and change that contributed significantly to the heritage, culture, or development of Washington, DC or the nation.

Individuals: They are associated with the lives of persons significant to the history of Washington, DC or the nation.

Architecture and Urbanism: They embody the distinguishing characteristics of architectural styles, building types, or methods of construction, or are expressions of landscape architecture, engineering, or urban planning, siting, or design significant to the appearance and development of Washington, DC or the nation.

Artistry: They possess high artistic or aesthetic values that contribute significantly to the heritage and appearance of Washington, DC or the nation.

Creative Masters: They have been identified as notable works of craftsmen, artists, sculptors, architects, landscape architects, urban planners, engineers, builders, or developers whose works have influenced the evolution of their fields of endeavor or are significant to the development of Washington, DC or the nation.

Archaeology: They have yielded or may be likely to yield information significant to an understanding of historic or prehistoric events, cultures, and standards of living, building, and design.

1007.15b Additionally, to qualify for designation, they shall possess sufficient integrity to convey, represent, or contain the values and qualities for which they are judged significant. To qualify for designation, sufficient time shall have passed since they achieved significance or were constructed to permit professional evaluation of them in their historical context.

1007.16 Action HP-1.5.C: Nomination of Federal Properties

Encourage federal agencies to nominate their eligible properties for listing in the NRHP and to sponsor concurrent nomination of these properties to the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites. When appropriate, seek other sponsors to nominate eligible federal properties to the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites.

1007.17 Action HP-1.5.D: Inclusiveness in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites

Nominate properties to the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites that recognize the significance of underrepresented District communities and all aspects of local history.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1008** HP-1.6 THE IMAGE OF WASHINGTON, DC {#sec-10-a1008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1008}

1008.1 The treasured image of Washington, DC and its wealth of historic buildings and neighborhoods is matched by few other cities in the United States. These assets include the grand and monumental legacies of the L’Enfant and McMillan Plans, as well as the social story that is embodied in each of the District’s neighborhoods. The natural beauty of Washington, DC is also an inseparable part of the District’s historic image. This is a landscape whose inherent attractiveness made it a place of settlement even before it was the nation’s capital.

1008.2 After two centuries of growth, the image of Washington, DC remains strong and distinctive. The District’s historic urban design, federal institutions, and national monuments largely define this vision, but the District spreads far beyond its monumental core. The District’s business center is endowed with historic commercial architecture and a carefully maintained mid-rise scale. Washington, DC is a mosaic of distinctive neighborhoods that create the setting for the District’s social and cultural life. These aspects of Washington, DC’s heritage also have a role in shaping the capital’s historic image.

1008.3 Policy HP-1.6.1: The Washington, DC’s Historic Image

Washington, DC's historic plans and wealth of historic federal buildings, monuments, and precincts are significant to the District and the nation. Of equal importance are the historic landmarks and districts, and heritage of the residents and businesses, contributing to Washington, DC’s image. The District of Columbia takes seriously its stewardship responsibilities to all of these resources and to preserve the fundamental historic character and image of Washington, DC as the District develops.

1008.4 Policy HP-1.6.2: Preserving the District’s Historic Character

Protect and enhance the views and vistas, both natural and designed, that are an integral part of Washington, DC’s historic image. Preserve the historic skyline formed by the region’s natural features and topography, and its historically significant buildings and monuments. Avoid intrusions, such as communication antennas and water towers. As the District benefits from new growth, preserve the historic scale and character established by its building height limits, including the 1910 Height of Buildings Act.

1008.5 Policy HP-1.6.3: Enhancing the District’s Historic Character

Encourage new architectural contributions that complement and enrich the District’s design heritage and historic character.

1008.6 Policy HP-1.6.4: Downtown and Neighborhood Character

Recognize the distinctive character of Washington DC’s historic downtown and varied neighborhoods as one of the District’s prime attractions and competitive strengths. As Washington, DC grows, encourage compatible new development that enlivens downtown and enhances the character and distinction of its neighborhoods.

1008.7 Policy HP-1.6.5: Commercial Signage

Control commercial signage to avoid vacant and underused billboards and intrusion upon the District’s monumental grandeur and residential neighborhoods.

Support the District’s economic vitality and quality of life through carefully considered policies and regulations for commercial signage in designated entertainment areas.

1008.8 Policy HP-1.6.6: Transportation Infrastructure

Transportation infrastructure should be compatible with the character of the Plan of the City of Washington and the District’s historic properties.

See the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions related to the District’s image and character.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1009** HP-2 PROTECTING AND ENHANCING HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1009 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1009}

1009.1 Protection of historic properties is inherent in the District’s community planning, economic development, and construction permitting processes. Preservation protections help to ensure that building renovations and new development respect the architectural character of historic landmarks and districts. Because the District’s preservation law specifically encourages enhancement of historic properties and adapting them for current use, preservation review procedures also promote high-quality new construction that improves the condition and setting of historic properties and neighborhoods.

1009.2 Preservation begins with sensitive land use planning and zoning that limits conflict between development rights and preservation policies. More direct protections include controls on building demolition and disturbance of archaeological sites. Standards for renovation and new construction in historic areas preserve historic integrity and character, and policies that encourage adaptation to changing needs preserve historic properties by keeping them in continued use. Fair and effective enforcement applied throughout the District encourages consistent compliance with property maintenance and preservation laws.

1009.3 Historic properties are protected under both District and federal law. Under the Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978, proposals for exterior alteration to a historic property must be submitted to the HPRB (or in some cases, notably in Georgetown, to the CFA) for a review to determine whether the proposed work is compatible with the character of the historic property. Similar reviews are required for demolition or subdivision of historic property and for new construction in historic areas. These reviews are conducted at various levels of complexity, with the most significant projects involving open public meetings, where interested groups and individuals may participate.

1009.4 Protections also apply to government projects. Under District law, projects on District-owned land involve a consultation with the SHPO during the planning phase. Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies must consider the effect of their projects on designated or eligible historic properties, in consultation with the SHPO. The same consultation is required for private projects funded or licensed by a federal agency. These reviews are designed to ensure that work is consistent with the historic character of affected historic properties and involves public participation commensurate with the nature of the undertaking. In Section 106 review, the SHPO applies the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and

the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1010** HP-2.1 THE DISTRICT’S HISTORIC PLANS {#sec-10-a1010 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1010}

1010.1 Preservation of historic properties in Washington, DC begins with its historic plans. The L’Enfant Plan, drawn by Pierre L’Enfant in 1791, has served as an enduring symbol and armature for growth of the national capital, but the District’s character has also been shaped by many other contributors over more than two centuries. Generations of civil engineers, architects, and artists contributed buildings, landscapes, public works and monuments that define the District’s built form. In the 1870s, municipal planners devised rules that created a unified landscape on District streets, known as public parking, comprised of green front yards and small federal park reservations. In the 1890s, city planners extended L’Enfant’s pattern of grid streets and avenues to fill the entirety of Washington, DC.

1010.2 After its first hundred years, the plan was reinvigorated according to City Beautiful principles in the McMillan Plan of 1901. Regulated building heights, first introduced by the District in 1894, further supported its enhancement and embellishment. The CFA and NCPC were created to oversee those improvements and to guide the continued development of federal buildings and parkland.

1010.2a Text box: Plan of the City of Washington

The L’Enfant and McMillan Plans established a design framework for the national capital that remains one of the world’s great examples of urban planning. Collectively, these plans and related 19th century refinements are known as the Plan of the City of Washington.

1010.3 The District’s Office of the Municipal Architect dates from this same era, and for the next half century it gave cohesion to the District through consistent design of local public buildings. With these many influences on its character, the Plan of the City of Washington is now protected as a historic landmark in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites and the National Register. Current planning reaffirms its historic significance and seeks to repair eroded sections of its fabric.

1010.4 Policy HP-2.1.1: The Plan of the City of Washington

Preserve the defining features of the Plan of the City of Washington. Work jointly with federal agencies to maintain the public squares, circles, and major reservations as landscaped open spaces that provide a means to experience the legacy of the plan. Preserve the historic pattern of streets, associated minor reservations, and landscape features. Protect these historic rights-of-way from incompatible incursions and intrusions.

1010.5 Policy HP-2.1.2: Spatial and Landscape Character of L’Enfant Plan Streets

Protect the generous open space and reciprocal views of the L’Enfant Plan streets, avenues, and reservations. Protect the integrity and form of the L’Enfant system of streets and reservations from inappropriate new buildings and physical incursions. Reinforce the spatial definition of the historic street plan by aligning main building facades along the street right-of-way lines and applying traditional rules for building projections. Support public and private efforts to provide and maintain street trees and continuous front yard landscaping to help frame axial views and reinforce the District’s historic landscape character.

1010.6 Policy HP-2.1.3: Public Space Design in the Plan of the City of Washington

Reinforce the historic importance and continuity of the streets as public thoroughfares through sensitive design of sidewalks and roadways. Avoid inappropriate traffic channelization, obtrusive signage and security features, and other physical intrusions that obscure the character of the historic street network. Work jointly with federal agencies to preserve the historic statuary and other civic embellishments of the Plan parks, and where appropriate, extend this tradition with new civic art and landscape enhancements of the public reservations.

1010.7 Policy HP-2.1.4: Enhancing Washington, DC’s Urban Design Legacy

Adhere to the design principles of the Plan of the City of Washington in any improvements or alterations to the street plan. Where intrusions and disruptions have damaged the character of the historic plan, promote restoration of the plan through coordinated redevelopment and improvement of the transportation network and public space. At the earliest opportunity, restore or rehabilitate historic streets and reservations that were inappropriately disrupted, or closed, to their original right-of-way configuration.

1010.8 Policy HP-2.1.5: Extensions of the Plan of the City of Washington

Preserve, rehabilitate, and enhance the character of the extensions of the original street plan and the pattern of reservations throughout the District created by the 1893 Permanent System of Highways.

1010.9 Action HP-2.1.A: Designation of the Plan

Complete the documentation and designation of the Plan of the City of Washington as a National Historic Landmark.

1010.10 Action HP-2.1.B: Extensions of the Historic Plan

Complete the documentation and evaluation of the significant features of the Plan of the City of Washington, including added minor streets. Survey the extensions of the original street plan and the pattern of reservations throughout the District, and evaluate elements of the 1893 Permanent System of Highways for their historic potential.

1010.11 Action HP-2.1.C: Review of Alterations to the Historic Plan of Washington

Ensure early consultation with the HPRB and other preservation officials whenever master plans or proposed redevelopment projects envision alterations to features of the Plan of the City of Washington.

1010.12 Action HP-2.1.D: Review of Public Improvements

An appropriate level of consultation with the SHPO should occur before undertaking the design and construction of public space improvements in the Plan

of the City of Washington.

See the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions on the historic

planning legacy of Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1011** HP-2.2 HISTORIC LANDSCAPES AND OPEN SPACE {#sec-10-a1011 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1011}

1011.1 The natural beauty of Washington, DC creates an exceptional setting for the nation’s capital. Nature permeates the District, helping to define its historic character. A long planning legacy has also endowed Washington, DC with a unique cultural landscape. L’Enfant’s urban parks, broad avenues, and wide streets bring openness into the District. In the 19th century, visionaries converted the Potomac mudflats to parkland and reserved Rock Creek valley as open park space. The McMillan Plan shaped the monumental greenswards of the Mall and drew the riverfront and stream valley parks and the open spaces of fort sites, cemeteries, and campuses into a green network for the District.

1011.2 Other significant landscape features of the District are the legacy of 19th-century engineers, planners, and developers who extended the L’Enfant Plan beyond the original borders. Tree-lined streets and landscaped front yards unite many historic neighborhoods, and small green oases are scattered throughout the District. Some are publicly owned, and others are private. Institutional campuses and private estates, many now owned by embassies, also contribute to the preservation of open space. Many provide the setting for historic buildings, creating a balance between the natural and built environment that unifies the District.

1011.3 Policy HP-2.2.1: The Natural Setting of Washington, DC

Preserve the historic natural setting of Washington, DC and the views it provides. Preserve and enhance the beauty of the Potomac and Anacostia riverfronts and the system of stream valley parks. Protect the topographic bowl around central Washington, DC, and preserve the wooded skyline along its ring of escarpments. Prevent intrusions into the views to and from these escarpments and other major heights throughout the District.

1011.4 Policy HP-2.2.2: Historic Landscapes

Recognize and preserve the District’s significant landscapes as historic features in their own right or as contributing features of historic landmarks and districts. Preserve the distinguishing qualities of the District’s historic landscapes, both natural and designed. Protect public building and monument grounds, recognized historic vistas, parks and parkway systems, government and institutional campuses, gardens, cemeteries, and other historic landscapes from deterioration and incompatible development.

1011.5 Policy HP-2.2.3: Public Campuses

Recognize the landscape value of government campuses as the setting for public facilities and as open green space for the entire District. Balance any new development on these campuses against the public interest in retaining green space and protect them from incompatible development.

1011.6 Policy HP-2.2.4: Landscaped Yards in Public Space

Preserve the continuous and open green quality of landscaped front and side yards in public space and beyond building restriction lines. Take special care at historic landmarks and in historic districts to protect this public environment from intrusions, whether from excess paving, vehicular access and parking, high wall and fencing, or undue disruption of the natural contours or bermed terraces.

1011.7 Policy HP-2.2.5: Streetscape Design in Historic Districts

Ensure that new public works such as streetlights, street furniture, and sidewalks within historic landscapes and historic districts are compatible with the historic context. Emphasize good design whether contemporary or traditional.

1011.8 Policy HP-2.2.6: Historic Open Space

Retain landscaped yards, gardens, estate grounds, and other significant green space associated with historic landmarks whenever possible. If development is permitted, retain sufficient open space to protect the setting of the historic landmark and the integrity of the historic property. In historic districts, strive to maintain shared open space in the interior of blocks while balancing the need to accommodate reasonable expansion of residential buildings.

1011.9 Action HP-2.2.A: Preserving Historic Landscapes

Increase appreciation of historic landscapes through documentation, recognition in designations, and public education. Work cooperatively with government and landowners to preserve historic landscapes as integral components of historic landmarks and districts and to make new construction compatible with their historic character.

1011.10 Action HP-2.2.B: Preserving the Natural Escarpment

Protect views of and from the natural escarpment around central Washington, DC. Work with government and landholders to encourage new development at St. Elizabeths Hospital, the Armed Forces Retirement Home, McMillan Reservoir, and similar large sites that is harmonious with the natural topography and preserves important vistas over the District.

1011.11 Action HP-2.2.C: Preserving Rights-Of-Way

Preserve original street patterns in historic districts by maintaining public rights of-way and historic building setbacks. Retain and maintain alleys in historic districts where they are significant components of the historic development pattern.

1011.12 Action HP-2.2.D: Historic Avenue Landscapes

Identify and document historic landscape plans for avenues and major streets in the L’Enfant City and beyond. Encourage the restoration of intended landscape treatments, including the planting of double rows of trees in public space to restore shaded sidewalk allées and designed sidewalk views along major avenues.

See the Urban Design and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Elements for additional policies and actions related to historic landscapes and the natural setting of Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1012** HP-2.3 DISTRICT GOVERNMENT STEWARDSHIP {#sec-10-a1012 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1012}

1012.1 The District government should set the standard for historic preservation in Washington, DC, through both committed leadership and exemplary treatment of its own historic properties. The following policies promote District government stewardship in preservation.

1012.2 Policy HP-2.3.1: Protection of District-Owned Properties

Sustain exemplary standards of stewardship for historic properties under District ownership or control. Use historic properties to the maximum extent feasible to accommodate government activities and promote innovative new design. Ensure that rehabilitation work adheres to the highest preservation standards. Properly maintain both designated and eligible historic properties and protect them from deterioration and inappropriate alteration.

1012.3 Policy HP-2.3.2: Disposition of District-Owned Properties

Evaluate District-owned properties for historic potential before acting on disposition. When disposal of historic properties is appropriate, ensure their continued preservation through transfer to a suitable new steward under conditions that ensure their protection and reuse.

1012.4 Action HP-2.3.A: Protection of District-Owned Properties

Strengthen procedures to ensure historic preservation review of District actions at the earliest possible stage of project planning. Apply standards for District construction consistent with the standards applied to historic properties by federal agencies.

1012.5 Action HP-2.3.B: Enhancing Civic Assets

Make exemplary preservation of District municipal buildings—including public schools, libraries, fire stations, and recreational facilities—a model to encourage private investment in Washington, DC’s historic properties and neighborhoods. Rehabilitate these civic assets and enhance their inherent value with new construction or renovation that sustains the District’s tradition of high-quality municipal design.

1012.6 Action HP-2.3.C: Preserving Public Space in Historic Districts

Develop guidelines for government agencies and utilities so that public space in historic districts is designed and maintained as a significant and complementary attribute of the districts. These guidelines should ensure that such spaces are quickly and accurately restored after invasive work by utilities or District agencies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1013** HP-2.4 ZONING COMPATIBILITY {#sec-10-a1013 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1013}

1013.1 The District’s zoning regulations adopted in 2016 (ZR16) improve consistency between zoning and existing building conditions in Washington, DC’s historic districts and older neighborhoods. The regulations also include incentives for retention and adaptive use of older buildings in the downtown development zone. As these new regulations are implemented, monitoring and refinement of individual provisions, as needed, will help to ensure that the rules are working consistently with their intended purpose.

1013.2 Policy HP-2.4.1: Preservations Standards for Zoning Review

Ensure consistency between zoning regulations and design standards for historic properties. Zoning for each historic district shall be consistent with the predominant height and density of contributing buildings in the district. Monitor the effectiveness of zoning controls intended to preserve characteristic features of older neighborhoods not protected by historic designation. Where needed, specialized standards or regulations should be developed to help preserve the characteristic building patterns of historic districts and minimize design conflicts between preservation and zoning controls.

1013.3 Action HP-2.4.A: Zone Map Amendments in Historic Districts

Identify areas within historic districts where zoning regulations may need adjustment based on the scale and height of contributing buildings, while considering District-wide needs for housing and affordable housing. Following neighborhood planning and public participation, pursue rezoning of such areas with more appropriate designations.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1014** HP-2.5 REVIEW OF REHABILITATION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION {#sec-10-a1014 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1014}

1014.1 Historic properties have generated record levels of rehabilitation and construction activity in Washington, DC in recent years, and this trend is expected to continue. Whether these projects are modest home improvements reviewed by HPO as a day-to-day customer service, major development projects involving extensive HPRB review, requests to certify work for tax credits, or monumental new federal buildings, all involve the application of similar preservation and design principles. These principles recognize that historic environments need to grow and evolve as cities constantly change. They also recognize that solutions need to be practical and affordable, and the review process responsive and efficient. At the same time, more work needs to be done to ensure that these requirements do not unduly burden property owners, especially resident homeowners. Better access to more specific design guidelines for common home alterations, identifying a range of appropriate treatments, would improve the management of this process.

1014.2 The District’s historic preservation law is the basis for review of most preservation projects. The key purposes of the law are to retain and enhance historic properties, and to encourage their adaptation for current use. It encourages the restoration of historic landmarks and protection of designated archaeological sites. It also establishes that the test for alterations, additions, and new construction in historic districts is compatibility with the character of the district.

1014.3 The HPRB conducts the design review of most major projects involving historic properties, with some exceptions. The CFA reviews most projects in certain areas fronting on federal properties and in Georgetown, with the assistance of its Old Georgetown Board. There is also a different procedure under the Foreign Missions Act for some embassy projects.

1014.4 The Section 106 process governs the review of federal projects not subject to the District’s preservation law. For major projects, sponsoring agencies must consult with the SHPO, interested parties, and the public. Such consultations often involve the CFA, NCPC, NPS, and ACHP.

1014.5 District and federal preservation standards guide rehabilitation and architectural design based on the premise of compatibility with the historic context. Compatibility does not require matching or copying the attributes of historic buildings, but rather means that additions and new construction should achieve harmony with the historic surroundings through basic good design and close attention to the characteristics and design principles of the historic environment. Good contemporary architecture can fit within this context; in fact, it is necessary in an evolving and dynamic District and is welcomed as an expression of contemporary times.

1014.6 Compatibility with the historic environment also means that new construction should be suited to the fundamental character and the relative importance of a wide range of historic buildings and environments. Fine-grained historic environments like a residential street call for design restraint at a uniform scale, while historic commercial and industrial environments can often sustain stronger design statements and more striking juxtapositions of scale.

1014.7 Policy HP-2.5.1: Rehabilitation of Historic Structures

Promote appropriate preservation of historic buildings through an effective design review process. Apply design guidelines without stifling creativity, and strive for an appropriate balance between restoration and adaptation as suitable for the particular historic environment.

1014.8 Policy HP-2.5.2: Adaptation of Historic Properties for Current Use

Maintain historic properties in their original use when possible. If this is no longer feasible, encourage appropriate adaptive uses consistent with the character of the property. Recognize the value and necessary function of special-purpose structures, such as utility buildings, and allow structural modifications and other alterations compatible with historic character when needed for the property to continue functioning in its original use.

1014.9 Policy HP-2.5.3: Compatible Development

Preserve the important historic features of the District while permitting compatible new infill development. Within historic districts, respect the established form of development as evidenced by lot coverage limitations, height limits, open space requirements, and other standards that contribute to the character and attractiveness of those areas. Ensure that new construction, building additions, and exterior changes are in scale with and respect their historic context through sensitive siting and design, and the appropriate use of materials and architectural detail.

1014.10 Policy HP-2.5.4: Suitability to the Historic Context

Apply design standards in a manner that accounts for different levels of historic significance and types of historic environments. Encourage restoration of historic landmarks while allowing enhancements of equivalent design quality, provided such enhancements do not damage the landmark. Exercise greater restraint in residential historic districts and areas with a clear prevailing development pattern or architectural style. Allow greater flexibility where the inherent character of historic properties can accommodate greater intervention or more dramatic new design, such as non-residential zones and areas without a significant design pattern.

1014.11 Policy HP-2.5.5: Protecting Historic Building Integrity

Protect historic buildings from demolition whenever possible and protect the integrity of whole buildings. Discourage treatments like facadism or relocation of historic buildings, allowing them only when no alternative for preservation is feasible, and only after a finding that the treatment is necessary in the public interest. Waivers or administrative flexibility should be provided in the application of building and related codes to permit maximum preservation and protection of historic resources while ensuring the health and safety of the public.

1014.12 Policy HP-2.5.6: Review Process for Local Projects

Maintain a fair and efficient preservation review process that handles applications according to clearly established procedures and timelines, consistent with applicable public notice requirements, laws, and regulations. Apply historic preservation standards and guidelines consistently, thoughtfully, and appropriately to the circumstances and practical constraints of specific situations.

1014.13 Policy HP-2.5.7: Reconciliation of Multiple Public Goals

Use the Mayor’s agent’s public hearing process to reconcile preservation concerns and other public goals when necessary. Apply the legal standards for consistently and appropriately determining what is necessary in the public interest to the circumstances of the specific situation based on conclusions supported by the hearing record. Clearly record any applicant commitments and conditions of approval in an official written order.

1014.14 Policy HP-2.5.8: Review Process for Federal Projects

Work cooperatively with federal agencies and consulting parties in the Section 106 process to ensure that federal construction is compatible with the qualities and character of historic buildings and their settings, in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

1014.15 Action HP-2.5.A: Conceptual Design Review Process

Sustain and improve the conceptual design review process as the most effective and most widely used means to promote good preservation and compatible design. Support this process by committing sufficient resources and appointing highly qualified professionals to the HPRB. Enhance public participation and transparency in the process through increased use of electronic means to provide public notice, process applications, and post documents for public review.

1014.16 Action HP-2.5.B: Design Standards and Guidelines

Expand the development of design standards and guidelines for the treatment and alteration of historic properties, and for the design of new buildings subject to preservation design review. These tools should address appropriate treatment of characteristics specific to particular historic districts. Disseminate these tools widely and make them available on the internet.

1014.17 Action HP-2.5.C: Design Review of Federal Projects

Work cooperatively with federal agencies to ensure that federal projects do not detract from the character of historic properties that are significant to the District and are compatible with the surrounding context. When appropriate, involve the HPRB for its expert advice and as a forum for public comment.

1014.18 Action HP-2.5.D: Accessibility Guidelines for Aging in Place

Analyze common barriers to accessibility in older homes, and develop guidelines on how older adults can modify such homes in ways that are compatible with their historic character while making them visitable and safer to live in.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1015** HP-2.6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1015 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1015}

1015.1 Washington, DC has been the home of successive generations stretching far back in time. The artifacts and human-made features uncovered through archaeological investigation are important evidence of the District’s history, its colonial origins, and its prehistoric past. These resources often illustrate aspects of past lives that are not visible in documents or in the built environment. They can illuminate what has been long forgotten about everyday life and help connect residents to the lives of those who preceded them.

1015.2 Policy HP-2.6.1: Protection of Archaeological Sites

Retain archaeological resources in place where feasible, taking appropriate steps to protect sites from unauthorized disturbance. If sites must be excavated, follow established standards and guidelines for the treatment of archaeological resources, whether in documentation and recordation or in the collection, storage, and protection of artifacts.

1015.3 Policy HP-2.6.2: Curation of Data and Artifacts

Treat archaeological artifacts as significant civic property. Ensure that all data and artifacts recovered from archaeological excavations are appropriately inventoried, conserved, and stored in a facility with proper environmental controls.

1015.4 Policy HP-2.6.3: Public Awareness of Archaeological Resources

Make archaeological artifacts and data visible to the public. Maintain public access to collections, use artifacts and information as educational tools, and treat artifacts as objects of cultural interest.

1015.5 Action HP-2.6.A: Archaeological Curation Facility

Establish, as a high priority, a facility for the proper conservation, curation, storage, and study of artifacts, archaeological materials, and related historic documents owned by the District. Ensure public access to these materials, and promote research using the collections and records.

1015.6 Action HP-2.6.B: Archaeological Surveys and Inventories

Increase surveys, inventories, and other efforts to identify and protect significant archaeological resources. Surveys and inventories should be directed by qualified professionals and adhere to the standards in the Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District.

1015.7 Action HP-2.6.C: Archaeological Site Reports

Require prompt completion of site reports that document archaeological findings after investigations are undertaken. Maintain a central archive of these reports and increase efforts to disseminate their findings and conclusions.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1016** HP-2.7 ENFORCEMENT {#sec-10-a1016 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1016}

1016.1 Enforcement programs are necessary to encourage consistent compliance with District property maintenance codes, as well as with historic preservation laws, permits, and approvals. Inspections and enforcement programs require cooperation among building code officials in the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, the HPO, and the Board for the Condemnation of Insanitary Buildings (BCIB). Active engagement by residents and neighborhood groups also helps to support these programs.

1016.2 Policy HP-2.7.1: Preservation Law Enforcement

Protect historic properties from unauthorized building activity, physical damage, and diminished integrity through systematic monitoring of construction and vigilant enforcement of the preservation law. Use enforcement authority, including civil fines, to ensure compliance with the conditions of permits issued under the preservation law.

1016.3 Policy HP-2.7.2: Maintenance of Historic Property

Historic properties shall be maintained in a manner consistent with the District property maintenance codes applicable to all properties. Encourage voluntary compliance by property owners, but when necessary for serious violations, take enforcement action to compel remedial action.

1016.4 Policy HP-2.7.3: Prevention of Demolition by Neglect

Prevent demolition of historic buildings by neglect or active intent through enforcement of effective regulations, imposition of substantial civil fines, and when necessary, criminal enforcement proceedings against those responsible.

1016.5 Action HP-2.7.A: Preservation Enforcement

Improve enforcement of preservation laws through a sustained program of inspections, imposition of appropriate sanctions, and expeditious adjudication. Strengthen interagency cooperation and promote compliance with preservation laws through enhanced public awareness of permit requirements and procedures. Ensure that protections remain in place during any public health emergency.

1016.6 Action HP-2.7.B: Accountability for Violations

Hold both property owners and contractors accountable for violations of historic preservation laws or regulations and ensure that outstanding violations are corrected before issuing permits for additional work. Ensure that fines for violations are substantial enough to deter infractions, and necessary action taken to collect fines.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1017** HP-2.8 HAZARD PROTECTION FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1017 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1017}

1017.1 While preservation planning is a well-established function in Washington, DC, more work needs to be done to effectively integrate the District’s preservation and resilience programs. This should include greater consideration of how natural hazards and the effects of climate change threaten the District’s ability to preserve its historic and culturally significant properties using traditional means.

1017.2 Strong resilience policies will enable the District to go beyond ordinary emergency preparedness plans. They can also help owners of historic properties to plan for and either avoid or reduce major property damage from flooding and other hazards. Such policies and implementation tools need to be in place before an unexpected hazard event or disaster forces an urgent need for widespread repair and restoration.

1017.3 The following policies and actions are intended to increase resilience and adaptive capacity in ways that can help ensure the long-term preservation of historic resources, despite challenging future conditions. They are also meant to enhance coordination between the SHPO and the District’s State hazard mitigation officer in the Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency (HSEMA) on the development and administration of flexible, integrated resilience programs that work together before and after disaster strikes.

1017.4 Policy HP-2.8.1: Resilient Design for Historic Properties

Develop resilient design principles for historic and cultural resources, with guidance on resilience planning and project implementation. Encourage owners of at-risk historic properties, both public and private, to assess their vulnerability to current and projected hazards, and to implement reasonable adaptation measures.

1017.5 Policy HP-2.8.2: Coordinated Resilience Planning

Integrate consideration of historic and cultural resources into hazard mitigation and climate adaptation planning. Develop resilience strategies and implement related initiatives through a coordinated effort involving the SHPO and the District’s Hazard Mitigation Officer. Address both preventive improvements for historic properties and post-disaster preservation procedures.

1017.6 Policy HP-2.8.3: Disaster Recovery for Historic Properties

Involve both the SHPO and the District’s Hazard Mitigation Officer in preparing and implementing flexible, coordinated policies that work effectively to enable swift protection and emergency repair of cultural and historic resources during disaster recovery.

1017.7 Action HP-2.8.A: Preservation and Climate Change

Complete an inventory of historic and culturally significant sites threatened by climate change. Give priority to these at-risk sites in developing hazard mitigation plans. Coordinate with key stakeholders to maximize use of available funding for mitigation and disaster response projects.

1017.8 Action HP-2.8.B: Historic Properties Strategy in the District’s Hazard

Mitigation Plan

Incorporate a strategy for historic and cultural resources into the District Hazard Mitigation Plan. Identify key hazard areas, assess the vulnerability of historic properties to disasters and climate change, propose adaptation alternatives for resources at risk, and identify capability limitations that need to be addressed.

1017.9 Action HP-2.8.C: Guidelines for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation of Historic

Properties

Develop guidelines to enable expeditious stabilization, repair, and rehabilitation of historic properties following disaster events or hazard impacts. Include procedures to streamline permitting, such as expedited design review and reduced fees for post-disaster repairs, while adhering to the applicable requirements under the District’s historic preservation law.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1018** HP-3 EXPANDING PRESERVATION KNOWLEDGE {#sec-10-a1018 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1018}

1018.1 Broad public awareness of historic properties and cultural resources is vital to a vibrant historic preservation program. It promotes understanding and appreciation of the District’s heritage, allowing communities to take pride in their past and residents to value the history of their homes.

1018.2 The District’s cultural heritage should be a source of inspiration that engages residents and communities and supports the cultural economy. Strong partnerships among communities, nonprofit organizations, and the District’s preservation program can help residents appreciate local history and heritage, and use that knowledge to strengthen cultural understanding and a more inclusive community life. Public events, placemaking and educational activities, oral history programs, and creative arts projects in neighborhood cultural spaces can all be used to expand appreciation of the role that heritage can play in drawing diverse communities together.

1018.3 Preservation also needs strong advocates to promote the importance of historic resources and cultural heritage among the host of priorities facing community leaders. Preservation draws strength by forging effective partnerships and developing preservation leaders for the future.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1019** HP-3.1 ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1019 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1019}

1019.1 District residents may first encounter the practice of preservation through a home improvement project. Communities may have the same experience when a new building or a historic district is proposed. For developers, it may be when a historic landmark application is filed. In each case, they deserve ready access to clear information. The government’s rules for the preservation process should be easily obtained and understandable.

1019.2 The repository of records from decades of historic surveys, documentation efforts, and historic designations is an important resource for public education. Better access to this information about potential historic properties also provides greater certainty to property developers contemplating major investment decisions, thus lessening the potential for conflict over demolition and redevelopment.

1019.3 Policy HP-3.1.1: Dissemination of Historic Information

Make information about local history and historic resources widely available to the public on the internet and through both traditional and new media. Widely distribute educational materials, expand public access to survey and landmark files, publicize new information, and provide assistance with public inquiries. Create online archaeological exhibits, display archaeological artifacts, and make information from excavations available to the public through educational programs.

1019.4 Policy HP-3.1.2: Publication of the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites

Maintain the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites and maps depicting the location of historic landmarks and districts. Keep them current and readily available to the public both in print and on the internet.

1019.5 Policy HP-3.1.3: Identification of Potential Historic Properties

Publicize survey projects and survey results as a means of increasing awareness of potential historic properties. Give priority to the public identification of eligible historic properties in active development areas.

1019.6 Action HP-3.1.A: Internet Access to Survey Data and Designations

Increase internet access to documentation of historic properties—including historic landmark and historic district designation forms and National Register nomination forms—and determinations of eligibility for designation. Expand and improve HistoryQuest DC, the geographic information system-based interactive internet map that provides basic historical documentation on individual properties throughout the District.

1019.7 Action HP-3.1.B: Enhancement of the District of Columbia Inventory and Map

Improve the value and effectiveness of the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites as an educational tool by presenting it in a more engaging format with maps and illustrations. Organize it to give context and meaning to individual designations and make it available both on the internet and in print. Keep the map of historic landmarks and districts current in an interactive GIS-based version accessible to the public on the internet.

1019.8 Action HP-3.1.C: Listings of Eligibility

Promote a clear understanding of where eligible historic properties may exist and how they can be protected through official designation. Reduce uncertainty for property owners, real estate developers, and the general public by maintaining readily available information on surveyed areas and properties identified as potentially eligible, especially in areas near Metro stations. Include both properties that have been formally determined to be eligible and those considered eligible based on available information. Make this information widely available in public documents, such as Ward Heritage Guides, and on the internet.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1020** HP-3.2 PUBLIC AWARENESS OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES {#sec-10-a1020 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1020}

1020.1 Washington, DC’s most important historic features are widely familiar and officially recognized through historic designation. The District’s monuments are world-famous, and some of its neighborhoods are well-known to people across the globe. But the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites includes hundreds of historic landmarks and dozens of historic districts, and many of these are likely to be unfamiliar even to native Washingtonians. Longtime residents and institutions serve as guardians of memory about such sites. These places and stories should become more vivid and accessible as a means to appreciate the District’s history.

1020.2 Recognition involves more than academic research and field work to identify and document historic properties. It also requires a deliberate effort to educate and inform property owners and the public at large about the nature and the protected status of those features and places whose historic value may not be readily apparent. It is easy to take historic properties for granted because of lack of reference or information. It is equally important to publicize the value of potential historic properties while actively seeking official recognition, and thus the benefits of legal protection.

1020.3 Many local organizations actively pursue outreach programs aimed at raising public awareness and appreciation of Washington DC’s cultural heritage. Public response to these activities has been strong, but more coordinated efforts could have a greater impact on a wider audience. The District also needs to raise the profile of its archaeological programs and make Washington, DC’s artifact collections available for research and public enjoyment.

1020.4 Policy HP-3.2.1: Public Education

Promote public education in the values of historic preservation and the processes for preserving historic properties.

1020.5 Policy HP-3.2.2: Community Awareness

Foster broad community participation in efforts to identify, designate, and publicize historic properties.

1020.6 Policy HP-3.2.3: Ward Heritage Guides

Make Heritage Guides for each ward available to the public on the internet and in print. Periodically update the guides as needed.

1020.7 Policy HP-3.2.4: Marking of Historic Properties

Develop and maintain a coordinated program for public identification of historic properties through street signage, building markers, heritage trail signage, and other means.

1020.8 Policy HP-3.2.5: Cultural Tourism

Celebrate the cultural history of District neighborhoods. Recognize cultural preservation as an integral part of historic preservation and use cultural tourism to link neighborhoods and promote communication among diverse groups.

1020.9 Policy HP-3.2.6: Notice to Owners of Historic Property

Maintain an appropriate method of periodic notification to owners of historic property, informing them of the benefits and responsibilities of their stewardship.

1020.10 Action HP-3.2.A: Preservation Outreach and Education

Sustain an active program of outreach to the District’s neighborhoods. Develop educational materials on the cultural and social history of District communities as a means to engage residents and introduce historic preservation values and goals. Promote public understanding of not just the principles for preserving properties but also the social and community benefits of historic preservation.

1020.11 Action HP-3.2.B: Historic Preservation in Schools

Work with both public and private schools to develop and implement programs to educate District students on the full range of historic, architectural, and archaeological resources in Washington, DC. Use education to promote the value of historic preservation as a community activity.

1020.12 Action HP-3.2.C: Historic District Signage

Complete implementation of the District-wide program for street signs identifying historic districts.

1020.13 Action HP-3.2.D: Markers for Historic Landmarks

Continue with implementation of the program of consistent signage that property owners may use to identify historic properties and provide brief commemorative information.

1020.14 Action HP-3.2.E: Historic and Archaeological Exhibitions

Develop display exhibits for libraries, recreation centers, and other public buildings that showcase historic and archaeological resources. Recruit volunteers to assist with the interpretation of these resources.

1020.15 Action HP-3.2.F: Heritage Tourism

Identify heritage tourism opportunities and strategies that integrate District programs with those of organizations like Cultural Tourism DC, EventsDC, and others oriented to visitors. Use these programs to promote and enhance the integrity and authenticity of historic resources.

1020.16 Action HP-3.2.G: Neighborhood Tourism

Enhance existing heritage tourism programs by celebrating the cultural history of District neighborhoods, especially those not recognized as visitor destinations, through local history tours and programs engaging a diverse audience.

1020.17 Action HP-3.2.H: Appreciating Cemeteries

Collaborate with cemetery administrators to reconnect burial grounds to their surrounding neighborhoods for greater public access. Promote cemeteries for purposes of tourism and low-impact recreation, such as walking. Create online guides of distinguished monuments and notable Washingtonians buried in local cemeteries.

See the Arts and Culture Element for additional policies and actions related to cultural heritage.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1021** HP-3.3 PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS AND ADVOCACY {#sec-10-a1021 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1021}

1021.1 The foundation of a strong preservation program is an informed and participatory public that understands why historic preservation is important, how it is achieved and what benefits it can provide. Strong preservation partnerships not only promote the values of preservation but also serve to forge a greater sense of community. Partnerships with the public are critical to any preservation program and should be established and advanced through education and outreach.

1021.2 Policy HP-3.3.1: Promotion of Historic Preservation

Use historic preservation to foster civic pride and strengthen communal values. Increase public awareness of historic preservation, promote appreciation of historic places, and support preservation activities of interest to residents and visitors.

1021.3 Policy HP-3.3.2: Preservation Advocacy

Encourage public participation in historic preservation through strong community partnerships. Promote communication and collaboration among the District’s preservation groups in advocating for preservation goals. Involve historical societies, academic organizations, and others with specialized knowledge of the District’s history and historic resources in efforts to promote historic preservation.

1021.4 Policy HP-3.3.3: Special Events for Preservation

Promote preservation awards, festivals, conferences, exhibitions, and other special events that raise awareness of historic preservation and celebrate the District’s history and historic places.

1021.5 Action HP-3.3.A: Coordinated Preservation Advocacy

Encourage and facilitate interaction between preservation and economic development interests. Strengthen working relationships among the HPO, HPRB, ANCs, and preservation organizations. Establish special task forces or advisory groups as appropriate to support preservation programs and advocacy for historic preservation.

1021.6 Action HP-3.3.B: Incorporating Preservation Issues in Local Initiatives

Include the historic preservation community in broader urban initiatives, such as those relating to housing, transportation, the environment, and public facilities. Involve the HPO and preservation groups in meetings to discuss relevant issues relating to zoning, transportation, open space, waterfronts, public facilities, public property disposition, and other planning and urban design matters.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1022** HP-4 INVESTING IN HISTORIC ASSETS {#sec-10-a1022 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1022}

1022.1 Historic preservation is fundamental to the growth and development of District neighborhoods. It is a proven catalyst for neighborhood investment and improvement, whose financial impact on Washington, DC is well documented. Preservation has revitalized neighborhoods, increased real estate values, strengthened the District’s tourism industry, and attracted new residents to Washington, DC. Looking to the future, preservation will become even more closely integrated with urban design, neighborhood conservation, housing, sustainability, economic development, tourism, and planning strategies.

1022.2 As growth continues, so does the debate about the course of change in many older neighborhoods that are eligible for but not protected by historic designation. While these communities are benefiting from new development, concerns about preserving their traditional character have been widespread. Similar issues have arisen with anticipated redevelopment of large sites throughout the District that contain historic properties or will affect established communities nearby. Development throughout the District should be guided by respectful stewardship of Washington, DC’s heritage, even where it may not be recognized by official designation. Designers and builders should plan with preservation in mind and actively engage with community leadership and residents to create projects that are economically, architecturally compatible, and welcomed as an enhancement to community life.

1022.3 Preservation of existing affordable housing is among the District’s highest priorities, and many of these units are located in the District’s older housing stock, including historic buildings. Historic preservation can help to retain and enhance this building stock as an important resource for Washington, DC. At the same time, as older neighborhoods become more attractive to new residents and developers, values rise, generating increases in property taxes. Maintenance and upkeep of these older buildings is necessary, and both taxes and repair costs affect lower-income residents most severely. Appropriate flexibility in the application of preservation standards within historic districts can mitigate this problem, but financial assistance programs and incentives are also necessary to keep as much of this building supply as possible affordable.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1023** HP-4.1 PRESERVATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a1023 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1023}

1023.1 Investment in historic preservation has been a source of economic development for Washington, DC. Continual investment in the District’s architectural heritage supports stable property values and keeps neighborhoods vibrant for residents and businesses. Historic districts promote healthy and diverse communities by giving residents a voice in guiding new development that respects and enhances the existing neighborhood fabric. Older buildings provide space to incubate new businesses. The quality of life in historic neighborhoods benefits residents and helps to attract newcomers.

1023.2 In recent years, the District’s preservation program has reviewed more than 500 government projects and 5,000 private project applications annually. The magnitude of this effort testifies equally to the extent of ongoing repair and rehabilitation of historic buildings, the value of historic assets as generators of economic activity, and the importance of the HPRB review process in supporting high-quality new development in the District.

1023.3 While historic preservation has supported the revitalization and enhancement of downtown and many neighborhoods in recent decades, the District currently faces a new challenge of providing adequate housing for a population that has increased by more than 100,000 people since the 2010 Census. Some of this housing will need to be provided in Washington, DC’s historic districts, whether existing or new. More study of the relationship between changing neighborhoods, historic preservation, and the cost and availability of housing is needed to support an understanding and consensus about how these new needs can best be managed.

1023.4 Policy HP-4.1.1: Preservation and Community Development

Promote historic preservation as a tool for economic and community development.

1023.5 Policy HP-4.1.2: Preservation and Neighborhood Identity

Recognize the potential for historic preservation programs to protect and enhance the distinct identity and unique attractions of District neighborhoods.

1023.6 Policy HP-4.1.3: Neighborhood Revitalization

Use historic preservation programs and incentives to encourage historic preservation as a revitalization strategy for neighborhoods and neighborhood business districts.

1023.7 Policy HP-4.1.4: Historic Preservation and Housing

Study and evaluate data on the interaction between historic preservation and housing costs and use this information to develop mechanisms to support the District’s housing production goals while preserving its historic character.

1023.8 Policy HP-4.1.5: Affordable Housing in Older and Historic Buildings

Recognize the importance of preserving affordable housing in the District’s existing older and historic buildings. Undertake programs to preserve the supply of subsidized rental units and low-cost market rate units in these buildings.

1023.9 Policy HP-4.1.6: Grant Programs and Tax Relief

Maintain grant programs and tax relief measures for low-income homeowners and low-income senior homeowners faced with rising assessments and the cost of maintaining older and historic homes.

1023.10 Action HP-4.1.A: Historic Neighborhood Revitalization

Implement preservation development strategies through increased use of proven programs and initiatives sponsored by preservation leaders like the National Trust for Historic Preservation, NPS, and others. Make full use of the programs available through the National Main Street Center, Preserve America, Save America’s Treasures, and other programs and funds designed for the recognition of diverse cultural heritage and the preservation and promotion of historic landmarks and districts.

1023.11 Action HP-4.1.B: Historic Homeowner Grants

Implement and promote the District’s targeted homeowner grants through an active program of outreach and public information. Monitor and evaluate the program to assess its effectiveness and to guide the development of other appropriate incentives and assistance programs. Consider expanding the program to income-eligible homeowners residing in any historic landmark or district.

1023.12 Action HP-4.1.C: Preservation and Housing Affordability

Examine the effects of historic preservation on housing affordability, as documented in existing studies and through analysis of available District data. Consider the findings of these studies and investigate how to manage preservation tools in ways that support housing affordability.

1023.13 Action HP-4.1.D: Workforce Development in Preservation Craftsmanship

Support initiatives for workforce development in artisan trades and traditional construction crafts that support preservation and repair of historic architecture. Work in partnership with local educational institutions to promote skills in masonry, carpentry, metalwork, glass arts, and other crafts that have contributed to the District’s historic fabric and character.

See the Urban Design Element for additional policies and actions related to development and community identity and the Housing Element for additional policies on conservation and maintenance of existing housing.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1024** HP-4.2 PRESERVATION INCENTIVES {#sec-10-a1024 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1024}

1024.1 Financial incentives are beneficial and sometimes necessary as a means of achieving preservation of historic properties. Incentives can also help to preserve affordable housing and protect neighborhood diversity. Existing preservation incentives include the federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and New Market Tax Credits. District programs include the Targeted Historic Homeowner Grants. Private nonprofits have also created programs and funds to support historic preservation work.

1024.2 The OP’s 2015 report on Pairing Historic Tax Credits with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits in DC, prepared jointly with the Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development, is among the recent analytical studies highlighting the value of state and local incentive programs that piggyback on federal historic tax credits, thus leveraging federal resources for local development. Since 2003, at least 25 projects in the District have used these federal tax credits to help finance the production or renovation of more than 2,100 affordable housing units in historic buildings. This demonstrates significant potential for using these credits to create affordable housing.

1024.3 Policy HP-4.2.1: Preservation Incentives

Develop and maintain financial incentives to support preservation of historic properties in private ownership. Give priority to programs to assist owners with low and moderate incomes. Encourage private sector initiatives, such as revolving funds and targeted financing programs, to support rehabilitation of historic properties, especially those in severe disrepair.

1024.4 Policy HP-4.2.2: Incentives for Special Property Types

Develop specialized incentives to support preservation of historic properties like schools, places of worship, theaters, and other prominent historic structures of exceptional communal value. Use a variety of tools to reduce development pressure on these resources and to help with unusually high costs of maintenance.

1024.5 Action HP-4.2.A: Transfer of Development Rights Benefits for Preservation

Monitor the effectiveness of transfer of development rights (TDR) programs included in the ZR16 zoning regulations and consider any appropriate revisions to enhance their utility for preservation.

1024.6 Action HP-4.2.B: Tax Credits for Affordable Housing in Historic Buildings

Encourage the coordinated use of multiple tax credits to support rehabilitation of existing affordable housing in historic buildings and to create new affordable units in historic buildings. Support such projects through historic designation of buildings meeting the eligibility criteria.

1024.7 Action HP-4.2.C: Coordination of District Programs

Evaluate the secondary preservation impacts of District policies and programs that support affordable housing, aging in place, and maintenance of homes in good repair. Identify and implement any improvements that could encourage use of these programs for projects involving historic buildings.

See the Land Use Element for additional policies and actions on row house preservation.

### **10-A11** COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1100** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1100}

1100.1 The Community Services and Facilities Element contains policies and actions for public facilities that provide health and older adult care services, as well as community facilities that include libraries, police stations, fire stations, and other municipal facilities such as maintenance yards. A well-balanced and adequate public facility system is a key part of Washington, DC’s drive to sustain and enhance the quality of life for its residents and to deliver services on an equitable and inclusive basis, supporting growth and prosperity, resilience, public health and safety, civic gathering, learning, and cultural production and expression.

1100.2 This element addresses the public health sector, recognizing the strong links between the built environment, land uses, and public health outcomes. It highlights Washington, DC’s work toward providing more equitable health access and on improving health outcomes for all.

1100.3 This element also addresses the vulnerability of District facilities and services to natural and human-made shocks, such as extreme weather events, public health events, and security incidents, and to long-term stressors, such as sea level rise and other adverse effects of climate change.

1100.4 Several District departments and other government agencies are responsible for the planning, construction, modernization, management, maintenance, and oversight of the District’s public facilities that deliver health and community services upon which all residents depend. These departments and agencies include the Department of General Services (DGS), the Department of Health (DC Health), the Department of Human Services (DHS), the Department of Disability Services (DDS), the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH), the Department of Aging and Community Living (DACL), the Department of Corrections (DOC), the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), Fire and Emergency Medical Services (FEMS), and the Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency (HSEMA). This element incorporates planning and policy guidance from the short-term and long-range plans and programs of these agencies. These agencies should coordinate their facilities master planning efforts and capital improvement plans with the District’s land use plans so that Washington, DC can continue delivering essential services to existing customers while accommodating projected growth.

1100.5 The critical community services and facilities issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. These include:

Assessing, rehabilitating, and maintaining facilities and lands to provide efficient and effective delivery of public services to existing and future District residents;

Investing in and renewing the public library system and enhancing the library’s role as a cultural anchor and center of neighborhood life;

Providing facilities to offer affordable and high-quality health care services in an equitable and accessible manner;

Providing for the public safety needs of all Washington, DC residents, workers, and visitors;

Making the District’s critical facilities and health and emergency response systems more resilient to chronic stressors and to sudden natural or human-made events; and

Ensuring that District-owned land and facilities meet the needs of a

growing population, informed by a cross-systems Public Facilities Plan.

1100.6 Other elements of the Comprehensive Plan should be consulted for more direction on road and transit facilities (Transportation Element); school facilities (Educational Facilities Element); recreation centers (Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element); housing for vulnerable populations and persons with disabilities (Housing Element); green building practices (Environmental Protection Element); job training facilities (Economic Development Element); water, energy, solid waste, and digital systems (Infrastructure Element); and arts and cultural facilities (Arts and Culture Element).

##### **10-A DCMR § 1101** COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES GOAL {#sec-10-a1101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1101}

1101.1 The goal for community services and facilities is to provide high-quality, accessible, efficiently managed, and properly funded community facilities to support the efficient, equitable, and resilient delivery of municipal services; preserve and enhance public health and safety, support Washington, DC’s growth and development, and enhance the well-being of and provide a high quality of life for current and future District residents.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1102** CSF-1 ADEQUATE COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1102}

1102.1 Providing adequate community services and facilities requires careful planning and, in some cases, reallocating resources and refocusing priorities. It also requires improved coordination among District agencies and ongoing evaluation and adoption of new approaches to the design, funding, and prioritizing of capital improvements.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1103** CSF-1.1 LONG-TERM PLANNING FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1103}

1103.1 DGS is responsible for the management, care, and operation of many of Washington, DC’s government facilities. As of 2018, these facilities include over 835 government-owned properties that include 650 buildings, dozens of triangle parks and slivers, approximately 34.5 million square feet of floor space (inclusive of District of Columbia Public Schools), 64 warehouses totaling approximately 882,700 square feet, and 75 leased buildings with 4.0 million square feet of floor space. Assets also include 26 parking lots and 71 antenna locations, seven of which contain communication towers. In addition, the total space leased out by DGS to private lessees is approximately 6.2 million square feet. DGS manages and implements a building improvement program for several of the largest District agencies, including District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), DACL, DOC, FEMS, DC Health, DHS, the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), MPD, and the Department of Public Works. The DGS portfolio also includes facilities of the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) and the District of Columbia Public Library (DCPL); however, building improvements as well as the management, care, and operation of these facilities are conducted by UDC and DCPL, respectively, rather than by DGS.

1103.2 The District consolidated the Department of Real Estate Services (DRES), the Office of Public Education Facilities Modernization (OPEFM), and the capital management functions for DOC, FEMS, DC Health, DHS, DPR, and MPD to create a single agency responsible for all vertical construction (with the exception of DCPL) for DC government in 2011. This single agency is today’s DGS.

1103.3 Historically, planning for the facility needs of these agencies focused on addressing incremental, short-term capital needs, rather than capital needs tied to long-term forecasts based on land use, transportation, and demographic growth and change analyses. This was partially due to the advancing age of many facilities, their underused condition, and an overriding emphasis on near-term facility replacement and modernization to address basic life-safety issues such as structural integrity, rather than planning more systematically for 10- or 20-year needs.

1103.4 Through the Comprehensive Plan, the District has guided Washington, DC’s growth, providing a long-term perspective on future needs. The District has identified gaps, redundancies, and functionally obsolete community facilities through a variety of place-based plans, systems plans, and facilities master plans covering a wide range of public facilities. This has produced more logical and equitable capital planning that presented opportunities for co-location, shared-use, and adaptive reuse strategies to help optimize the performance and policy outcomes of District-owned facilities.

1103.5 Since the 2006 Comprehensive Plan adoption, DGS and its predecessor agencies built over four million square feet of new public facilities and renovated or opened more than 15 police and fire stations. These figures are in addition to more than eight million square feet of school modernization projects, addressed in the Educational Facilities Element. These activities demonstrate significant strides made by the District in planning and delivering facilities that now provide better and more accessible services. As Washington, DC continues to grow and its needs evolve, opportunities to enhance cross-systems civic planning should be harnessed.

1103.6 Washington, DC has a land area of 61 square miles and, as of 2017, a population of 693,972. Within this compact footprint and using a finite number of public facilities and lands, the District must serve the health, education, recreation, safety, and security needs of residents. With the District's population anticipated to grow, District ownership and decision-making control over these public assets will grow more critical. Moving forward, the District should carefully consider the ownership, control, use, and disposition of these assets to ensure it can meet near-term and long-range needs of residents. A Public Facilities Plan can inventory civic assets against future needs to help inform decisions. The Public Facilities Plan would help ensure that an adequate supply of land and facilities is available for the dynamic needs of a growing residential population in the long-term future.

1103.7 In addition to financing and constructing facilities itself and co-locating compatible facilities together, the District uses joint development and public-private ventures to leverage its assets. An additional tool—and one of the most important used by the District—is the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), a six-year, forward-looking plan that establishes the strategy for future public investment in capital assets, including District-owned facilities, equipment, and transportation infrastructure, and that prioritizes and allocates investments to specific projects based on a careful annual evaluation and assessment of needs. The Public Facilities Plan can serve as a repository of cross-agency information that can help inform the CIP.

1103.8 Co-location is the reuse of a publicly owned site in a manner that accommodates a combination of public and/or private uses. Co-location can help Washington, DC to achieve many of the goals described in the Comprehensive Plan, such as maximizing the public benefits that a given public property, asset, facility, or combination thereof can deliver.

1103.9 Co-location can help residents individually, by providing a one-stop shop with a variety of services typically needed by the same people in the same facility or by keeping facilities occupied and thus safer day and night, as when apartments sit atop libraries or schools are used for community meetings in the evening. Co-location can be physical, when two or more uses occur on the same site, and/or temporal, where different uses take place at different times in the same room or same building on the site, as when religious congregations rent school auditoriums on weekends and private sports leagues use school athletic facilities.

Thus, co-location includes, but is not limited to, the following potential combinations of uses on a single site:

One or more community services or programs located with government offices or in government facilities;

Private uses, such as affordable and mixed-income housing built together;

Public uses, such as libraries, recreation facilities, and police and fire stations located together or with private uses, such as housing;

Child development facilities located on school property;

Multiple health and wellness-related facilities; and

Retail and commercial uses (such as grocery stores) that can serve community needs located alongside government uses.

A Public Facilities Plan can encourage the District to consider co-location of a wide range of municipal uses and assets that can help maximize the ability of any given facility to deliver services to District residents. This is especially critical when uses under consideration are under the auspices of separate agencies.

1103.10 Washington, DC is facing deferred facilities maintenance. To balance limited resources and competing priorities, the District is creating a comprehensive asset management plan. This plan consolidates asset inventories from all District agencies and analyzes their maintenance and replacement schedules on a unified basis, delivering the following benefits:

Better prioritization of capital projects relative to long-term risks and costs;

Ability to determine optimal rehabilitation and maintenance schedules and processes;

Determination of financial impact of deferred capital maintenance; and

Optimal timing for delivering new projects.

This new approach will enable the District to better understand maintenance, replacement, and related investment needs, helping ensure that related budget and capital funding priorities can be optimally aligned.

1103.11 As of 2017, public facilities data layers are publicly available through online tools provided by the District’s Geographic Information Systems (DCGIS) Program, including the http://opendata.dc.gov portal, which is developed and maintained by the Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO). These tools enable agencies and the public to quickly access data, create maps, and conduct analyses. While a wide array of public facilities information is currently available through this portal, visualization of public facilities on a unified (i.e., cross-asset) basis could be improved as part of the Public Facilities Plan. By aggregating these data, relationships and dynamics within civic systems (e.g., the way schools, libraries, and parks interact) as well as alignment with other systems, such as housing and transportation, can be made more readily evident and help inform and enhance the CIP and other District efforts to help shape and manage growth.

1103.12 Policy CSF-1.1.1: Public Facilities Plan and Effective Use of District-Owned

Lands and Buildings

District-owned buildings and lands should be effectively used to meet the needs of residents. Develop a District-wide Public Facilities Plan to understand the distribution, capacity, control, and occupancy of District facilities and lands across systems and agencies, taking into account service delivery and improved alignment with current needs and expected future growth.

1103.13 Policy CSF-1.1.2: Adequate Facilities

Construct, rehabilitate, and maintain the facilities necessary for the efficient delivery of public services to current and future District residents.

1103.14 Policy CSF-1.1.3: Adequate Land

Ensure that the District government owns a sufficient amount of land in appropriately distributed locations to accommodate needed public facilities and meet the long-term operational needs of the government.

See also the Land Use Element and Economic Development Element policies and actions to preserve and conserve adequate lands for public facilities.

1103.15 Policy CSF-1.1.4: Prioritization of Publicly Owned Land

Prioritize District-owned property for community facility uses. Wherever feasible, the District should use short- or long-term leases for lands not currently needed to preserve the District’s long-term supply of land for public use.

1103.16 Policy CSF-1.1.5: Addressing Facilities That Are Functionally Obsolete

Develop reuse or disposition plans for public buildings or sites that are functionally obsolete, that cannot be rehabilitated cost-effectively, or that are no longer needed. Before any disposition of property is made, consideration shall be given to potential future uses by, and needs of, the District.

1103.17 Policy CSF-1.1.6: Universal Design

All District public facilities shall accommodate the needs of persons with physical disabilities to the greatest extent possible. Comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all new construction and renovations. Consider Universal Design solutions when opportunities present themselves and as funding allows.

1103.17a Text Box: Universal Design

Universal Design is defined by the National Park Service (NPS) and the National Center on Accessibility (NCA) as the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.

1103.18 Policy CSF-1.1.7: Location of Facilities

Ensure that the planning, siting, and design of new public facilities is consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, including the Future Land Use Map and the Policy Map.

1103.19 Policy CSF-1.1.8: Public Facilities, Equity, and Economic Development

Locate new public facilities to best serve all District residents and to support economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts, with a focus on underserved areas and areas of growth.

See the Environmental Protection Element for policies on green building requirements for new public facilities and the Urban Design Element for policies on the design of public buildings.

1103.20 Policy CSF-1.1.9: Co-Location

Encourage the strategic co-location of public municipal uses on publicly-owned and controlled sites, provided that the uses are functionally compatible with each other and the site’s future land use designation. Consider co-location of private and public uses as a strategy that can help advance District-wide and neighborhood priorities, such as the creation of affordable housing and equitable access to services.

1103.21 Policy CSF-1.1.10: Agency Coordination for Co-Location Strategies

The Public Facilities Plan should include interagency coordination for co-location of public uses early in planning and project initiation processes so that critical input is captured and incorporated. Joint planning of District-operated facilities with other community facilities such as schools, older adult services, health clinics, community kitchens, healthy food growing or retail spaces, and nonprofit service centers should also be supported through ongoing communication and collaboration among relevant District agencies and outside agencies and partners.

See the Land Use Element for policies related to the siting of community facilities and mitigation of potential impacts.

1103.21a Text box: Food Hubs

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines a food hub as “a business or organization that actively manages the aggregation, distribution, and marketing of course-identified food products primarily from local and regional producers to strengthen their ability to satisfy wholesale, retail, and institutional demand.” (Source: USDA 2012 Regional Food Hub Resource Guide).

1103.22 Policy CSF-1.1.11: Developing a Food Systems Network

Support development of a system of food hub and processing centers where nutritious and local food can be aggregated, safely prepared, and efficiently distributed to District agencies, feeding sites, shelters for persons experiencing homelessness, schools, nonprofits, and local businesses for the District's normal institutional meal operations as well as leveraged for emergency feeding efforts during disaster events.

1103.23 Policy CSF-1.1.12: District-Owned Facilities and Shared Uses

Encourage the shared use of District-owned facilities, such as recreation centers, as sites that can support a variety of programs and activities. These can include community education about nutrition, nutrition entrepreneurship, and small business development; urban agriculture; cultural performance, production, and exhibition; and child development and care.

1103.24 Action CSF-1.1.A: Civic Facilities Plan

Continue to develop and refine the District’s multilayered approach to facilities master planning) so that adequate community facilities are provided for existing residents and can be provided for new neighborhoods in Washington, DC, including by providing guidance for the long-term (six-year) CIP and the annual capital budget. The approach should include an assessment of all District-owned or -maintained community facilities and property and should identify what improvements are needed to correct deficiencies and address planned growth and change in the District. The facilities plan should be continuously maintained and updated regularly with new priorities and timelines. As needed, the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to incorporate master facilities planning findings. As part of this work, the appropriate agency shall continue to annually collect and publish data on public school capacity and enrollments, recreation facilities, libraries, emergency medical service response time, sewers, green space, and public transit capacity, including bus routes and ridership statistics for Metrorail stations and lines as well as parking availability and traffic volumes on roads and at key intersections. These data should be used, as appropriate, when evaluating the need for facility and infrastructure improvements.

1103.25 Action CSF-1.1.B: Guidelines For Public Uses of Public Facilities

Develop unified District inventory of public facilities and establish guidelines that can help the District understand the adequacy of District-owned space for use by District agencies.

1103.26 Action CSF-1.1.C: Site Planning Procedures

Public facility planning shall include site planning and management procedures to mitigate adverse impacts on surrounding areas.

1103.27 Action CSF-1.1.D: Public Facilities Planning

Develop a Public Facilities Plan that helps to inventory, consolidate, and coordinate facility information across District agencies.

1103.28 Action CSF-1.1.E: Opportunities to Promote Local Food Businesses

Identify best practices and potential locations for food hubs, food business incubators, and community kitchens to expand healthy food access and food-based economic opportunity in underserved areas through co-location with job training, business incubation, and entrepreneurial assistance programs.

1103.29 Action CSF-1.1.F: Co-Location of Housing with Public Facilities

As part of facilities master planning and the CIP, conduct a review of and maximize any opportunities to co-locate mixed-income multi-family housing when there is a proposal for a new or substantially upgraded local public facility, particularly in high-cost areas.

1103.30 Action CSF-1.1.G: Universal Design

Create a working group comprised of relevant District agencies to explore the use of Universal Design standards in new and existing District facilities.

1103.31 Action CSF-1.1.H: Central Kitchen Facility

Explore the potential for establishment of a central kitchen facility, as required by the Healthy Students Act and subject to funding availability, which could function as a meal preparation site for the District’s institutional meal programs (e.g., schools, shelters for persons experiencing homelessness), an aggregation center for fresh food to be distributed to local businesses, and a job training facility, among other potential functions including emergency feeding.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1104** CSF-1.2 FUNDING AND COORDINATION {#sec-10-a1104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1104}

1104.1 The District’s CIP includes District-owned facilities (e.g., libraries, recreation centers, District offices, parking lots), District-owned equipment (e.g., police cars, fire trucks, snow removal equipment), and transportation infrastructure (e.g., roads, bridges, Metro). Washington, DC can maximize the strategic impact of these large investments by improving inter-disciplinary/cross-sector coordination and by linking them to neighborhood revitalization strategies, private investment plans, facilities master plans, and long-range growth plans. For example, District investments in transportation may be a key part of stimulating construction of a major new development. Investments in a new community center or school may be a pivotal component of commercial district renovation, and so on. The District has begun to formalize this relationship through policy links between the CIP and the Comprehensive Plan.

1104.2 The DC Office of Planning (OP) helps the District to develop and refine principles for capital planning and to coordinate links among long-range growth plans, facilities master plans, and the CIP.

1104.3 Policy CSF-1.2.1: Capital Improvement Programming

Continue to use the capital improvement program process to coordinate the phasing, prioritizing, and funding of public facilities.

1104.4 Policy CSF-1.2.2: Strengthening Links Between the Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program

Continue to improve links between the Comprehensive Plan and the District’s CIP through the Public Facilities Plan, which should be systematic, comprehensive, and based on analytical data about community needs, service levels, and projections, in addition to facility condition assessments. Additionally, provide relevant Comprehensive Plan and Public Facilities Plan guidance to individual agencies in earlier phases of their strategic planning, facilities master planning, and budget development processes, which can strengthen cross-links and add efficiencies to the District’s annual CIP and capital budget development process.

1104.5 Policy CSF-1.2.3: Construction and Rehabilitation

Continue to improve the coordination of public facility construction and rehabilitation projects to minimize public costs, maximize community benefits, and avoid service disruption.

1104.6 Policy CSF-1.2.4: Innovative Financing Strategies

Continue to explore alternative financing strategies for projects that provide public benefits, including public facilities. Strategies include ground leases, impact investing, joint development, creative leasing arrangements, and other financing instruments that have no effect on the District’s debt cap and can maximize financial performance and achieve public policy outcomes.

1104.7 Policy CSF-1.2.5: Planning for Maintenance and Operation

Continue to develop and fund adequate maintenance budgets for all public facilities based on industry standards. Evaluate projected operating and maintenance (O&M) costs before approving new capital facilities so that sufficient funds will be available for O&M once a new facility is constructed.

1104.8 Policy CSF-1.2.6: Impact Fees

Ensure that new development pays its fair share of the capital costs needed to build or expand public facilities to serve that development. Consider the use of impact fees for schools, libraries, and public safety facilities to implement this policy. Adoption of any fees shall take potential fiscal, economic, and real estate impacts into account and shall be preceded by the extensive involvement of the development community and the community at large.

1104.9 Action CSF-1.2.A: Capital Projects Evaluation

Continue to refine measurable criteria, standards, and systematic coordination procedures to evaluate capital improvement projects.

1104.10 Action CSF-1.2.B: Inventory of Lands Owned By or Under the Jurisdiction of the District

Continue to update and expand the District’s property management database, identifying the location, size, and attributes of all District-owned facilities and properties.

1104.11 Action CSF-1.2.C: Coordinate Facilities Master Planning with Public Facilities Planning

Improve facilities master planning processes and outcomes by coordinating facilities master planning efforts of individual agencies with public facilities planning efforts. This coordination can illuminate relationships and dynamics across systems, helping to inform the District’s public investments.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1105** CSF-2 HEALTH {#sec-10-a1105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1105}

1105.1 One of Washington, DC’s most important resources is the health of its residents. While many of the District’s residents and neighborhoods enjoy exceptional health, significant health disparities persist along dimensions of income, geography, race, gender, and age in the District.

1105.2 DC Health promotes health, wellness, and equity across the District and protects the safety of residents, visitors, and those doing business in the nation’s capital. The responsibilities of DC Health include identifying health risks; educating the public; preventing and controlling diseases, injuries, and exposure to environmental hazards; coordinating emergency response planning for public health emergencies; promoting effective community collaborations; and optimizing equitable access to community resources.

1105.2a Text box: Social and Structural Determinants of Health

The World Health Organization defines social and structural determinants of health (SSDH) as the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life. These forces and systems include economic policies and systems, development agendas, social norms, social policies, and political systems. The District has adopted this understanding of the larger factors that shape health and that influence the systems and conditions for health and outcomes, including health equity in the District.

1105.3 The DC Health Equity Report (HER) 2018 lays out a comprehensive baseline dataset of key drivers of health. Non-clinical determinants of health influence 80 percent of health outcomes, with the remaining 20 percent determined by clinical care (HER 2018). The nine drivers—education, employment, income, housing, transportation, food environment, medical care, outdoor environment, and community safety—were mapped thematically by statistical neighborhood (n=51) and overlaid with life expectancy estimates. There was a strong correlation between differences in life expectancy and differences in key driver outcomes by statistical neighborhood, underscoring the need for shared collective impact goals and practices across sectors and applied health in all policy approaches.

1105.4 While the 2006 Comprehensive Plan focused on advancing equitable access to health care services to address disparities in health outcomes, the District’s approach has evolved to better recognize and incorporate the role and effect of social and structural determinants on health. Thus, the Comprehensive Plan now seeks to improve population health by providing health-informed policy guidance for the future of Washington, DC’s built and natural environments. While policies contained in this section focus on the traditional health care infrastructure and clinical care service delivery system, transportation, housing, economic development, and other important social/structural determinants are addressed in other Comprehensive Plan Elements.

1105.5 This section of the Community Services and Facilities Element focuses on the adequacy, maintenance, and expansion of health care facilities as important contributors to the health of District residents, as well as the provision and improvement of human service facilities such as senior wellness centers. Recognizing that education and learning are lifelong endeavors and reflecting the District’s evolving approach to early childhood care and development, the childcare section was moved from this element to the Educational Facilities Element and retitled to “Child Development.”

1105.5a Text box: Health

Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. (Source: World Health Organization.)

1105.6 Planning for accessible and equitable health care facilities is complicated by a broad set of factors, including the changing nature of the nation’s health care delivery system and the District’s limited jurisdiction over private service providers. The Comprehensive Plan can inform and guide public and private investments in support of Washington, DC’s commitment to provide an adequate distribution of facilities and services that support the health of District residents, promote health equity across the District, and increase the District’s emergency preparedness. This includes measures to advance health through the design of Washington, DC and conservation of the environment.

1105.7 HER 2018 shows that there are differential opportunities for health across the District by income, geography, and race. The most racially and economically segregated neighborhoods are also at the extremes of life expectancy estimates, with majority Black (and low-income) populations experiencing the lowest life expectancies and majority White (and high-income) populations experiencing the highest life expectancies. Overall life expectancy at birth for Washington, DC residents increased from an average of 78 years in 2013 to 79 years in 2015, closing the gap with the U.S. estimate of 78.8 in the same year. All District wards experienced an improved life expectancy from 2010 to 2015, with the largest gain seen in Ward 6 and the smallest gain seen in Ward 7 (see Figure 11.1). However, when evaluating smaller geographic areas, the gap between the highest and the lowest life expectancy estimates increases to more than 21 years. Again, the social and structural determinants of health influenced by geography, race, and income level are major intersecting components that drive the differences in estimated life expectancy and other population health outcomes across Washington, DC.

1105.8 The 2020 public health emergency is anticipated to have broad impacts that can exacerbate existing inequities in the District, including disparate health effects. While the data in this chapter precede the 2020 health emergency, the policies contained in the Health and Health Equity section below address equity in a manner that supports the District’s response to and recovery from the 2020 health emergency in the near-term, and that provides guidance for shocks and stressors that may occur in the long-term. Additionally, social and structural determinants of health such as income, employment, housing and transportation, are also addressed in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

1105.9 Figure 11.1. Life Expectancy in 2010 and 2015 at Birth by Ward in the District of

Columbia

Sources: Data for the 2010 life expectancy estimates are drawn from DC Health’s 201 Community Health Needs Assessment. Data for 2015 are drawn from DC Health’ Draft/Unpublished HER.

**History**
- *Note: The 2010 and 2015 life expectancy estimates were calculated as the average of the current and preceding four years. Five-year averages are more reliable predictors of life expectancy estimates than single-year data points since the latter identify a trend over multiple years. 1105.10 Figure 11.2. Leading Causes of Death in the District of Columbia, 2015 (Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2015 Annual Report, DC Health) 1105.11 Compared to national trends, data from 2015 in Figure 11.3 indicates that Washington, DC has higher rates of heart disease mortality and homicide compared to the U.S. and a higher prevalence of stroke. However, a larger percentage of District residents report routine health care checkups compared to the U.S. average. Additionally, while HIV/AIDS incidence and mortality have decreased over the last decade, the rates are still at an epidemic level in the District, with a prevalence of 1.9 percent as of 2017. 1105.12 Notable trends displayed in the District’s 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) annual health report show a slight improvement among residents who receive preventive care and who take steps to prevent future illness. However, data trends from 2015 demonstrate a steady decline among Washington, DC residents who are overweight or obese. The variation in obesity rates is linked to access to healthy foods and to parks and recreation facilities. 1105.13 Figure 11.3. Top 10 Leading Causes of Death in the District of Columbia and the United States, Age-Adjusted Rates per 100,000 population, 2015 DC Health (Sources: Center for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation; DC Health; Xu, Jiaquan et al; Mortality in the United States, 2015; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.) 1105.14 Washington, DC has experienced improvements in perinatal health outcomes, such as a decline in infant mortality rate from 11.8 deaths per 1,000 births in 2009 to 7.1 in 2016. However, while the overall infant mortality rate has declined, significant disparities persist based on race and geography (Figure 11.4). In 2015, non-Hispanic Black mothers were five times more likely to experience infant mortality than non-Hispanic White mothers, and Hispanic mothers were 1.6 times more likely to experience infant mortality than non-Hispanic or White mothers in the District. 1105.15 Figure 11.4. Infant Mortality Rate per 1,000 Live Births, District of Columbia, 2010-2016 (DC Health, Perinatal Health Report, 2018) 1105.16 Figure 11.5: Newly Diagnosed HIV Cases, Deaths, and HIV Cases Living in the District by Year, 2011-2015 (Source: HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, Annual Epidemiology & Surveillance Report: Surveillance Data through December 2015, DC Health, 2017.) 1105.17 Figure 11.6: Proportion of HIV Cases Living in Washington, DC by Race/Ethnicity, Gender Identity, and Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia, 2015 (n = 13,391) (Source: HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, Annual Epidemiology & Surveillance Report: Surveillance Data through December 2015, DC Health, 2017.) 1105.18 As shown in Figure 11.5, approximately 1.9 percent of Washington, DC residents live with HIV (considered an epidemic level). While there were still newly diagnosed cases of HIV in 2017, this number declined significantly, by 31 percent from 2013 and by 73 percent from 2007. However, concerns remain as the populations with the highest rates of HIV are Black men and Black women. When examining residents living with HIV, 27 percent were Black men who have sex with other men and/or use injection drugs, 16 percent were heterosexual Black women, and 14 percent were White men who have sex with other men and/or use injection drugs in 2017.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 1105*

##### **10-A DCMR § 1106** CSF-2.1 HEALTH and HEALTH EQUITY {#sec-10-a1106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1106}

1106.1 Health equity is defined as the commitment to ensuring that everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be healthier. Many of the determinants of health and health inequities in populations have social, environmental, and economic origins that extend beyond the direct influence of the health sector and health policies. Thus, public policies in all sectors and at different levels of governance can have a significant impact on population health and health equity. Washington, DC is moving toward a Health in All Policies (HiAP) approach, a systems-wide, cross-sector consideration of health in government decision-making. This HiAP approach seeks to advance accountability, transparency, and access to information through cross-sector and multilevel collaboration in government.

1106.2 Access to affordable, equitable, quality clinical care and health behaviors are crucial for improving health outcomes. DC Health has advanced this framework through several strategic plans, including DC Healthy People 2020 (DC HP2020), the DC Health Systems Plan (HSP), and the DC State Health Innovation Plan (SHIP), and by continually developing and deploying innovative tools that help track and improve health outcomes.

1106.3 Further, Sustainable DC 2.0, a multi-agency initiative led by OP and the Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE), includes the goal of improving population health by systematically addressing the link between community health and place, including where people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age. Sustainable DC 2.0 sets a target of reducing racial disparities in the life expectancy of residents by 50 percent by 2032.

1106.4 The District has adopted an overarching framework of health equity. Achieving health equity requires an explicit focus on and targeting of societal structures and systems that prevent all people from achieving their best possible health, including poverty, discrimination, and lack of access to economic opportunities.

1106.5 Figure 11.7. Leading Health Indicator Chart, District of Columbia District of Columbia Healthy People 2020, Annual Report and Action Plan 2017-2019

(Source: Annual Report & Action Plan, 2017-2019, DC Healthy People 2020, DC Health)

1106.5a Text box: Strategic Planning and Implementation Frameworks for Improving Community Health

The approach of DC Health to population health improvement consists of cross-cutting plans and implementation frameworks that include DC HP2020, SHIP, and HSP.

1106.5b DC HP2020, adopted in 2016, sets goals and targets for health outcomes for the year 2020 (the District’s leading health indicators are shown in Figure 11.7) and provides evidence-based strategies to improve them. As of 2017, five percent of the leading health indicators in HP2020 were met, 50 percent improved, 25 percent had no change, and 20 percent worsened. SHIP, released in 2016, seeks to improve primary health care, better coordinate care for vulnerable residents, enhance patient care experience, and reduce costs. Finally, HSP, released in 2017, serves as the District’s roadmap for developing a comprehensive, accessible, equitable health care system through comprehensive assessment of community needs, provider capacity, and service gaps and strategies for strengthening health services.

1106.5c Together, these three plans identify the strategic needs and priorities essential to Washington, DC’s community health improvement agenda and advancing social and structural determinants of health for all residents. These plans are all informed by an equity lens, recognizing the importance of social and structural determinants in population health outcomes.

1106.5a1 Text box: Person-Centered Thinking and Cultural and Linguistic Competence

The District recognizes that person-centered thinking, cultural competence, and linguistic competence are keys to promoting equity in health. Person-centered thinking is a philosophy that encourages positive control and self-direction of people’s own lives. Cultural competency is the ability of District agencies to deliver services in a manner that affirms worth, preserves dignity, and honors the preferences and choices of people of all cultures and human identities in accordance with the DC Human Rights Act, which makes discrimination illegal based on 19 protected traits. Cultural competency also incorporates a person’s cultural values, beliefs, practices, mode of communication, and economic status, including sensitivity to the environment from which the person comes and to which the person may ultimately return, in all aspects of service delivery. Linguistic competence involves the District’s ability to communicate in a manner and through modes that can be easily understood by diverse groups, including but not exclusive to persons who have low literacy skills or are not literate, persons with disabilities, and persons who have limited and non-English proficiency.

1106.6 Policy CSF-2.1.1: Enhance Health Systems and Equity

Support the Strategic Framework for Improving Community Health, which seeks to improve public health outcomes while promoting equity across a range of social determinants that include health, race, gender, income, age and geography.

1106.7 Policy CSF-2.1.2: Advancing Inclusion for All People in the District

Promote person-centered thinking as well as linguistic and cultural competence across District agencies, especially those that deliver long-term services and supports. Inclusion can also be enhanced by improved cross-agency communications and coordination of service delivery to all residents.

1106.8 Policy CSF-2.1.3: Health in All Policies

Advance a health-forward approach that incorporates health considerations early in the District’s government planning processes.

1106.9 Action CSF-2.1.A: Public Health Goals

Continue efforts to set public health goals and track and evaluate key health indicators and outcomes.

1106.10 Action CSF-2.1.B: Primary Health Care Improvements

Intensify efforts to improve primary health care and enhance coordination of care for the District’s most vulnerable residents to improve health, enhance patient experience of care, and reduce health care costs.

1106.11 Action CSF-2.1.C: Health Care System Roadmap

Continue refining and implementing the District’s health care system roadmap for a more comprehensive, accessible, equitable system that provides the highest quality services in a cost-effective manner to those who live and work in the District.

1106.12 Action CSF-2.1.D: Advance People-Centered Thinking and Cultural and Linguistic Competency

Enhance and expand training of District agency employees regarding people-centered thinking and cultural and linguistic competency.

1106.13 Action CSF-2.1.E: Built Environment and Health Outcomes

Explore tools that can help decision-makers, practitioners, and Washington, DC residents to better understand how changes in the built environment can affect human health. Such tools can include Health Impact Assessments (HIAs).

1106.14 Action CSF-2.1.F: Advancing Grocery Store Access in Underserved Areas

Enhance healthy food access, address diet-related health disparities, and generate economic and social resilience by supporting the development of locally owned, community-driven grocery stores in areas with low access to healthy food options. Such support should include targeted financing, technical assistance, and co-location with new mixed-use developments.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1107** CSF-2.2 HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND RESILIENCE {#sec-10-a1107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1107}

1107.1 Healthy communities, where social and structural determinants of health are met and supported, are also resilient communities. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), “health is a key foundation of resilience because almost everything we do to prepare for disaster and preserve infrastructure is ultimately in the interest of preserving human health and welfare.” Communities with poor health outcomes and disparities in disease incidence, physical activity levels, and healthy food and health care access are more vulnerable and slower to recover from major shocks and chronic stressors. When these social and structural determinants of health are addressed, communities improve their ability to withstand and recover from disaster, becoming more resilient.

1107.2 While much focus is given to the vulnerability of the built environment and physical systems, underlying social and economic conditions of communities also play a significant role in their ability to recover rapidly from system shocks, such as extreme weather events, public health emergencies, or security incidents. Thus, community resilience is directly related to the ability of a community to use its assets to improve the physical, behavioral, and social conditions to withstand, adapt to, and recover from adversity.

1107.3 Given the strong links among resilience and community health, equity, and social cohesion, communities can employ multiple strategies to become more resilient, including improving access to health care facilities and social services, increasing access to healthy foods, expanding communication and collaboration within communities so that individuals can help each other during adverse events, and providing equitable disaster planning and recovery, recognizing that some areas of the District will be more heavily impacted than others due to existing socioeconomic conditions and other factors. These cross-cutting components of resilience and public health are addressed with policies that are contained throughout the Comprehensive Plan. While this section focuses on health facilities and services, it is important to understand these within the broader context of health in all policies, equity, and resilience.

1107.4 Policy CSF-2.2.1: Behavioral Health and Resilience

Leverage the links between behavioral health and the resilience of individuals to bolster District efforts to build community resilience. These factors include programs and activities that enhance the well-being of Washington, DC residents by preventing or intervening in behavioral health issues, depression or anxiety, and substance abuse. These and other measures can strengthen the ability of individuals, households, and neighborhoods to be prepared for and recover from potential emergencies and disasters.

1107.5 Action CSF-2.2.A: Assessing Disparities and Supporting Recovery Strategies from Adverse Events

Assess the impacts of adverse events on communities with varying socioeconomic characteristics and levels of vulnerability. Track disparities in impacts to help inform response and recovery strategies aimed at reducing inequity and strengthening communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1108** CSF-2.3 HEALTH FACILITIES AND SERVICES {#sec-10-a1108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1108}

1108.1 Over the last decade, the District focused public health efforts on expanding primary care across Washington, DC. During this time, the District invested over $71 million in the construction of new state-of-the-art primary care facilities and the renovation of existing primary care facilities across Washington, DC. DC Health funded a total of 15 medical home-focused capital expansion projects between 2006 and 2016 in seven of the District’s eight wards (1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8). Twelve of these 15 projects were completed in collaboration with the District of Columbia Primary Care Association (DCPCA), a nonprofit health care and advocacy organization dedicated to improving the health of Washington, DC’s vulnerable residents by ensuring access to high-quality primary health care, regardless of one’s ability to pay. DCPCA has worked for more than a decade to enlarge and enhance the network of community health centers and to improve access to non-emergency care regardless of one’s ability to pay.

1108.2 These past investments have increased provider capacity throughout Washington, DC. The strategic focus needs to emphasize coordinated, patient-centered care: the right care, at the right time, in the right place. Looking to the future, the District should invest in addressing the underlying factors that pose persistent barriers, including factors that lead to the underuse of preventive services, while retaining emergency care capacity.

1108.3 While health care coverage in the District was already high after the 2006 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, implementation of the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010 provided more residents with increased access to health insurance—leading to Washington, DC achieving the second-highest coverage rate in the nation in 2017. As highlighted in the District’s 2017 HSP, the ACA led to early expansion of Medicaid in the District, which in turn raised health insurance coverage to 93 percent of adult residents and 96 percent of children residing in the District. While significant strides have been made, Washington, DC residents, particularly residents of color, continue to face barriers to accessing some types of health care. Promoting health care coverage and appropriate use of services for all its residents therefore continues to be a challenge in the District.

1108.4 Washington, DC is fortunate to have many health care facilities, including full-service hospitals, primary care health centers, long-term care facilities, and assisted living residences (ALRs). Additionally, as shown in Figure 11.8, in 2017 there were 161 pharmacies and a variety of outpatient private medical facilities in Washington, DC that offer an expanding range of services. However, with the changing demographic and health care services landscape, new needs and gaps have emerged.

1108.5 Hospitals are an important part of the health care delivery system. Numerous hospitals provide services to Washington, DC residents, including large full-service facilities, such as the George Washington University Hospital, the Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, and the Medstar Washington Hospital Center, and more specialized facilities such as the Psychiatric Institute of Washington. The text box to the right includes a list of existing hospitals located within Washington, DC.

1108.5a Text box: Hospitals in the District of Columbia as of 2019

BridgePoint Capitol Hill Hospital (Long-Term Acute Care)

BridgePoint National Harbor Hospital (Long-Term Acute Care)

Children’s National Medical Center (Acute Care)

Hospital for Sick Children Pediatric Center (Specialty Care)

Howard University Hospital (Acute Care)

Medstar Georgetown University Medical Center (Acute Care)

Medstar National Rehabilitation Hospital (Rehab Services)

Medstar Washington Hospital Center (Acute Care)

Psychiatric Institute of Washington (Behavioral Health)

St. Elizabeths Hospital (Behavioral Health)

Sibley Memorial Hospital (Acute Care)

The George Washington University Hospital (Acute Care)

United Medical Center (Acute Care)

14. Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

1108.6 The distribution of these facilities across Washington, DC is presently uneven, with most hospital beds on the west side of the District and only one planned full-service hospital in Wards 7 and 8.

1108.7 In addition to hospitals, the District counts on a broad array of facilities that provide a wide range of health care and health services. Many of these facilities provide services that enable Washington, DC residents to age in their communities. As of 2017, the District has 12 ALRs, which provide long-term care in the form of housing, health, and personalized assistance. However, ALRs are not distributed throughout the District and ALR fees may exceed the means of many District residents. Some Washington, DC residents who are not eligible to receive Medicaid benefits find it challenging to pay for ALR care. Many smaller, private-pay ALR providers closed their doors in recent years due to their inability to meet regulatory requirements or attain financial support.

1108.8 Prior to the advent of ALRs in 2009, the District had approximately 20 homes licensed as Community Residence Facilities (CRFs), most located in Wards 7 and 8 and catering to low-income residents. However, there has been a steady decline in the number of CRFs, as most of them converted to ALRs. In 2017, three CRFs remain in business, and while they provide support in a safe, hygienic, and protective living arrangement, today’s CRF residents generally require a lower level of care and services than those residing in ALRs. However, that, too, is changing, as CRF residents who also wish to age in place find that their support needs are becoming more intensive and costly. In addition to facilities, it is important to consider the growing need for health care workers, including home health care workers, to provide the services that offer older adults care and housing options, including aging in place at home.

1108.9 In addition to CRFs and ALRs, Washington, DC’s four hospices and 18 nursing facilities continue to provide care and services to those who meet admission criteria. Two facilities provide hospice care where the patient resides, including their home or a long-term care facility. The District continues to support development of hospices and other long-term care facilities to serve those with a need for these services.

1108.10 For a more detailed picture of health service facilities in the District, please see Figure 11.8, Health Service Facilities in the District.

1108.11 Figure 11.8. Health Services Facilities in the District

(Source: DC Health, 2017)

1108.12 The 2017 HSP aims to provide the equitable geographic distribution of community health care facilities throughout Washington, DC. The primary means of achieving this goal is the Certificate of Need (CON) Program, which reviews proposals for the establishment and/or expansion of health care facilities and services in the District. An upcoming Primary Care Needs Assessment will provide greater clarity concerning the relationship between facilities and services and how these can better meet the needs of the District population.

1108.13 In addition, the District’s Health Strategic Framework emphasizes the importance of applying evidence-based programs for special populations with chronic and complex conditions and promotes healthy aging. DDS and DACL are well-positioned to support implementation of these key goals through their plans and programming. DC Health also supports policies to better coordinate resident- and patient-centered services for residents.

1108.14 Policy CSF-2.3.1: Primary and Emergency Care

Ensure that high-quality, affordable primary health care, preventive health, and urgent care centers are available and accessible to all District residents. Medical facilities should be geographically distributed so that all residents have safe, convenient access to such services. Priority should be given to improving accessibility and quality of services at existing facilities/centers. New or rehabilitated health care facilities, where warranted, should be developed in medically underserved and/or high-poverty neighborhoods and in areas with high populations of older adults, persons with disabilities, persons experiencing homelessness, and others with unmet health care needs.

1108.15 Policy CSF-2.3.2: Public-Private Partnerships

Develop public-private partnerships to build and operate a strong, cohesive network of community health centers in areas with few providers or health programs.

1108.16 Policy CSF-2.3.3: Coordination to Better Serve Older Adults and Residents With Disabilities

Design and coordinate health, housing, and human services to foster the maximum degree of independence for older adults and persons with disabilities.

1108.17 Policy CSF-2.3.4: Connecting for New Families

Encourage the creation and implementation of initiatives that can improve health care navigation for new families.

1108.18 Policy CSF-2.3.5: Development and Coordination of Behavioral Health Issues and Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities

Coordinate development of an adequate number of equitably distributed and conveniently located behavioral health issues and substance abuse treatment facilities to provide easily accessible, high-quality services to those District residents in need of such services. DC HP2020 identified behavioral health issues as the District’s number one priority.

1108.19 Policy CSF-2.3.6: Health Care Planning

Continue to use strategic plans to improve community health. These plans integrate demographic forecasts and health data to prepare for Washington, DC’s socio-economic changes and growth.

1108.20 Policy CSF-2.3.7: Hospices and Long-Term Care Facilities

Support the development of hospices and other long-term care facilities for persons with advanced HIV/AIDS, cancer, and other disabling illnesses, such as dementia, including Alzheimer’s.

1108.21 Policy CSF-2.3.8: Increasing Supply of Facilities That Support Assisted Living

Promote expansion of the supply of facilities that provide assisted living services in Washington, DC. These include ALRs and CRFs, as well as adult daycare facilities. Encourage actions to expand the workforce numbers and appropriate skills of health care workers, including home health care workers, to support aging in place and assisted living.

1108.22 Policy CSF-2.3.9: Improving Access to Long-Term Supports and Services for Vulnerable Populations

Continue to improve access to long-term supports and services (LTSS) for vulnerable populations, including people with disabilities, older adults and their families, and members of the LGBTQ+ community. Enhance the network of government and nonprofit organizations that provide LTSS to these individuals and seek to improve their experience.

1108.23 Policy CSF-2.3.10: Prioritize Investment in High-Quality Health Care Services for Underserved Residents in Wards 7 and 8

Prioritize investment in high-quality health care services for residents, specifically for residents living in Wards 7 and 8, by developing a new acute care community hospital and health services complex at the St. Elizabeths East campus in Ward 8. Support the medical education, research, and technology uses that the new hospital and health services complex aims to provide.

1108.24 Action CSF-2.3.A: Review Zoning Issues

Continue to review and assess zoning regulations to identify barriers to, and create opportunities for, increased access to primary care facilities and neighborhood clinics, including through the reuse of existing non-residential buildings in residential zones, after a public review and approval process that provides an opportunity to address neighborhood impacts.

1108.25 Action CSF-2.3.B: Increase Supply of Assisted Living Residential Facilities (ALRs) and of Community Residential Facilities (CRFs)

Explore a variety of approaches for increasing the number of CRFs, as well as small and mid-size ALR facilities, in underrepresented areas and areas of high need in the District. These approaches can include financial strategies and partnerships, as well as regulatory reform. Work to increase community awareness of these needs.

1108.26 Action CSF-2.3.C: Connecting District Residents to Resources

Continue to maintain a digital resource portal that disseminates resources on a cross-agency basis to better connect people with government and community-based health resources.

1108.27 Action CSF-2.3.D: Improving Coordination and Service Delivery Among District Agencies

Explore the potential to create and implement a cross-agency case management system that can enhance coordination among relevant agencies to improve service delivery to persons with disabilities, older adults, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and other vulnerable populations.

1108.28 Action CSF-2.3.E: Health in All Policies

To the extent possible, relevant District agencies should evaluate the potential impact of their policies and actions on population health and align these with strategies identified in Sustainable DC 2.0 and in the 2017-2019 Action Plan of DC HP2020.

1108.29 Action CSF-2.3.F: No Wrong Door/DC Support Link

Continue to develop a person- and family-centered and linguistically and culturally responsive No Wrong Door system (also known as DC Support Link) across District agencies that can better support the needs of people with disabilities, older adults, and their families by providing them with links to government and community-based resources, such as LTSS, regardless of their point of entry into the District’s service system.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1109** CSF-2.4 SENIOR/OLDER ADULT CARE {#sec-10-a1109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1109}

1109.1 The population of older adults or seniors (persons 60 years of age and older) is expected to continue to grow at a steady rate and to be the fastest growing segment of the District’s population during the next 15 to 20 years. Although DACL and several affiliated nonprofit organizations already provide a comprehensive system of health care, education, employment, and social services for Washington, DC’s older adult population, these entities may be hard pressed to keep up with demand as the number of older adults in the District rises. The 2017 older adult population of 118,275 (17 percent of the total population) is forecasted to rise to 132,648 in 2025 and to 141,381 by 2030. As of 2017, about 36 percent of the District’s older adults 65 years and older live alone. Some 37.4 percent of older adult households have no personal vehicle, and 36.5 percent have some type of disability. The largest percentages of older adults are in Rock Creek West and Rock Creek East. Many are homeowners, caring for their properties on a fixed income. Others are primary caregivers for their grandchildren, facing the challenge of raising a family as they age.

1109.1a Text box: Seniors and Older Adults

Washington, DC residents have expressed mixed preferences regarding use of the word “senior” compared with older adults to refer to persons 60 and over. Since many District programs and facilities have the word “senior” in their titles, both approaches are used interchangeably in this section of the Comprehensive Plan.

1109.1a1 Text box: Age-Friendly DC

Age-Friendly DC is part of the World Health Organization’s Network of Age- Friendly Cities and AARP’s Network of Age-Friendly Cities and Communities. The initiative aims to prepare the built environment, change attitudes about growing older and lifelong health and security to better accommodate the growing numbers of older adults in Washington, DC, and promote healthy aging and purposeful living at every age. The Age-Friendly DC effort began in October 2012 and resulted in the 2012-2017 Age-Friendly DC Strategic Plan. In 2017, the World Health Organization and AARP recognized Washington, DC as a “Top City in Age-Friendly Policies.” Building upon the success of its first five-year planning and implementation cycle, the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services released the 2018-2023 Age-Friendly DC Strategic Plan in October 2018.

This plan, which guides the work of the initiative, outlines a number of strategies for the District to pursue across 14 domains:

Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

Transportation

Housing

Social Participation

Respect and Social Inclusion

Civic Participation and Employment

Communication and Information

Community Support and Health Services

Emergency Preparedness and Resilience

Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Fraud

Financial Security

Lifelong Learning

Public Safety

14) Caregiving.

1109.2 The policies below focus on the importance of senior wellness centers and other services and care facilities for older adults. As of 2017, there were six senior wellness centers located across the District. A variety of services, programs, and opportunities for socialization are delivered from these facilities, including nutrition, exercise, health care, creative arts, and education. Future reinvestment will deploy a more decentralized approach and feature more partnerships with DPR, faith-based groups, and community organizations with a focus on promoting intergenerational and other satellite activities for isolated residents, thereby serving the District’s growing senior population and enhancing their quality of life.

See also the Transportation; Urban Design; Parks, Recreation, and Open Space; and Housing Elements for additional policies about older adults/seniors.

1109.3 Policy CSF-2.4.1: Senior/Older Adult Care Facilities Programming

Develop new programming and activities at existing community facilities, including faith-based institutions, health facilities, libraries, recreation centers, and parks. Explore partnerships with District youth to increase interaction and learning across generations. Attain community input on preferences and needs for fitness and wellness.

1109.4 Policy CSF-2.4.2: All-Inclusive Care for Seniors/Older Adults

Encourage the development of neighborhood-based, interdisciplinary, holistic models of care that promote community living and independence.

1109.5 Policy CSF-2.4.3: Senior Wellness Centers

Maintain and upgrade the District’s six senior wellness centers, helping ensure they continue to promote the health and wellness of residents 60 years of age and older across Washington, DC.

1109.6 Policy CSF-2.4.4: Age-Friendly Built Environment Strategies

Advance built environment strategies that support lifelong health and security for residents of all ages. Examples of such strategies include improvements to lighting, signage, and accessibility and safety of roads, sidewalks, and recreational

paths for older adults.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1110** CSF-3 LIBRARIES AND INFORMATION SERVICES {#sec-10-a1110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1110}

1110.1 As one of world’s leading centers of information and knowledge, Washington, DC has a state-of-the-art public library system, which combines high-quality physical buildings with new technology, an expanded online presence, inviting public spaces for meetings and gatherings, and programs and collections that meet the needs of all residents, including immigrants and other newcomers to Washington, DC. The District’s libraries help children succeed in school and adults improve their reading skills, while supporting career advancement and life enrichment goals. The District aspires to nothing less than greatness as it creates a library system that demonstrates Washington, DC’s commitment to meeting the educational, cultural, and lifelong learning needs of all of its residents.

1110.2 Washington, DC’s public library system is planned and managed by DCPL, an independent agency. The Board of Library Trustees sets policy for DCPL. Its nine members are unpaid District residents appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council for a maximum of two five-year terms. There are currently 26 library facilities, including the central Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library, and 25 neighborhood libraries.

1110.3 Since 2006, there has been significant investment in library buildings, technology, books, and other materials, as well as expanded programming and hours of operation. Nineteen of the 26 facilities are entirely new or have been fully renovated; multiple are in design or under construction; and DCPL intends to modernize the remaining facilities thereafter. The DCPL system now boasts four million visits a year. From 2008 to 2016, the number of materials borrowed annually increased by 250 percent, the number of public access computers increased by 150 percent, and the number of active library accounts increased by more than 60 percent.

1110.4 In late 2005, the Mayor’s Task Force on the Future of the District of Columbia Public Library System produced a Blueprint for Change that recommended rebuilding the library system from the ground up. That report made two fundamental recommendations:

(1) To revitalize DCPL’s neighborhood libraries to meet 21st-century opportunities; and

(2) To build a new Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library tha inspires and empowers.

1110.5 Implementation of the first recommendation has been underway over the last decade, while the second is now in progress. The District is working to enhance the library’s role as a community learning hub, with neighborhood branches serving diverse neighborhoods in different ways.

1110.6 In 2017, DCPL released a Strategic Plan, Know Your Neighborhood, that outlines priorities, goals, and initiatives through 2021. The plan follows an intensive community outreach process that engaged with more than 2,000 residents. The plan identifies four priority areas:

Reading: Support new readers and cultivate a love of learning;

Digital Citizenship: Prepare residents for life online;

Strong Communities: Neighborhood libraries should be vital centers of community learning and civic engagement; and

(4) Local History and Culture: Foster understanding and appreciation of what makes Washington, DC unique.

1110.7 The DCPL Strategic Plan also includes a focus on stewardship so that each library is responsive to community needs. DCPL is also seeking external funding and resources to deepen the library’s impact and is working to increase awareness of libraries and the services they provide among constituents. Three key metrics have been established to measure future success: (i) 75 percent of all District residents with active library accounts, (ii) five million library items borrowed annually, and (iii) five million visits to library locations and outreach events annually.

1110.8 Reinvestment in the library system is transforming the role of the library, making it a neighborhood focal point and gathering place, rather than simply a repository for books. Washington, DC has embraced the principle of Know Your Neighborhood, aiming for each neighborhood library to be responsive to and reflective of the distinctive communities it serves and tailoring its services and programs to reflect local needs. The library is envisioned as a haven for learning and civic expression and a place that enables residents in each neighborhood to meet their information and learning needs. In addition, each branch library should provide a home for cultural events, classes and programs, and community activities. Libraries are also envisioned as keepers of the story of each District neighborhood, providing a window into local history and culture.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1111** CSF-3.1 LIBRARY FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1111 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1111}

1111.1 Map 11.1 shows the location of DCPL facilities as of 2017. As noted earlier, the current system includes the central library and 25 branches.

1111.1a Text box: DC Public Library System

As of 2018, DCPL is one of a few large urban library systems in the country that is open seven days per week in all locations. Nineteen of its 26 facilities are new or fully renovated, with many in some stage of design or construction. The system boasts four million annual visits from individuals who use the library’s technology, meeting rooms, books, and digital resources in record numbers. The library looks to build on this progress in the years to come.

1111.2 In 2017, the District began a $208 million modernization of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library. This three-year project will preserve and restore Mies Van Der Rohe’s notable glass and steel library building exterior but significantly alter much of the interior to accommodate new programs and functions that could not have been imagined when the building was designed in the late 1960s. The renovation will add creative spaces, a café, new space for special collections and exhibitions, a double-height reading room, and a rooftop event space and terrace. As of 2019, four of the six remaining modernizations are in some stage of design or construction: Southeast, Southwest, Lamond-Riggs, and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library. Funding has not yet been allocated for the remaining two modernizations: Chevy Chase and Shepherd Park libraries.

1111.2a Text box: Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library

Washington, DC’s modernized flagship library will include a spectacular new, vibrant, and transparent entryway; sculptured, monumental stairs; a large auditorium and conference center; creative spaces for fabrication, music production, and art creation; a ground-level café with patio; a double-height reading room; a newly designed special collections space for researchers and research enthusiasts; and a rooftop events space with a terrace.

1111.3 In addition to ongoing modernization work, DCPL continues to focus on improving access to library materials for all users, including students, educators, persons with disabilities, adult learners, and English language learners.

1111.4 Map 11.1: DCPL Sites

(Source: District of Columbia Public Libraries, 2017)

1111.5 Policy CSF-3.1.1: State-of-the-Art Public Library System

Ensure that the District has a state-of-the-art Central Library and branch libraries that meet the information and lifelong learning needs of District residents.

1111.6 Policy CSF-3.1.2: Libraries as Civic Infrastructure

Recognize libraries as valuable public infrastructure that support residents of all ages through intellectual development, workforce development, and cultural activation, programming, and exchange.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1111.7 Policy CSF-3.1.3: Providing Flexible Spaces in Libraries

Encourage library facilities to incorporate multidisciplinary arts, heritage, and cultural programming by providing flexible spaces for meetings, displays, and presentations and, where feasible, dedicated spaces for learning and producing cultural work.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1111.8 Policy CSF-3.1.4: Tailoring Libraries to the Neighborhoods They Serve

Encourage library functions, services, and spaces to be tailored in accordance with each neighborhood’s needs.

1111.9 Policy CSF-3.1.5: Promote Libraries as Keepers of Local Heritage and Culture

Support libraries as community and cultural anchors that can preserve local history.

1111.10 Policy CSF-3.1.6: Supporting Immigrants

Continue to support immigrants to Washington, DC by providing welcoming spaces and materials, resources, and programs in multiple languages as part of DCPL offerings.

1111.11 Action CSF-3.1.A: Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library Modernization

Complete the modernization of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial (Central) Library, which serves as a vital center of Washington, DC’s education and civic life. The modernization will accommodate state-of-the-art library services and technology and enhance public space both within and outside the building. The Central Library should continue to be an architectural civic landmark — a destination and gathering place for residents from across the District.

1111.12 Action CSF-3.1.B: Branch Libraries

Complete the remaining modernization of Washington, DC’s branch libraries. Each neighborhood library should provide a safe and inviting space with services and programs tailored to meet the needs of local residents. Each branch library should be designed to be flexible to provide a variety of offerings and have a clearly visible entrance and an open, inviting, and attractive facade.

1111.13 Action CSF-3.1.C: Library Funding

Continue to explore new, dedicated funding sources for the O&M of each library. This includes annual funding for collections development and programming; programs and services, including literacy, cultural, and computer training programs; and building repair and maintenance.

1111.14 Action CSF-3.1.D: Libraries and Local History

Implement initiatives such as oral histories, historic archives and collections, and Know Your Neighborhood programs throughout the library system. Such initiatives should foster a deeper understanding of local history and culture, enabling residents to explore and understand their community and District.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1111.15 Action CSF-3.1.E: Archival Materials

Provide appropriate access to archival and historical materials of Washington, DC.

1111.16 Action CSF-3.1.F: Facilities Master Plan

Develop a Facilities Master Plan to inform future decisions on the libraries’ physical campuses and so that libraries are planned and designed to maximize their value to the community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1112** CSF-3.2 LIBRARY LOCATION {#sec-10-a1112 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1112}

1112.1 The recent modernization of branch libraries creates an exciting opportunity for many Washington, DC neighborhoods. High-quality public libraries can help anchor neighborhood and corridor reinvestment efforts. Libraries can also support many of the other goals articulated in the Comprehensive Plan, including creating space for the arts, bringing communities together across generations, providing job training and literacy programs, and promoting high-quality civic design. While recent public investment in libraries has been substantial, additional investment may be leveraged through public-private partnerships that connect library improvements to new housing and mixed-use projects.

1112.2 Policy CSF-3.2.1: Location of Branch Libraries

Locate branch libraries in a systematic way to maximize access for the greatest number of Washington, DC residents, including future residents who will reside in planned new neighborhoods. This approach may result in the development of new libraries in growing population centers within the District. Coordinate the location of future branch libraries with District-wide cross-systems public facilities planning.

1112.3 Policy CSF-3.2.2: Public-Private Partnerships for Libraries

Explore public-private partnerships to fund the construction of new libraries, including the development of new and remodeled libraries within mixed-use projects on existing library sites. In such cases, any redevelopment should conform to the other provisions of this Comprehensive Plan, including the preservation of usable neighborhood open space.

See also Policy CSF-1.1.9 on public facilities co-location and the Urban Design Element for policies on the design of public facilities.

1112.4 Policy CSF-3.2.3: Libraries and Neighborhood Identity

Neighborhood libraries should be vital centers of community learning and interaction. Library meeting space, conference space, and study space should support the role of the library as a neighborhood anchor. The services and programs offered at each library should enhance community identity and civic pride and create a safe place for all residents and families.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1112.5 Policy CSF-3.2.4: Libraries as Neighborhood Anchors

Encourage library modernization and new construction to support corridor reinvestment efforts, create spaces for arts and culture, bring together multigenerational communities, provide job training and literacy programs, promote high-quality civic design, and create partnerships that connect library improvements to new housing and mixed-use projects.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1112.6 Policy CSF-3.2.5: Libraries and Mixed-Uses

When feasible, locate and integrate District-owned library facilities in mixed-use facilities, such as those containing in-line retail, housing, or office uses. This can help induce programmatic links that enhance the public impact of libraries.

1112.7 Policy CSF-3.2.6: Cultural Spaces in Libraries

Encourage provision of spaces for cultural expression, performance, and production in libraries, especially as part of modernization or new construction. These spaces can be configured to support activities, such as maker spaces, art exhibits, and cultural events and performances.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for related policies.

1112.8 Action CSF-3.2.A: Optimizing Library Services on an Ongoing Basis

Periodically evaluate library use and services through DCPL Needs Assessments and make appropriate service adjustments to position DCPL to meet the needs of the community on an ongoing basis. Data on library use, services, program attendance, and material checkouts should be used to inform decisions about programming, facilities, and technology.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1113** CSF-4 Public Safety {#sec-10-a1113 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1113}

1113.1 Public safety affects Washington, DC residents’ lives and activities across multiple dimensions that collectively have a significant effect on quality of life. Over the past decade, the District experienced significant reductions in crime, particularly violent crime. Between 2009 and 2016, violent crime decreased more than 20 percent, while the District’s population grew by more than 10 percent. Despite these public safety improvements, there are neighborhoods across the District that regularly still experience violent crime, substantially reducing the quality of life for residents and businesses.

1113.2 Fire and emergency medical services are essential to preserving life and property, to responding to natural and human-made hazards, and to providing pre-hospital medical care and transport for its residents and visitors with medical emergencies. The District’s ability to respond quickly may be affected as its population grows and its streets become more congested. Competing demands for water and deteriorating infrastructure may also affect firefighting capacity.

1113.3 Public safety personnel keep the District functioning during major public events, ranging from inaugurations to demonstrations to street fairs. The operations of MPD and Capitol Police, transit police, and others are essential to maintaining public safety (see text box to the left for an overview of major law enforcement providers in the District).

1113.4 Public safety facilities are aging, with many in need of replacement. A 2014 assessment of police and fire facilities found that 30 percent had inadequate space and that approximately 40 percent are more than 75 years old. The number of facilities rated as being in good condition decreased by 13 percent between 2009 and 2014. Even buildings in relatively good condition may now lack the infrastructure needed to support modern and emerging technology and telecommunications functions. Public facilities represent one symbolic face of Washington, DC to the public—they should not only be highly functional but also promote positive neighborhood identity and elicit confidence in the government.

1113.4a Text box: Policing the National Capital

Numerous police and security forces besides the MPD are responsible for security and law enforcement in the nation’s capital. Some of the most prominent are:

The United States Park Police is a unit of the Department of the Interior, National Park Service. It provides law enforcement services to designated areas within the National Park Service around the country, including National Park Service areas within and around Washington, DC.

The U.S. Capitol Police protect the Congress and enforce traffic regulations throughout the large complex of congressional buildings, parks, and roadways around the U.S. Capitol.

The United States Secret Service is a unit of the Department of Homeland Security. The Secret Service has primary jurisdiction over the protection of the President, Vice President, their immediate families, other high-ranking government officials, and visiting foreign heads of state and government.

The Metro Transit Police Department provides a variety of law enforcement and public safety services on the Metrorail and Metrobus systems in the Washington metropolitan area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1114** CSF-4.1 POLICE FACILITIES AND SERVICES {#sec-10-a1114 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1114}

1114.1 MPD is the primary law enforcement agency for Washington, DC. The District is divided into seven Police Districts and 56 Police Service Areas (PSAs) that provide the basic building blocks for community policing. Map 11.2 shows the police districts, the PSAs, and the location of police stations as of 2017. In addition to police headquarters in the Henry J. Daly Building, there are seven police stations, three substations, and a variety of additional facilities, including the Metropolitan Police Academy, impoundment lot, and evidence control warehouse.

1114.2 In addition to MPD, the Protective Services Division (PSD) of DGS is a police force responsible for law enforcement activities and physical security of all properties owned or leased by the District, or otherwise under its control. PSD’s mission is executed through direct staffing at critical locations, response and monitoring of contract security guards, and electronic security systems.

1114.3 Change or growth within Washington, DC’s neighborhoods, including the development of new housing areas, requires periodic assessments of MPD facilities and personnel needs. In 2015, DGS released a needs assessment that included space estimates for replacing many of MPD’s administrative and training facilities as well as adding correctional facilities and fire/emergency medical services (EMS) facilities. The District will determine an approach to renovating the Daly Building, including opportunities for a public-private partnership that enables efficiencies and cost savings.

1114.3a Text box: A Safer, Stronger DC

Launched in 2015, A Safer, Stronger DC is an innovative initiative that integrates outreach with community building, support, and stabilization, as well as public health and economic opportunity, to foster a holistic community-based model for violence prevention and public safety for neighborhoods that have been hardest hit by crime. This initiative provides intensive focus on families and individuals likely to become victims or perpetrators of crime while also providing improved re-entry services and job training for formerly incarcerated individuals. Through investments in education, employment, home and business security, emergency response, public safety, and criminal justice system diversion programs, the District has focused on addressing the causes of violence and laid the foundation for District residents to live in communities where they feel safe and supported. The initiative has also strengthened connections between communities and the agencies, investments, and programs that serve them. Together, these measures help make Washington, DC safer and stronger.

1114.3a1 Text box: Critical Physical Facilities and Infrastructure in Washington, DC Within Washington, DC a network of facilities provides essential support functions in case of disasters and emergencies. Critical facilities and infrastructure, such as government buildings, utility plants, fiber optic telecommunications lines, highways, bridges, and tunnels, are critical assets to the continuity of operations within the District. These facilities are considered critical in maintaining the overall functionality of the District’s emergency services network. These facilities are essential in ensuring the provision of infrastructure, critical systems, and other government services. In the event of a disaster that compromises any of these structures or services, the cascading effects could be detrimental. During such a breakdown, an effective response will depend on the adaptability of the whole community, including District residents, first responders, and emergency managers.

1114.3a2 The restoration of services to these facilities is essential to successful response and recovery operations. In addition to the District government structure and facilities, Washington, DC is home to the three branches of the federal government and numerous structures and spaces of national symbolic prominence. While these are federal assets, it is incumbent upon District government officials to collaborate with federal partners to mitigate loss.

See also the Infrastructure Element for information on critical facilities.

1114.4 Policy CSF-4.1.1: Updated Police Facilities

Provide updated and modern police facilities to meet the public safety needs of current and future Washington, DC residents, businesses, workers, and visitors.

1114.5 Map 11.2. Police Stations, Police Districts, and PSA, as of 2017

(Source: MPD, 2017)

1114.6 Policy CSF-4.1.2: Coordination of Public Facility Planning and Management with PSD

Coordinate physical security risk assessments with PSD at the onset of, and throughout the process of, modernization, use changes, or new development of lands and buildings controlled by the District.

1114.7 Policy CSF-4.1.3: Cross-Sector Partnerships to Support A Safer, Stronger DC

Continue to build partnerships and advance community outreach and support, community stabilization, community building, economic opportunity, and public health objectives to reduce violence in those neighborhoods most affected by it.

1114.8 Policy CSF-4.1.4: Public-Private Partnerships for Police Facilities

Explore public-private partnerships to fund the construction of new police facilities, including the development of new and remodeled police stations within mixed-use projects on existing police station sites. In such cases, any redevelopment should conform to the other provisions of this Comprehensive Plan, including the preservation of usable neighborhood open space.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1115** CSF-4.2 FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES {#sec-10-a1115 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1115}

1115.1 Washington, DC’s FEMS provides fire protection and pre-hospital medical care and transportation to residents, workers, and visitors, including those in federal facilities located in the District. FEMS conducts fire inspections in apartment buildings, businesses, hotels, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, correctional facilities, and residential care facilities to identify and correct potential fire hazards. It is also the primary District agency dealing with hazardous materials (HAZMAT)–related incidents.

1115.2 The 33 fire stations in Washington, DC include 33 engine companies, 16 truck (ladder) companies, three heavy rescue squads, one HAZMAT squad, one marine firefighting/rescue company, and seven Battalion Fire Chiefs. Emergency medical units include 17 advanced life support ambulances and 22 basic life support ambulances, seven EMS supervisor units, and one Battalion EMS Chief. Map 11.3 shows the location of fire stations in the District.

1115.3 Emergency medical service units are supplemented by means of a service contract with American Medical Response (AMR), which provides up to 25 additional basic life support ambulances during peak call load periods. In 2016, FEMS began using National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1710 (with modifications) response time goals for both fire and EMS calls. The NFPA response time goal for a first responding fire engine to structure fire calls is five minutes 20 seconds or less. During 2016, the Department achieved this goal for 96 percent of calls. The NFPA response time goal for a first responding EMT to higher priority EMS calls is five minutes or less. During 2016, the Department achieved this goal for 62 percent of calls.

1115.4 Map 11.3. Fire Station Locations

(Source: DC OP, 2018)

1115.5 The Department has made significant progress in recent years in modernizing its fire stations and will continue this work. With the exception of a few critical major capital improvements, according to FEMS, the current number and distribution of facilities is generally adequate for maintaining the minimum standard response times. These projects include a new fleet maintenance facility, fireboat facility, and improvements to its Training Academy. Longer-term facility needs will need to be analyzed during the development of a FEMS facilities master plan.

1115.6 With the highest per capita EMS call volume in the nation, Washington, DC’s emergency response system is overtaxed with non-emergency and low-priority medical calls. To address this issue, in 2016 the District created the Integrated Healthcare Collaborative (IHC), also known as the Integrated Healthcare Task Force. The IHC included government and non-governmental organizations representing medical, human services, finance, and public safety sectors. Topics addressed included nurse triage, alternative transport, connection to care, policy, communications, and marketing. Recommendations were published in the IHC Final Report in 2017, and their implementation began in 2018.

1115.7 Going forward, FEMS resources and physical plans will need to keep pace with the District’s population growth and corresponding infrastructure needs, which will be addressed through efforts such as a facilities master plan.

1115.8 Policy CSF-4.2.1: Adequate Fire Stations

Continue to provide an adequate number of properly equipped fire stations to ensure the health and safety of Washington, DC residents. FEMS evaluates the level of adequacy of existing facilities based in part on the ability to maintain a response time of five minutes 20 seconds at least 90 percent of the time for emergency fire calls and five minutes at least 90 percent of the time for emergency medical calls. Where response times exceed acceptable limits, equipment and facilities should be relocated or provided to close these gaps.

1115.9 Policy CSF-4.2.2: Public-Private Partnerships for Fire and Emergency Medical

Services Facilities

Explore public-private partnerships to fund the construction of new fire and EMS

facilities, including the development of new and remodeled facilities within mixed-use projects on existing sites. In such cases, any redevelopment should conform to the other provisions of this Comprehensive Plan, including the preservation of usable neighborhood open space.

1115.10 Policy CSF-4.2.3: Fleet Maintenance and Administrative Office Space

Accommodate the administrative, maintenance, and transportation needs of the District’s fire and EMS, including space for training and fleet maintenance and storage.

1115.11 Policy CSF-4.2.4: Responsiveness to Demographic Change and Facilities Planning

Fire and EMS and facility assessments should be responsive to the changing social and economic composition of the population, including workers, visitors, and residents. This includes supporting the development of a Public Facilities Master Plan.

1115.12 Policy CSF-4.2.5: Preservation of FEMS Resources for High-Priority Emergencies

Support the development and implementation of strategies to preserve resources for high-priority emergencies and to reduce non-emergency and low-priority medical calls. Such strategies should include those that can raise awareness and education regarding fire prevention and emergency assistance techniques. Early intervention by bystanders can complement FEMS efforts, save lives, and better triage resources.

1115.13 Action CSF-4.2.A: Level of Service Monitoring

Continue to prepare evaluations of the response times for fire and emergency medical calls to evaluate the need for additional facilities, equipment, and personnel and identify specific geographic areas where services require improvement, on an annual basis, or as needed during disaster response efforts. This should include a review of the distribution of fire hydrants and water flow capabilities.

1115.14 Action CSF-4.2.B: Fire Prevention and Emergency Intervention Education

Continue to educate and empower residents on fire safety and prevention measures and on emergency response techniques, such as bystander CPR and use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs).

1115.15 Action CSF-4.2.C: New Apparatus Maintenance and Fireboat Facilities

Finalize plans to build a new apparatus maintenance facility, which will be used for maintenance and repair of FEMS vehicles, and a new fireboat facility to replace the existing one, which will provide a new dock for FEMS’ four fireboats.

1115.16 Action CSF-4.2.D: Third-Party Providers

Continue to contract with third-party providers to supplement the agency’s provision of pre-hospital medical care and transport of basic life support patients to preserve FEMS resources for higher priority emergencies.

1115.17 Action CSF-4.2.E: Implement Strategies from the 2017 IHC 2017 Final Report

Continue to implement strategies from the 2017 IHC Final Report, including those relating to street calls, nurse triage, public education, and third-party providers of pre-hospital medical care and transport. These strategies can improve the population’s health and safety by connecting low-acuity callers to a more appropriate comprehensive source of care and by reducing or eliminating the use of 9-1-1 resources for non-emergency medical issues, enabling greater and more appropriate use of 9-1-1 resources for rapid response, treatment, and transport for high-acuity, life-threatening medical calls.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1116** CSF-5 CORRECTIONS {#sec-10-a1116 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1116}

1116.1 Corrections is a critical component of public safety in Washington, DC. Just as police are essential to deterring unlawful activity, DOC should ensure that individuals who are deemed by the legal system to pose a significant danger to themselves or others in the community are humanely, lawfully, safely, and securely detained. During detainment, these individuals need to be offered meaningful opportunities to engage in activities that will support successful community reintegration. DOC is entrusted with the care and custody of these individuals, touching the lives of over 10,000 arrestees per year. DOC operates the Central Cell Block, the Central Detention Facility (CDF), and the Correctional Treatment Facility (CTF) and administers contractual bed space at two community halfway houses. These facilities, located in the District, require a well-trained staff, appropriate staffing levels, and comprehensive assessment of inmates to connect them to programs and services to help guide their paths forward.

1116.2 Since the 2006 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, DOC has evolved from a system that was frequently overcrowded and operating over legislated capacity to one that now operates within its operating capacity. During the intervening years, DOC has developed a more holistic understanding of how Washington, DC’s incarceration and behavioral systems are interconnected and has enhanced relationships with respective providers. DOC is also improving employment readiness and behavioral health services programs; leveraging planning, analytics, and evidence-based methodologies; and expanding partnerships with over 103 community-based organizations as of 2017, providing a wide array of services to inmates. Facilitating voting is another pathbreaking program provided by DOC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1117** CSF-5.1 CORRECTIONS FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1117 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1117}

1117.1 Secure detention facilities, like jails, require significant resources to operate. In many cases, these facilities are not the best way to address the needs of all individuals who require correctional intervention. Less restrictive, yet equally effective alternatives to detention exist.

1117.2 As stated previously, in 2015 DGS released a needs assessment that included space estimates for replacing many public safety facilities, including correctional facilities. The District will explore approaches for renovating and building new correctional facilities, including opportunities for public-private partnerships that can enable efficiencies and cost savings. Such arrangements provide upfront funding that is then paid back by the District over time, with no incentive for a private partner to underdeliver services or incarcerate more persons.

1117.2a Text box: DOC Facilities

DOC operates the Central Cell Block at 300 Indiana Avenue NW, where over 10,000 arrestees per year who are charged with non-citable offenses are detained prior to arraignment. Most are released to the community after arraignment. It also operates the 41-year-old CDF and the 25-year-old CTF located on the DC General Campus and administers contractual bed space at two community halfway houses. About 7,600 individuals are processed yearly in over 11,000 bookings. DOC provides on-site inpatient care facilities to help those with substance abuse and other health issues. In addition, the District’s Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services (DYRS) provides supervision of those under the age of 18 charged with criminal offenses at the New Beginnings Youth Development Center, located in Laurel, Maryland. This facility opened in 2009, the same year DYRS closed the Oak Hill Youth Center. New Beginnings is a 60- bed facility that provides 24-hour supervision and comprehensive social services grounded in the principles of positive youth justice, including physical and behavioral health care, behavioral modification programs, vocational and life-skills training, educational services, and structured recreational activities.

1117.3 Policy CSF-5.1.1: Ensuring Safety, Security, and Humane Operation

Provide adequate correctional capacity and resources to ensure safe, secure, orderly, healthy, and humane operation of correctional facilities. The appropriate design, construction, maintenance, operation resources, and staffing of these facilities is necessary to realizing public safety objectives.

1117.4 Policy CSF-5.1.2: Non-Detention Alternatives to Jail

Promote the assessment of all individuals to identify the appropriate intervention and to expand non-detention alternatives to jail. These alternatives may include supervised house arrest, day-reporting program-intensive centers, and pre-release centers.

1117.5 Policy CSF-5.1.3: Information Systems

Adopt appropriate information technology systems necessary to support effective operations and related protocols, such as those for medical and legal privacy.

1117.6 Policy CSF-5.1.4: Public-Private Partnerships for Correctional Facilities

Explore public-private partnerships to fund modernization of correctional facilities and services, including the development of new and remodeled facilities.

1117.7 Action CSF-5.1.A: Planning and Design of Correctional Facilities

Engage the community in the planning and design of correctional facilities and ensure appropriate interagency coordination for alignment across public safety, public health, behavioral health, family/social service, and economic development

objectives.

1117.8 Action CSF-5.1.B: Maintenance and Upgrades to Information Systems

Assess needs and plan for the maintenance and systematic modernization of information systems that support correctional functions in the District, including public safety and health and human services.

1117.9 Action CSF-5.1.C: Periodic Assessment of Effectiveness

Periodically assess the corrections process for effectiveness against desired outcomes and its needs and realign resources to support its public safety objectives accordingly.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1118** CSF-5.2 FORMERLY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS {#sec-10-a1118 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1118}

1118.1 Washington DC’s criminal justice system is a hybrid of local and federal control. The District’s felons are housed by the Federal Bureau of Prisons, except in some instances during the last months of their sentences, where they may be stepped down to DOC custody or halfway houses. Annually, approximately 7,600 individuals return to the community after release from DOC facilities, while an additional 2,400 return from federal facilities.

1118.2 Transitional and permanent supportive housing is needed for successful reentry. In many cases it must be suitable to provide not only for the returning citizen but also for the needs of children or elderly dependents they support. Without such housing, many individuals return to the cycle of activities that resulted in incarceration.

1118.2a Text box: Reentry Portal

In 2018 Washington, DC began piloting a ReEntry Portal, which integrates access to transition support services for reentry, including critical connections to parole and supervision, health and behavioral health services, education and employment readiness programs, social services, benefits enrollment, identification cards, and transitional housing.

1118.3 Formerly incarcerated individuals need to be connected to their children, but they can face challenges to do so, including the need to travel to services and mandated appointments. Returning parents often have difficulties supporting themselves and cannot afford adequate child care. Provision of affordable child care within their home communities would have a positive impact on returning individuals and their families. This service could also have a preventive effect for at-risk individuals in the same communities.

1118.4 Access to appropriate education and employment, essential for full and productive participation in community life, is challenging for many returning citizens. Without the necessary means to support themselves and their families, they may not be able to support successful reentry and community reintegration. Education and employment readiness and support are vital for the success of these individuals and for supporting safe and strong neighborhoods and communities.

1118.5 Policy CSF-5.2.1: Supportive Services for Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

Ensure that supportive service needs for formerly incarcerated individuals are identified and gaps addressed on an ongoing basis, including for transitional and permanent housing, health care and behavioral health, child care, educational and skills training, and employment.

See also Housing and Economic Development Elements for related policies.

1118.6 Policy CSF-5.2.2: Needs of Families and Minor Children of the Incarcerated

The needs of families and children of those incarcerated should be assessed and corresponding supportive services should be provided.

1118.7 Action CSF-5.2.A: Address Supportive Needs of Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

Work to create an inventory of housing needs for returning citizens and provide appropriate transitional, supportive, and permanent housing opportunities; provide adequate child supportive services; assess the education and training needs for these individuals; and create a plan to enhance pathways to employment opportunities.

See also the Housing Element for related policies on housing needs for returning citizens.

1118.8 Action CSF-5.2.B: Integrated Services Pilot Program for Returning Citizens

Enhance and expand the ReEntry Portal based on analysis of its functionality.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1119** CSF-6 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESILIENCE {#sec-10-a1119 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1119}

1119.1 In the years since the 2006 Comprehensive Plan adoption, Washington, DC’s approach to emergency management and homeland security has evolved significantly. The District has expanded its focus to include not only pre-disaster planning but also a comprehensive approach that integrates all facets of emergency management, including preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery. In addition, resilience has emerged as a centrally vital issue to the future of cities. The District has recognized this and has endeavored to characterize threats to the District on an ongoing basis and create living plans and practices that can help the District be prepared for, respond to, and recover from severe weather events, public health events, human-made incidents, and chronic stressors. Emergency management and resilience are highly interrelated, particularly as they pertain to public facilities.

See also Environmental Protection Element for related policies and actions on climate change, severe weather events, and natural hazards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1120** CSF-6.1 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS {#sec-10-a1120 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1120}

1120.1 HSEMA leads efforts to ensure the District is prepared to prevent, protect against, respond to, mitigate, and recover from all threats and hazards. HSEMA develops and implements homeland security and emergency preparedness plans in coordination with a wide array of local, regional, and federal government agencies, as well as private sector entities. HSEMA serves as the central communications point for District agencies and regional partners before, during, and after an emergency; provides training exercises to District agencies and communities; and leads cross-agency coordination in preparation for special events, such as demonstrations, marches, and parades.

1120.2 HSEMA was created by the District in 2007 in response to City Council passage of the Homeland Security, Risk Reduction, and Preparedness Act of 2005, which consolidated the functions of the former District of Columbia Emergency Management Agency (DCEMA) with those of the State Administrative Agency. In 2012 the District designated HSEMA as home for the primary Fusion Center, which houses the day-to-day operation of the Washington Regional Threat and Analysis Center (WRTAC). As a result of this change, HSEMA expanded to an additional facility on the Unified Communications Center campus.

1120.3 In recent years, HSEMA developed and institutionalized the District Preparedness System (DPS), which is governed by the DC Emergency Preparedness Council (EPC), the DC Emergency Response System (ERS) Committee, subcommittees, advisory panels, and working groups. As administrator and steward of the DPS, HSEMA coordinates collaboration among these groups to leverage best practices, lessons learned, existing knowledge, and expertise and to elevate innovative resources to meet known and emerging threats and hazards, building on Washington, DC’s standing as a national leader in emergency management.

1120.4 In addition, HSEMA plays a key role in District efforts to increase resiliency to climate change and disasters and to improve the lives of District residents. It served as a key participant in the 100 Resilient Cities initiative launched in 2016, working closely with dozens of stakeholders to promote resilience for the whole community and to integrate resilience and mitigation measures into relevant initiatives.

1120.5 Figure 11.9 District Preparedness System

(Source: HSEMA)

1120.5a Text box: Washington, DC’s District Preparedness System (DPS)

DPS encompasses all elements of the preparedness cycle that allow the District to identify capability gaps, prioritize and develop capabilities, and execute those capabilities when required by real-world events. DPS success relies heavily on the support and participation of stakeholder agencies across Washington, DC and the national capital region. By working together to identify the most critical threats and hazards and build capabilities to address them, DPS stakeholders continue to build a more prepared and resilient Washington, DC.

1120.5a1 Text box: Community Risk Assessment

A vital component of Washington, DC’s DPS is the Community Risk Assessment (CRA), a multipronged approach to identifying hazards and assessing risk. The CRA uses sophisticated methods and data (including geospatial, demographic, socio-economic, and critical infrastructure information) to model the risk and consequences for a variety of threats and hazards. These are then used to inform a wide range of preparedness products and processes, including hazard mitigation strategies; strategic, operational, and tactical plans; the annual DPS Report; and the District’s annual Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment.

1120.6 Policy CSF-6.1.1: District Preparedness

Continue to create a District-wide culture of preparedness, informed by a sustainable and effective system, that prepares Washington, DC to prevent and protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from all hazards that threaten it. This includes integrating preparedness goals into relevant efforts across individual District agencies. Include Neighbor-to-Neighbor Disaster Assistance Training, building on the success of the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and related programs.

1120.7 Policy CSF-6.1.2: Direction, Coordination, and Support During Incidents and

Events

Continue to enhance the capability to provide overall direction and support of significant incidents and events within or affecting the District through the O&M of the Emergency Operations Center, as well as the District’s 24/7 watch center, an intelligence fusion center, a public information coordination center, and a center for private sector coordination.

1120.8 Policy CSF-6.1.3: Reducing Vulnerability in Recovery Phase

Capitalize on opportunities during the recovery phase to further reduce vulnerability by integrating mitigation activities into Washington, DC’s post-disaster recovery operations, including Preliminary Damage Assessment (PDA) and after-action processes.

1120.9 Policy CSF-6.1.4: Accommodating Accessibility Requirements

Preparedness capabilities should accommodate accessibility requirements of individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. Taking a whole community approach, develop plans with the Disabilities and Access or Functional Needs (DAFN) community to provide an equal opportunity to access and benefit from the District’s preparedness programs, services, and facilities.

1120.10 Policy CSF-6.1.5: Emergency Communications

Establish and maintain capabilities to deliver coordinated, prompt, and actionable information to the whole community through the use of clear, compatible, accessible, and culturally and linguistically appropriate methods to effectively relay information regarding any threat or hazard and, to the extent possible, District actions and assistance being made available for those in need.

1120.11 Policy CSF-6.1.6: Technology and Emergency Preparedness

Ensure ongoing coordination of District technology initiatives with DPS efforts, providing effective, efficient, and secure services to government agencies, as well as residents, businesses, and visitors who depend on them.

1120.12 Policy CSF-6.1.7: Securing Essential Resources

Continue to assess and secure essential resources, including personnel, facilities, equipment supplies, technology, and technological systems, in response to a changing community and threat/hazard environments.

1120.13 Policy CSF-6.1.8: Stakeholder Engagement

Continue engaging with key stakeholders and partners in relevant aspects of DPS to strengthen District-wide preparedness. Continue to build collaborative partnerships with key private sector stakeholders to facilitate timely coordination, information dissemination, and emergency response and recovery efforts, particularly during catastrophic incidents.

1120.14 Policy CSF-6.1.9: Maximize External and Alternative Funding Means

Maximize the use of federal funding, as well as funding from the private sector and nongovernmental sources, to implement the District’s preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery strategies. When applicable, for events that qualify for federal disaster declaration, develop requests for individual assistance, public assistance, and hazard mitigation assistance. Create policies and procedures to incorporate hazard mitigation into the repair, relocation, or replacement of damaged public facilities and infrastructure. To the extent possible, include a process for identifying and prioritizing eligible projects and programs that can leverage additional funding.

1120.15 Policy CSF-6.1.10: Cybersecurity

Continue to coordinate cybersecurity vulnerabilities and threat assessments across relevant agencies and other stakeholders and to strengthen Washington, DC’s cybersecurity protection and response capabilities.

1120.16 Action CSF-6.1.A: District Preparedness System

Continue to administer, define, refine, implement, and maintain DPS to provide continuity of government, maintain continuity of operations, and provide emergency services to the community.

1120.17 Action CSF-6.1.B: Integration of Accessibility Requirements into the Preparedness System

Continue to develop and maintain a program that allows DPS stakeholders and partners to regularly integrate the accessibility requirements of individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs across all phases of DPS, as mandated by the DC Human Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and Rehabilitation Act. This includes developing and delivering training to agencies on inclusive methods and practices for preparedness. Continue to develop and maintain strategic, operational, and tactical-level plans for providing individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs accessible programs and services, including mass care and shelter services, transportation and evacuation, and notification and communication.

1120.18 Action CSF-6.1.C: Development Projects and Risk Reduction

Explore methods for further reducing risks and vulnerabilities of major development projects to human-made and natural hazards.

1120.19 Action CSF-6.1.D: Evaluate Use and Impacts of Emerging Technologies on Emergency Preparedness

Explore and evaluate the potential use and impacts of new and emerging technologies on the District’s emergency preparedness, mitigation, and response operations. Arenas with rapidly evolving or emerging technologies include robotics (including drones and autonomous vehicles), data and connectivity, energy and resources, and digital visualizations and interfaces.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1121** CSF-6.2 RESILIENCE AND CRITICAL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1121 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1121}

1121.1 This section addresses the preservation and enhancement of Washington, DC’s facilities and lands to address vulnerability of critical facilities to adverse effects of natural and human-made shocks, such as extreme weather events, health events, and security incidents, and to long-term stresses, such as sea level and temperature rise driven by climate change. Washington, DC has adopted robust, multipronged strategies to address these issues. In addition to addressing sudden threats and hazards through DPS, the District is working to address chronic stressors, such as poverty, safety, and access to health care and healthy food, through a wide range of policies contained throughout the Comprehensive Plan. While the District recognizes that many, if not most, Comprehensive Plan policies are connected to resilience, policies that explicitly identify resilience are contained in specific subsections of this element to provide a logical framework (this section and the CSF-2.2 Healthy Communities and Resilience section).

1121.2 Policy CSF-6.2.1: Consider Vulnerabilities and Mitigations When Planning Critical Facilities

Consider and evaluate vulnerabilities and mitigations for planning and preserving District-owned facilities from human-made and natural incidents and events, as well as chronic stressors, such as sea level rise and heat emergencies. Identify and prioritize major vulnerabilities and hazards. Incorporate risk and hazard mitigation into operational and investment planning.

1121.3 Policy CSF-6.2.2: Integration of Climate Adaptability

Promote integration of vulnerability assessments in resilience planning, including climate adaptability, into pertinent aspects of DPS using the best available data and in accordance with other District initiatives to adequately prepare for an evolving risk environment.

See also the Environmental Protection Element.

1121.4 Policy CSF-6.2.3: Energy-Resilient Facilities

Explore ways to make buildings critical to emergency response services more energy resilient. Consider energy systems capable of operating during periods of brief or sustained outages and supply disruptions, including microgrids.

See also the Environmental Protection Element for policies and actions related to climate adaptability and energy-resilient facilities.

1121.5 Policy CSF-6.2.4: Temporary Post-Disaster Housing

Provide residents displaced by disaster with local access to emergency shelter and temporary, interim housing as part of the community disaster recovery process. Coordinate with federal and regional partners to promptly identify and secure safe, temporary housing options for those in need. Seek to reduce barriers to provision of interim housing through existing regulations, ordinances, codes, and policies.

See also the Housing Element for policies and actions related to temporary post-disaster housing.

1121.6 Policy CSF-6.2.5: Technology and Resilience

Explore the use and impact of new and emerging technologies on resilience vulnerability assessment and mitigation planning.

1121.7 Policy CSF-6.2.6: Community Resilience Hubs

Explore Community Resilience Hubs as a key component of Washington, DC’s resilience strategy. Community Resilience Hubs are intended to serve as a gathering place for residents who are experiencing a shock or stress in their neighborhood. Hubs could be located in places in the community, such as a recreation center or church, or could be provided in a virtual format when necessary.

1121.8 Policy CSF-6.2.7: Promote Resilient Communities

Promote resilient communities in Washington, DC by advancing resilience on a District-wide basis and at a neighborhood-specific level. Improve coordination across plans and strategies that address Washington, DC’s social, health, physical, and food systems and the positioning of District assets to help neighborhoods withstand, adapt to, and recover from adversity.

1121.9 Policy CSF-6.2.8: Temporary Facilities

Coordinate across District agencies and relevant private sector entities to plan for surge capacity of existing facilities or temporary facilities that may be needed during emergency response and recovery. Identify existing facilities that can add to their capacity and adaptive space that can be used for temporary facilities.

1121.10 Action CSF-6.2.A: Community Risk Assessments

Update the CRA of DPS on a recurring basis to reflect changes in the risk profiles of relevant natural and human-made systems in the District.

1121.11 Action CSF-6.2.B: Preserving Critical Community Facilities

Safeguard critical facilities from a wide range of threats and hazards and develop fortified and redundant systems to deliver essential services at all times.

1121.12 Action CSF-6.2.C: Training on Safeguarding Critical Community Facilities

Develop a training program on Critical Community Facilities for law enforcement, public utilities, and private sector personnel.

1121.13 Action CSF-6.2.D: Vulnerability of District-Owned Facilities

Continue to support development of criteria and methodologies to assess the vulnerability of critical District-owned facilities to human-made and natural shocks, as well as chronic stressors.

1121.14 Action CSF-6.2.E: Mitigating Vulnerability of District-Owned Facilities

Explore approaches and tools to address identified vulnerabilities of District-owned facilities. District-wide and site-specific factors should be taken into account, as well as near-term and long-range risks.

1121.15 Action CSF-6.2.F: Evaluate the Potential Use and Impacts of Emerging

Technologies on Resilience and Critical Facilities

Review and evaluate the impacts of new and emerging technologies on the District’s resilience and their potential for helping the District to advance near-term and long-range resilience objectives.

1121.16 Action CSF-6.2.G: Community Resilience Hubs

Explore the potential of establishing Community Resilience Hubs to strengthen community ties and to help establish reliable networks for vital services and disaster preparedness and recovery.

1121.17 Action CSF-6.2.H: Temporary Facilities

Develop and periodically update a plan for surge capacity of existing facilities or temporary facilities that may be needed during emergency response and recovery. Consider taking into account relevant threats and hazards, an up-to-date inventory of facilities and other relevant spaces in the District, and facility capacity and constraints.

### **10-A12** EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1200** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1200}

1200.1 The Educational Facilities Element addresses the location, planning, use, and design of the District’s educational facilities and campuses. It includes policies and actions related to early childhood development facilities, public primary and secondary District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), public charter schools, private schools, and higher educational facilities, including public and private colleges and universities.

1200.2 The District’s pre-kindergarten (PK) through adult environment includes a network of neighborhood schools, matter-of-right schools, and feeder systems that provide predictable paths from elementary to middle to high school grades, as well as a District-wide application and lottery-accessed public and public charter schools. Both DCPS and the public charter schools offer traditional programming as well as specialized programs such as dual language, expeditionary learning, International Baccalaureate, and Montessori. Washington, DC’s collegiate environment includes nine universities whose home campuses are in the District, as well as many other educational institutions and non-local universities that provide programs within the District.

1200.3 The Element focuses on the efficient use of school property and the relationship between schools and the communities that surround them. For DCPS, it focuses on school planning and modernization efforts to meet existing and long-term educational needs, and on investing equitably in a system of neighborhood public schools to provide fair access to high-quality education throughout the District’s communities.

1200.4 The crucial educational facilities issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this Element. These include:

Ensuring that investments in schools promote equity and excellence, serve the needs of all students, and provide access to educational skills and development opportunities across all eight wards through matter-of-right neighborhood schools and District-wide public schools. Equity for many communities of color requires attention on family/community involvement.

Continuing to plan for and invest in new and existing school facilities to meet the District’s growth and enrollment needs while delivering spaces that reflect best practices in building configuration and design.

Leveraging schools as assets and anchors of District neighborhoods where culture, skills training, and civic engagement goals can be achieved, in addition to schools’ core educational missions.

Encouraging university and community college satellite campuses in Wards 7 and 8 to provide expanded educational opportunities, and engaging Washington, DC’s universities as innovation centers, potential activators for large site development, and good neighbors that are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods through the use of a campus plan.

Using school facilities to exemplify Washington, DC’s environmental commitments through such measures as building to gold LEED standards.

Maintaining District-owned school sites to provide adequate green space for educational, recreation, athletic, and environmental benefit, which are located equitably throughout the District.

1200.5 Since 2006, when the Comprehensive Plan was last updated, the District has committed to reconceiving and rebuilding its public schools in partnership with residents, business owners, and civic organizations. The Educational Facilities Element has guided Washington, DC’s historic strides toward increasing the quality of DCPS facilities to support teaching and learning after decades of disinvestment prior to the year 2000. From 2007 to 2018, the District allocated more than $2 billion to modernize or renovate 73 school facilities. As of 2020, over a dozen years after the modernization project started in earnest, twenty-one schools have yet to be modernized or have received only Phase 1 modernizations and are not yet scheduled for full modernization. Of the latter category, there are none in Ward 3, one each in Wards 1, 2 and 4; two in Ward 5; four in Ward 7, five in Ward 6 and seven in Ward 8. In addition, from 2007 to 2018, the District provided public charter schools with more than $1.2 billion in funding through the per-student public funding allotment specifically for facilities.

1200.6 Washington, DC’s charter and private schools and universities have access to the District’s enviable tax-exempted bonds through Washington, DC’s private activity bond program. Institutions have used this financing tool to raise millions of dollars to finance their expansion, building and renovation programs.

1200.7 Because the emphasis of the Comprehensive Plan is on the physical environment, this Element, as it relates to DCPS and public charter schools, addresses school land and buildings, rather than educational curriculum, teacher quality, school administration, and other programmatic issues. Such issues are critically important, but they will be addressed in the DCPS Strategic Plan and other DCPS documents.

1200.8 Policies in the Educational Facilities Element work alongside those adopted by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Education (DME), DCPS, the DC Public Charter School Board (DC PCSB), the Department of General Services (DGS), the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE), and the Office of Planning (OP) as a coordinated, internally consistent strategy for educational excellence and neighborhood revitalization.

1200.9 Continuing to improve schools is fundamental in meeting the goal of retaining and attracting households with children. Schools strongly define the social, economic, and physical characteristics of the District’s neighborhoods.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1201** EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES GOAL {#sec-10-a1201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1201}

1201.1 The overarching goal for educational facilities is to provide facilities that accommodate population growth and its geographic distribution and inspire excellence in learning; create a safe and healthy environment for students; and help each individual achieve their fullest potential while helping to build and strengthen local communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1202** EDU-1 PK-12 AND ADULT/ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FACILITY PLANNING {#sec-10-a1202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1202}

1202.1 Public education in the District of Columbia is provided by DCPS and by public charter schools. DCPS is a traditional local education agency (LEA) headed by a chancellor appointed by the Mayor under the Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007. DCPS is responsible for educating Washington, DC’s children and provides a school of right for every compulsory school-age child. DCPS also coordinates with DGS in planning, operating, maintaining, designing, and constructing public school facilities (see text box, Understanding the Relationship of DC Public Schools to District Government). Public charter LEAs are publicly funded and organized as nonprofit corporations, and each is managed by an independent Board of Trustees. DC PCSB, created in 1996 and governed by the School Reform Act of 1995, is the sole authorizer of public charter schools, and it provides comprehensive oversight, application review, and stakeholder engagement across all public charter schools.

1202.2 In school year 2017-2018 (SY2017-18), DCPS had 116 schools housed in 112 different facilities serving approximately 48,150 students. Other facilities include administrative buildings, swing space used for temporary relocation during campuses renovation, and facilities undergoing modernization. Map 12.1 shows the location of DCPS schools. Washington, DC has one of the most robust charter school sectors in the country. In SY2017-18, 66 public charter LEAs were operating 121 schools, serving approximately 43,350 students. The location of public charter schools as of SY2017-18 is shown on Map 12.2.

1202.3 DCPS and public charter school total enrollment, including PK-12th grade and adult and alternative schools, started to increase in 2008, driven by enrollment in public charter schools and also in DCPS in recent years. Between 2008 and 2017, total public school enrollment increased by 29 percent (see Figure 12.1). Public charter school enrollment has increased steadily since the School Reform Act authorizing charters was passed in 1997, with DCPS enrollment increasing after 2008. As of SY2017-18, DCPS enrolled 53 percent of all public school students, while public charters enrolled 47 percent. Total District-wide growth in enrollment between 2011 and 2017 was greatest in the elementary (K-5th) and early childhood grades (PK3 and PK4).

1202.4 These increases in public school enrollment mirror recent increases in population. The District added 122,000 residents between 2000 and 2017, driven mostly by an increase in adults. However, in the past five years, the number of children has substantially increased, surpassing the 2000 number—specifically, between 2010 and 2017, infants and toddlers under age five increased by 12,200. Forecasts from the OP State Data Center indicate that this trend will continue in 2017-2025, with an estimated net population increase of 91,000, of which 21,090 (23 percent) will be school-age children. These figures, coupled with vigorous housing construction activity over the last 10 years and improved quality of schools, suggest there will be many new students, necessitating additional school facility space and financial resources. Not only are there likely to be more students, but the racial composition of students is changing to reflect broader District demographic trends. It is important to collect and use data disaggregated by race to provide equitable outcomes in school facility planning.

1202.5 Figure 12.1: Public School Enrollment Trends in the District 1996-2016

(Source: DME)

1202.6 The proposed 2018 Master Facilities Plan (MFP), for the first time, analyzed both the public charter school sector and DCPS schools. It used population forecasts, enrollment projections, utilization analyses, and facility data to better understand the current landscape of the District’s public school facilities (PK through adult provided by DCPS and public charter schools), as well as facility needs five and 10 years from now. The proposed MFP GAP analysis showed that as of SY17-8, capacity exceeded enrollment by over 22,000. Fully modernizing the DCPS inventory, addressing overcrowding in DCPS feeder schools where it has already become an issue, and already approved charter expansions will increase capacity in the coming years. The proposed MFP illustrated a key challenge confronting the District. The proposed 2018 MFP estimated that there would be sufficient facility capacity in aggregate within the educational sector taking enrollment patterns and market share into account. However, if the LEA’s growth plans are taken into account, the proposed 2018 MFP estimated that may be an overall shortage of seats by SY2027-28. The analysis indicated that without coordinated planning the District could open more school capacity than required, driving up costs and diluting the ability to serve students, families, and communities.

1202.7 Through the proposed 2018 MFP, DME, in conjunction with DCPS, DGS, DC PCSB, and community stakeholders, provided (1) information about current public school facility conditions and needs, and (2) analyses of future facility needs based on estimated population growth and LEAs’ aggregated enrollment growth plans. The proposed MFP included datasets and visualizations, which help the public, policymakers, LEAs, education support organizations, and other educational stakeholders in their work to improve public education.

1202.8 The District Council disapproved the proposed 2018 MFP submitted by the Mayor as the Council believed the information provided in the proposed MFP lacked critical elements that would inform the Mayor’s and Council’s decisions on school location, school building utilization, student enrollment, and potential charter school locations. The proposed MFP also lacked comprehensive information about the plan for six vacant public school facilities. Further, the proposed MFP failed to address school overcrowding, under-enrollment, or school buildings with poor utilization (below 50 percent), and it did not clearly define the Facility Condition Index (FCI) which identified ten schools with buildings in poor condition. An updated MFP that addresses Council interests, specifically providing a plan for the District to address over-crowding in over-utilized schools and increase enrollment in underutilized buildings, and plan for forecasted population growth to provide appropriate capacity, is a critical first step to advance a master plan. This MFP must be approved by Council. A Council-approved MFP would help inform strategic and sustainable long-term facilities planning for DCPS, charter LEAs, District agencies, and others. 1202.8

1202.9 Map 12.1: Location of DCPS Schools School Year 2018-2019

(Source: OP, 2018)

1202.10a Text Box: Understanding the Relationship of DC Public Schools to District Government

The District of Columbia Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007 (PERAA), effective June 12, 2007 (DC Law 17-9; 54 DCR 4102), created a new and reorganized structure of educational leadership. PERAA established that the Mayor has direct control of District public schools and DCPS as a cabinet-level agency. It also empowered the Mayor to appoint, after review and confirmation by the Council of the District of Columbia, a DME to plan, coordinate, and supervise public education in the District, a chancellor to lead DCPS as its chief executive officer, and a state superintendent of education. The Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) is the state education agency that requests, distributes, and monitors the use of federal grant monies, sets state policy and regulations, and collects and shares reliable and actionable data. The District’s State Board of Education (SBOE) is responsible for advising the state superintendent on educational matters, including state standards, policies, and objectives. DGS oversees the maintenance, construction, and modernization of all DCPS facilities. All public charter schools are chartered under the authority of DC PCSB.

1202.10 Across Washington, DC, DCPS school facilities and grounds serve as community assets by providing recreational space, meeting space, and more. As part of the facility modernization planning process, DCPS will continue to engage communities on how modernized facilities and grounds could better serve the needs of the surrounding communities and improve quality of life.

1202.11 A School Improvement Team (SIT) is established at every DCPS school where a major capital project (to include modernization, school replacement, addition, renovation, or remodeling) is scheduled within the next one to two fiscal years. The SIT includes parents, neighbors, and community members, as well as DCPS and DGS staff. The SIT has several duties, including providing feedback during the development of education specifications and schematic design and assisting with disseminating information about the progress of the school improvement to constituencies and peers represented on the SIT. Team members are also expected to consult on issues that arise during construction, be available to receive updates, and serve on the SIT through the end of construction.

1202.12 Like many school districts in U.S. cities, DCPS is facing substantial social needs. Poverty, disrupted families, and neighborhood violence challenge school buildings (and grounds) to do more, such as stay open longer, expand their services, and adopt a broader constituency. Indeed, as school facilities are modernized, the opportunity is created to use those buildings to more fully serve the communities that surround them.

1202.13 The proposed 2018 MFP anticipated combined public charter school and DCPS growth in enrollment, from 91,484 students in SY2017-18 to between 109,000 and 122,000 students in SY2027-28, depending on the assumptions made. The upper end of the enrollment projection includes the aspirational growth plans of the public charter sector that would ultimately require DC PCSB approval and facility acquisition to actually reach that ambitious number. DCPS enrollment is based solely on school-level estimations that could reach 58,400 students in SY2027-28, up from 48,000 students in SY2017-18. When analyzed against available school capacity, the proposed 2018 MFP estimated that enrollment will outstrip DCPS’s current capacity in all wards except Wards 5, 7, and 8. The District has experienced overcrowding in certain schools. There are underutilized schools, particularly in Wards 7 and 8. While current and projected capacity are influenced by population growth, demographic trends, and the physical condition of facilities, the more difficult issue that must inform a revised MFP is significant disparities in school performance that lead students to enroll in higher performing schools, even if these schools are a considerable distance away.

1202.14 Map 12.2: Location of Public Charter Schools School Year 2018-2019

(Source: OP, 2018)

##### **10-A DCMR § 1203** EDU-1.1 Integrated Master Planning for All Public Schools {#sec-10-a1203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1203}

1203.1 Washington, DC is committed to not only modernizing its inventory but also to maintaining school facilities over the long term. The Facility Conditions Assessment (FCA) Program aims to complete FCAs for every DCPS school on a three-year cycle. An FCA is a comprehensive evaluation of the condition of the systems and structure of the school building and is conducted via a walk-through by licensed engineers. FCAs, combined with other capital asset replacement programs currently in use by the District, assist DCPS and DGS in developing detailed repair needs, estimated repair costs, and capital reinvestment plans, which will allow for a more proactive approach to building maintenance and repair.

1203.2 Policy EDU-1.1.1: Master Facility Planning

Strongly support DME efforts to prepare long-range Council-approved MFPs so that the DCPS school modernization program and public charter school facilities planning are based on comprehensive, system-wide assessments of facility conditions, enrollment trends, long-term needs, and the District’s land use plans.

1203.3 Policy EDU-1.1.2: Locating DCPS and Public Charter Schools

Study and address neighborhood impacts when a public charter school or DCPS school locates in a non-school facility, such as a vacant commercial or industrial building.

1203.4 Policy EDU-1.1.3: Co-Location of Charter and DCPS Schools

If co-location of charter schools in significantly under-utilized schools is proposed, address on a case-by-case basis the long-term ability of affected DCPS and charter schools to operate effectively and thrive. Address parking, traffic, noise, needs for green open space and recreational facilities, and other impacts associated with increased enrollment and space usage when co-location occurs.

1203.5 Policy EDU-1.1.4: Administrative and Maintenance Facilities

Ensure that educational facility planning accommodates the administrative, maintenance, and transportation needs of DCPS, as well as public charter schools where relevant.

1203.6 Policy EDU-1.1.5: Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) Uses and Schools

Discourage siting of schools in areas zoned as PDR. Already, some public schools exist on PDR lands, generating the potential for conflicts. Zoning regulations require buffers between PDR zoned land and residential zone uses, including schools.

1203.7 Policy EDU-1.1.6: Programming Partnerships for Cultural Activities in Schools

Encourage partnerships between cultural organizations and schools to maximize students’ cultural exposure and access to space by cultural organizations.

See also the Arts and Culture Element for information on fine and performing arts.

1203.8 Policy EDU-1.1.7: Cultural Space

Maximize use of in-school facilities and spaces, such as art studios, rehearsal studios, and theaters, for cultural performance, expression, and production endeavors by students, as well as by external organizations when feasible and appropriate.

1203.9 Policy EDU-1.1.8: Expanded Access to Facilities for DCPS and Public Charter Schools

Plan for forecasted District-wide and neighborhood-specific population growth by (1) considering the co-location of schools within and across schools where appropriate; (2) considering incentives for developers to include educational space in future mixed-use developments; (3) considering the establishment of impact fees on new or proposed development projects to contribute to the costs of providing services, including education, to those developments; and (4) investigating the inclusion of educational uses into the development plans for large, public vacant parcels.

1203.10 Action EDU-1.1.A: Master Facility Plan Process

Submit an updated MFP that addresses D.C. Council interests, specifically the District’s plan to address over-crowding in over-utilized schools and increase enrollment in under-utilized buildings, and is approved by Council, as a critical first step in advancing a master plan. Ensure that the submitted MFP accounts for equitable access to matter-of-right DCPS public school locations in every ward; adequate acreage and quality of green space associated with DCPS matter-of-right school facilities locations in every ward; the full modernization of all DCPS school buildings by 2030; and investment in programming in those schools to build DCPS enrollment and ensure successful matter-of-right feeder systems in every community in the city. Complete the updated MFP process in close collaboration with relevant agencies and the District’s education stakeholders. Use the updated MFP outcomes to guide school facilities planning on a District-wide and neighborhood-specific basis, guiding growth across both DCPS and public charter school sectors for a span of 10 years.

1203.11 Action EDU-1.1.B: Space for Youth Cultural Entrepreneurship Initiatives

Explore the availability of public school spaces to serve partnerships and programs between cultural organizations and schools that can help youth become entrepreneurs.

See also the Economic Development Element for related policies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1204** EDU-1.2 DCPS FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1204}

1204.1 Washington, DC has made significant progress toward modernizing DCPS school buildings, investing more than $2 billion since 2007 to modernize 73 school buildings. The District has budgeted an additional $1.6 billion to modernize 20 DCPS school buildings from 2019-2024. DCPS schools slated for future capital improvements will be prioritized using an approach identified in the Planning Actively for Comprehensive Education Facilities Amendment Act of 2016. This quantitative assessment employs data concerning facility conditions, school demand, community needs, and equity to arrive at an impartial ordering of school modernizations. The prioritization will inform District Capital Improvement Plans. Once the modernizations in the FY2021-26 Capital Improvement Plan are completed, 21 schools, the majority of which are east of the Anacostia River, will have yet to receive full modernizations. The 32 DCPS school buildings that have received a partial modernization will be prioritized for full modernization funding. By 2023, 90 percent of DCPS school buildings will have been renovated and modernized.

1204.2 Policy EDU-1.2.1: Continue to Provide Updated DCPS Facilities

Continue to provide updated and modernized DCPS school facilities throughout the District based on a Council-approved MFP and in compliance with laws, regulations, and appropriations.

1204.3 Policy EDU-1.2.2: Partnerships for DCPS Facilities

Explore partnership opportunities to enhance operation, modernization, and/or construction of new DCPS school facilities, and strongly encourage the retention and inclusion of actively used recreational areas and/or open space.

1204.4 Policy EDU-1.2.3: Developer Proffers for DCPS Facility Needs

Explore developer proffers as a way to meet school facility needs through the development process.

1204.5 Policy EDU-1.2.4: Using District-Owned Facilities for Healthy Food Access

Encourage the renovation and new construction of schools to support healthy food education and access. Assess feasibility of incorporating space for teaching kitchens, prep kitchens, cafeterias, and educational gardens in renovated and modernized buildings.

1204.6 Policy EDU-1.2.5: Facility Expansion

Where additional DCPS school capacity is needed to satisfy enrollment demand and to avoid overcrowding, DCPS may need to consider existing site capacity, site acquisition, and new school development, in addition to school boundary and enrollment adjustments.

1204.7 Policy EDU-1.2.6: Transportation Demand Management Programs for DCPS Facilities

Improve parking management at DCPS facilities by pairing reduction in surface parking availability with a transportation management plan for school staff.

1204.8 Policy EDU-1.2.7: DCPS School Design and Sustainability

Continue to use green practices in the modernization, construction, and operation of DCPS schools to maximize sustainability and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Examples of building features and systems that can help achieve this include architectural design and materials, solar panels, rain gardens, green roofs, and high-efficiency energy, water, and waste management systems.

1204.9 Policy EDU-1.2.8: DCPS School Design as a Tool for Teaching Sustainability

Promote design features of schools as a tool for interactive learning about sustainability and to provide related stewardship opportunities. Examples of design features include green roofs and rain gardens; energy, water, and waste management systems; and on-site greenhouses and urban farming facilities.

1204.10 Policy EDU-1.2.9: Neighborhood Schools of Excellence

Strongly support the goal of making neighborhood schools and feeder systems an appealing school of choice where students’ academic and personal achievements are nurtured, so that children do not have to travel long distances to schools across the District and to ensure families in every community have attractive, predicable options from PK through 12th grade.

1204.11 Action EDU-1.2.A: Parking Utilization Study at DCPS Facilities

Conduct studies to understand use of parking facilities at appropriate DCPS sites to determine where reductions may be possible in order to identify potential higher and better uses for them.

1204.12 Action EDU-1.2.B: Shared-Use Agreements

Continue to support shared-use agreements for public access to recreation facilities and gardens in public schools while ensuring host schools have appropriate, prioritized access.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1205** EDU-1.3 PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1205}

1205.1 Public charter schools provide another school choice for families with school-age children. As of SY2016-17, 46 percent of all public-school students were enrolled in public charter schools, and DC PCSB approved the conditional opening of three more public charter schools in SY2018-19.

1205.2 Public charter schools are publicly funded, their daily operations and curriculum are managed by their school leadership and an independent board of trustees, and some offer specialized programs such as dual language, expeditionary learning, International Baccalaureate, and Montessori. The per-pupil facilities allowance from public funds helps public charter schools acquire and renovate space and is intended to cover their facility expenses (see description in the text box entitled Uniform Per Student Funding). Public charter schools are authorized and monitored by DC PCSB and are held accountable for student performance and compliance with local and federal laws in the same way as DCPS schools are by OSSE.

1205.3 As of SY2017-18, there were 121 public charter schools with 135 campuses located in 104 facilities. Of those public charter school campuses, 63 were located in 40 former DCPS buildings through long-term leases or ownership of a surplus facility. These 63 campuses include 10 co-locations of public charter LEAs. Two additional public charter schools are co-located with existing DCPS schools. The remaining 70 public charter school campuses were located in 62 commercial facilities that they either owned or leased from the District; these 70 campuses include six co-locations.

1205.4 Although public charter schools operate in a wide range of facilities, former DCPS school buildings offer attractive solutions due to the ready functionality of their space and to the scarcity of and rising costs for space. To help identify those sites that may be suitable for public charter school use, the D.C. Council adopted a pre-surplus designation of excess in 2014. D.C. Law 20-114 (D.C. Official Code § 38-2803(e)) defines a school site to be designated excess after it has been identified as vacant without a plan for reuse or has been significantly underused for two consecutive years without a plan for reuse. Thirty-nine former DCPS schools have been turned over for use by charter schools. There are very few DCPS school buildings that are not being used, and these sites are needed to ensure there are adequate schools in various geographic locations available, as well as places available for swing space.

1205.5 If a school building has been determined to be excess by DCPS, and the District does not have plans for its public reuse, DME conducts a process to designate the building as surplus, subject to final approval by the Council of the District of Columbia. For surplus buildings, DME develops a Request for Offers (RFO), which allows public charter schools to submit proposals to lease the space from the District. Public charter schools and charter school incubators, which are nonprofit organizations that provide short-term, transitional, and below-market rent space to public charter schools that may face difficulty in finding and/or financing education facilities, have right of first offer for the use of surplus DCPS school buildings.

1205.6 Since school buildings serve as institutional anchors, the RFO process includes public engagement.

1205.7 Consistent with 110 Stat. 1321, Pub. L. 104-134, as amended (D.C. Official Code § 38-1802.09), the following preferences are used to determine the use of former DCPS schools that are deemed surplus:

First preference to an existing tenant that is a public charter school that occupies all, or substantially all, of the facility;

Second preference to a high-performing and financially sound public charter school, or to an existing tenant that has occupied all or substantially all of the excess school facility since December 30, 2008, and is a District nonprofit elementary or secondary school or District community-based nonprofit arts education organization whose programming includes youth classes; and

Third preference to any other eligible entity.

1205.7a Uniform Per Student Funding

The Uniform Per Student Funding Formula (UPSFF) is used to help set annual operating funding for DCPS and public charter schools. The requirement that education be funded on a uniform per-student basis was enacted into DC law in 1995 (110 Stat. 1321, Pub. L. 104-134; D.C. Official Code § 38-1804.01). UPSFF allocates funding to DCPS and DC public charter LEAs based on students’ grade levels and additional relevant characteristics, such as at-risk status. It applies only to local funding. In addition, public charter schools also receive a per-pupil facility allotment through UPSFF intended for facility funding. DCPS capital expenses are funded from the capital budget. Between FY16 and FY20, UPSFF is expected to increase by 15.7 percent, resulting in the foundation-level per-student rate increasing from $9,492 per public school student in FY16 to $10,980 per public student in FY20.

1205.8 Policy EDU-1.3.1: Planning for Public Charter Schools

Incorporate the needs of public charter schools in public school facility planning, including in MFP efforts, to account for the community’s desire for a District-wide system of neighborhood public schools supplemented by school choice that is equitably invested in and provides predictable and fair access to high-quality schools in all of Washington, DC’s communities.

1205.9 Policy EDU-1.3.2: Partnerships for Public Charter School Facilities

Explore partnership opportunities to enhance operation, modernization, and/or construction of new public charter school facilities, and strongly encourage the retention and inclusion of actively used recreational areas and/or open space.

1205.10 Policy EDU-1.3.3: Developer Proffers for Public Charter School Facility Needs

Explore developer proffers as a way to meet school facility needs through the development process.

1205.11 Policy EDU-1.3.4: Alternative Financing Systems

Support the construction and renovation needs of public charter schools, as well as private schools and universities, by allowing them access to low-cost financing programs offered by the District. Examples of these programs include the DC Revenue Bond Program, the Green Bank, and Property Assessed Clean Energy Programs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1206** EDU-1.4 PRIVATE PK-12 SCHOOL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1206}

1206.1 Information gathered from the National Center for Educational Statistics, the Association of Independent Schools of Greater Washington (AISGW), the National Center for Education Statistics, and the National Catholic Education Association (NCEA) indicates that, in 2017, there were approximately 94 private schools in the District of Columbia. These private schools rendered services to specific segments of the District’s population, from PK to 12th grade, as well as children throughout the metropolitan area. These facilities are shown in Map 12.3. Thirty-one schools are affiliated with AISGW. Several of these, as well as schools unaffiliated with AISGW, are affiliated with churches, including a total of 11 represented by NCEA and several affiliated with other religious organizations. Washington, DC acknowledges the contributions that these schools have provided to the education sector and the importance of including K-12 private schools in overall school planning and discussions.

1206.2 Policy EDU-1.4.1: Private PK-12 Schools

Recognize private schools as an important part of Washington DC’s educational infrastructure. Private school representatives should be encouraged to participate in District-wide educational facility planning initiatives.

1206.3 Map 12.3: Location of Private Schools

(Source: OP, 2018)

1206.4 Policy EDU-1.4.2: Private School Partnerships

Encourage engagement and partnership with communities and other institutions in the delivery of school services and engagement with local neighbors in planning and development processes.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1207** EDU-1.5 SCHOOL BUILDING DESIGN AND SITE PLANNING {#sec-10-a1207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1207}

1207.1 Attractive, well-designed, and well-sited schools communicate respect for the people who use them and contribute to a positive school climate and productive learning. By strategically locating windows, access points, and gathering places, for example, school designers can foster student safety and security. High-quality site planning and architecture also provide an opportunity to enhance the learning experience.

1207.2 School modernization projects should take into consideration issues that extend beyond school boundaries, such as the safety of children traveling to and from school, public transit accessibility, the availability of open green space, playgrounds, and athletic facilities, as well as parking and traffic.

1207.3 Policy EDU-1.5.1: Promoting High-Quality Design

New construction, renovation or reconstruction of public, private, and public charter school facilities should use high architectural and landscape design standards that are sensitive to community context, as well as academic and student safety needs.

1207.4 Policy EDU-1.5.2: Safety First: Designing For Multiple Uses

Strongly encourage design of K-12 public, private, and public charter schools to include appropriate measures that keep students healthy, secure, and safe, especially where multiple activities are accommodated in a single structure.

1207.5 Policy EDU-1.5.3: Eco-Friendly Design

Strongly support the use of green building, energy efficiency, and green infrastructure development methods in school construction and rehabilitation of K-12 public, private, and public charter school design.

1207.6 Policy EDU-1.5.4: Multimodal Access to Schools

Continue to coordinate among District Department of Transportation (DDOT), DCPS, DC PCSB, and K-12 private school stakeholders to improve the safety of students walking or biking to and from school through design and transportation improvements in coordination with the safe routes to school program. In addition, new K-12 public, private, and public charter school buildings should be designed to foster safe and attractive pedestrian access. Encourage transit connections to high schools to provide easy access for students and teachers, thereby minimizing the need for driving to school.

See also the Transportation Element for additional information on modes of transit to schools.

1207.7 Policy EDU-1.5.5 School Projects and Design Plans

Seek to better align proposed school modernization and new school projects with District-wide and place-based design plans so that school design achieves a high quality.

1207.8 Policy EDU-1.5.6: Historic Preservation

Consider historic preservation concerns in the planning of DCPS and public charter schools, as well as private school facilities occupying DC government property.

1207.9 Policy EDU-1.5.7: Site Planning

Continue to plan for the modernization of entire DCPS school campuses rather than just the school buildings. Where school facilities are adjoined by athletic fields, playgrounds, educational and community gardens, and open space, the improvement of these areas should be included in renovation plans wherever feasible. In addition, school employee parking should not be provided at the expense of recreational space.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1208** EDU-1.6 PLANNING FOR THE LONG-TERM FUTURE {#sec-10-a1208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1208}

1208.1 An important long-range planning objective is to align DCPS and public charter school enrollment projections with the Comprehensive Plan’s demographic forecasts. The Comprehensive Plan can aid DCPS by identifying the specific schools that may be most impacted by increased in-boundary enrollment from new development and therefore most in need of future expansion. As an example, population forecasts used in 2016 for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process were used to develop student population projections to support the proposed 2018 MFP.

1208.2 In Washington, DC, the relationship between new housing construction and school planning is complex. Public school enrollment policies allow students to enroll in their in-boundary DCPS school and apply to enroll in an out-of-boundary DCPS school, a public charter school, or any other District-wide or selective DCPS school. Thus, students often travel to schools in other parts of the District, leading to significant out-of-boundary enrollment at many DCPS facilities and to public charter schools far from students’ homes. Figure 12.2 shows the share of students who enroll in the different types of schools in SY2016-17 and how many students enroll in their own ward of residence. This complexity makes projecting enrollment at DCPS and public charter schools challenging.

1208.2a DCPS Boundary and Student Assignment Policy Review

In 2013-2014, DME and DCPS led a comprehensive review process of student assignment policies and DCPS school boundaries. The process culminated in a series of recommendations made by the DC Advisory Committee on Student Assignment that were fully adopted by the Mayor and chancellor at that time. Implementation of the recommendations began in 2015. In its Final Recommendations on Student Assignment Policies and DCPS School Boundaries, the committee noted that, “The overwhelming input from parents and District residents was that families want a District-wide system of neighborhood public schools that is equitably invested in and provides predictable and fair access to high-quality schools in all of the city’s communities.”

1208.3 Figure 12.2: Share of All Students by Public School Type (SY2016-17)

(Source: DME)

1208.4 The Comprehensive Plan cannot predict who will actually occupy new housing units and whether they will be singles or families with children. Increases in enrollment may also take place in established neighborhoods as the existing housing stock changes hands—even though very little new construction is occurring. In addition, a higher percentage of students may choose to attend public schools rather than private schools in the future.

1208.5 Aggregate projections indicate the need to coordinate the growth of educational facilities with the growth of housing in some parts of the District, driving recommendations in the proposed 2018 MFP to consider incentives for developers to include educational space in future mixed-use developments, consider establishing impact fees on new development projects to contribute to the costs of providing services to new developments, including education, and investigate the inclusion of educational uses into the development plans for large public vacant parcels.

1208.6 Notwithstanding these challenges, a Council-approved MFP will enable the District to align population growth forecasts, estimated school needs, and facilities planning to better anticipate facilities’ space needs. This will include facility utilization data as well as population trend and forecast information from the District’s OP State Data Center to inform enrollment projections. Given that population and enrollment growth lagged projections even before COVID, it will be important to update population and enrollment projections after the completion of the 2020 Census.

1208.7 In addition to the proposed 2018 MFP, the District launched EdScape Beta, the educational landscape, in 2019. This online tool provides a comprehensive set of interactive visualizations and downloadable datasets on topics essential to inform and coordinate the opening and siting of programs and schools in Washington, DC. This information, as updated on an ongoing basis, can support data transparency and help build a coherent public education system as well. EdScape Beta is intended to help inform whether and where new schools, programs, or facility capacity may be needed, and to provide the public with the same information available to policy-makers for transparency purposes. Together, a Council-approved MFP and EdScape Beta will help assess overcrowding and identify strategies to address it.

1208.8 As of 2017, the District’s OP State Data Center forecasts a sizable increase in children, particularly infants, toddlers, and elementary-age children, over the next 10 years. These forecasts assume age cohort movement and population net migration. Recent forecasts indicate a net population increase of 114,954 people over the 10 years spanning 2015-2025, with an average growth of 11,500 people each year. The District’s total population will continue to increase but at a slower rate: from an annual change of 1.9 percent in 2015, to 1.6 percent in 2020, to 1.5 percent in 2025.

1208.9 For the District’s youth population aged 0-17 years, the forecast points to an additional 21,090 (23 percent) youth from 2017-2025. With a total forecasted youth population of 144,250 in 2025, this number will comprise 18.3 percent of the total District population, up from 18 percent in 2017. The 0-17 age group is expected to increase but will do so at a declining annual rate of 2.1 percent by 2020, to 2.0 percent by 2025. The 2018 MFP provided estimated DCPS school-level enrollment projections, estimations of sector enrollment (DCPS and public charter schools), and a gap analysis of facility needs at various scales such as District-wide and ward-level.

1208.10 Over the last 10 years, the District has made great strides toward inclusively rebuilding its educational infrastructure and attracting families back to Washington, DC and to public education, reversing the decline in enrollment the District experienced previously. With the forecasted growth in population, the District should approach the disposition of surplus DCPS school facilities for non-educational use with great caution. Given the high cost and limited supply of land, the District should retain as many of its assets as possible, employing interim use strategies for the short or mid-term to achieve this goal if necessary. As spatial mismatches between growth and capacity occur, boundary adjustments, grade realignments, and facility expansion should be considered to avoid overcrowding.

1208.11 In previous decades, DCPS consolidated school facilities and eliminated more than three million square feet of space, sometimes releasing the buildings into the private market. Recent modifications to District regulations make it clear that Washington, DC will retain DCPS’s surplus buildings to provide opportunities for both DCPS and public charter schools. In addition, if the requirement that charter schools receive the right of first offer is satisfied, and no charter school proposal is selected for adaptive re-use, non-charter school entities may be able to submit proposals for adaptive re-use. The re-use process for non-charter schools is often handled by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED). One enduring factor in the disposition of school land is that some of the school grounds were formerly owned and maintained by the federal government. When jurisdiction was transferred from the federal government to the District in 1973, the transfers were typically made for recreational purposes only. Such use constraints should be considered as school properties are repurposed and were considered in the proposed 2018 MFP, which provided additional direction on the use of excess space.

1208.12 Policy EDU-1.6.1: Retention of DCPS Public Schools Facilities

Retain DCPS public school buildings and lands in public ownership to the maximum extent feasible, which includes expiry of leases of former DCPS schools currently leased by public charter schools through the RFO process. This will put the District in a better position to respond to future demographic shifts, address long-term needs for public education, and maintain the need for swing space, which temporarily accommodates students during construction or renovation projects.

1208.12a Schools as Community Anchors

In addition to supporting the academic needs of local students, schools can reflect the social, educational, recreational, and personal needs of the broader community. Historically, the District’s schools have been anchors for the community at large, serving as neighborhood gathering places.

1208.13 Policy EDU-1.6.2: Long-Term Leases

Strongly encourage long-term leases instead of sales so that underused school sites and buildings can be retained in public ownership. This approach is necessary due to the limited availability of District-owned land for public facility uses, and the need to retain such land to deliver quality public services and anticipate long-term changes in enrollment.

1208.14 Policy EDU-1.6.3: Preserving Sites Near Transit

Preserve school sites located near Metrorail and other locations well served by transit for educational use.

1208.15 Policy EDU-1.6.4: Public Charter School Reuse of DCPS School Surplus Space

Support public charter schools in gaining access to surplus or underenrolled DCPS school buildings.

1208.16 Policy EDU-1.6.5: Reuse of DCPS School Surplus Space

Continue to apply the following preferences in accordance with the Landrieu Act (118 Stat. 1349, Pub. L. 108-335) to determine the future use of DCPS schools that are deemed surplus:

First preference to an existing public charter school tenant;

Second preference to (1) a high-performing and financially sound public charter school, or (2) an existing tenant that has occupied the excess school facility since December 30, 2008, and is a District nonprofit elementary or secondary school or District community-based nonprofit arts education organization whose programming includes youth classes; and

Third preference to any other eligible entity.

1208.17 Policy EDU-1.6.6: Adaptive Reuse

When a DCPS facility is no longer viable to house an institution with an educational mission, the District should promote adaptive reuse. The facility can be used to respond to local needs through adaptive reuse and/or dynamic reprogramming. Such new uses can include cultural incubators, job training programs, and affordable housing. A conversion to new non-school uses should be sensitive to neighborhood context and mitigation of impacts on parking, traffic, noise, open space and green space, and other quality of life factors. Provide for public review of potential new uses, and ensure that any issues related to prior jurisdiction over the site by the federal government are addressed. 1208.17

See also the Land Use Element for additional policies on the reuse of public school land.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1209** EDU-2.1 SCHOOLS AS COMMUNITY ANCHORS {#sec-10-a1209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1209}

1209.1 Schools are a powerful expression of a community’s values and aspirations. In addition to supporting the academic needs of local students, they can reflect the social, educational, recreational, and personal needs of the broader community. Historically, the District’s schools have been anchors for the community at large, serving as neighborhood gathering places.

1209.2 The District has a history of collaborative arrangements with its school facilities. For years, Washington, DC’s schools have hosted recreational programs, public services, and even family services, such as health care. DCPS foresees many opportunities to establish mutually beneficial partnerships with District agencies and the nonprofit sector in the future to help sustain schools as community anchors. This principle was strongly supported by the 2013 DCPS MFP and is regarded as key to improving the emotional and physical health of neighborhoods. Schools can be leveraged as anchors and cultural assets for District neighborhoods—community hubs that can serve local needs beyond their core educational mission and use.

1209.3 DCPS accommodates wrap-around services at schools in low-income neighborhoods with the objective of enhancing their educational and community impact. Wrap-around services include family counseling and parenting programs, career education, behavioral health therapy, and after-school enrichment programs. Implementation of these services at key campuses holds great promise for the District’s children and families.

1209.4 Policy EDU-2.1.1: Collaborative Arrangements with Community Service Providers

Continue to create partnerships among DCPS, public charter schools, District government, nonprofits, and other institutions to promote schools as the central focus of community activities.

1209.5 Policy EDU-2.1.2: Wrap-Around Services

Where space is available, continue to accommodate wrap-around health and human services programs within schools to address the non-academic needs of students and families. Include affordable child-care services wherever feasible.

1209.6 Policy EDU-2.1.3: Community Use

Keep school space accessible and available for neighborhood meetings, community gatherings, and other events that promote resident engagement and public service, while maintaining the school’s primary mission of educating the District’s children.

1209.7 Policy EDU-2.1.4: Out-of-School Time Opportunities

Encourage and promote programs across District agencies, including DCPS and the Department of Parks and Recreation, that can provide out-of-school opportunities for District children.

1209.8 Policy EDU-2.1.5: Shared-Use of Public Parks and Recreation Space for Public Schools

Continue to provide access to public recreational and athletic space for DCPS and public charter schools that lack such spaces.

1209.9 Policy EDU-2.1.6: District Schools and Resilience

As part of the educational facilities planning process, explore the potential role that schools can serve for sheltering, gathering, and service provision during disasters and emergencies.

1209.10 Action EDU-2.1.A: Shared Maintenance Facilities

Identify opportunities to share DCPS and District government operations, transportation, and maintenance facilities to reduce land and facility costs for both entities.

See also the Economic Development Element and the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element for policies on joint-use agreements for public access to school recreation areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1210** EDU-2.2 SCHOOLS IN COMMUNITY PLANNING {#sec-10-a1210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1210}

1210.1 School facility planning should be integrated with broader community planning efforts such as Small Area Plans and revitalization plans. The inclusion of schools in these plans can help promote parental involvement, improve school safety, and create connections between the school and the larger community around it. Coordinated planning also provides a means for residents to address land use, design, transportation, and physical planning issues associated with schools, and to voice opinions on the types of supplemental educational (such as libraries and arts and cultural spaces) and non-educational services that might be provided on school campuses.

1210.2 Policy EDU-2.2.1: Intergovernmental Coordination

Coordinate DCPS facility planning efforts with District agencies to so that school modernization produces better education facilities for District children while also improving the neighborhood.

1210.3 Policy EDU-2.2.2: Educational Facilities in Local Plans

Involve DCPS and DC PCSB in District government land use and transportation planning activities. Local principals, faculty, students, parents, and other local stakeholder groups should be invited and encouraged to participate in decisions that impact school facilities and their surroundings.

1210.4 Policy EDU-2.2.3: Community Participation

Promote an open, public process when making school facility decisions, including decisions on school renovations, additions, and replacements; new schools; school closings and consolidation; the disposition of surplus schools and/or property; site selection; and school design. A School Improvement Team (SIT) for major capital projects includes parents, neighbors and members of the larger community and should be an important component of the public process. This team provides feedback throughout design and construction and helps disseminate information about the school improvement to peers and constituencies. Encourage student participation.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1211** EDU-3 COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES {#sec-10-a1211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1211}

1211.1 Washington, DC has an extraordinary concentration of academic resources, including some of the country’s finest colleges and universities. Beyond their core role as educators and knowledge hubs, universities are jobs and cultural centers that can significantly contribute toward advancing equity goals through multi-sector partnerships and other efforts that can be focused locally. While it is essential to acknowledge these dynamic attributes, universities should also be good neighbors and develop compatibly with surrounding communities by updating and adhering to campus plans.

1211.2 University campuses located within the District include American University, the Catholic University of America, Gallaudet University, Georgetown University, The George Washington University, Howard University, Trinity University, the University of the District of Columbia (UDC), and the National Defense University. For the fall semester of 2017, the federal Department of Education Database (IPEDS) indicated that these institutions enrolled approximately 84,040 students. Map 12.4 shows their locations. These universities have a deep historic imprint on the District, serve as some of the largest employers in Washington, DC, and contribute significantly to local diversity. As examples, Howard University and UDC are Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Gallaudet University is chartered for the education of deaf and hard of hearing students.

1211.3 In addition to the schools listed above, many non-local universities maintain Washington, DC campuses, largely due to the concentration of government-serving professional employment, such as foreign relations and diplomacy, public policy, technology, and law. Thousands of students from across the country attend Washington semester programs at these and local institutions, for study and internships. Washington, DC offers additional access to learning opportunities through a wide range of cultural and research institutions.

1211.4 UDC is Washington, DC’s only post-secondary public educational institution, enrolling more DC public high school graduates than any other local university. The historically Black university is also the only urban land-grant institution in the nation. In 2009, the university established the Community College of the District of Columbia (CCDC) as a component institution. With multiple points of access to educational opportunity, UDC now offers certificate, associate, baccalaureate, and graduate level degrees that are tailored to meet the unique needs of the District. Available programs range from associate degrees in Nursing and Mortuary Science, master’s degrees in Cancer Biology Prevention and Clinical Psychology, to law degrees, as well as workforce training and professional certifications, among other offerings. Over 50 different programs of study are offered and are aligned with immediate and long-term District needs, including workforce training.

1211.5 Map 12.4: Locations of Colleges and Universities

(Source: OP, 2018)

1211.6 UDC and CCDC serve a diverse population that includes students from over 80 different nations. CCDC has an open admissions policy that is particularly beneficial for non-traditional students. Together, these institutions provide an important opportunity for young adults and adult learners to gain a quality education at an affordable price.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1212** EDU-3.1 UDC {#sec-10-a1212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1212}

1212.1 Continued political and financial support for UDC is essential if it is to fulfill its mission as a viable educational option and path to career advancement for District residents. Creation of UDC campus locations across the District has been a priority of UDC to better serve residents’ needs. As shown on Map 12.4, UDC continues to expand offerings, with campuses at 801 North Capitol Street, NE; Bertie Backus at 5171 South Dakota Avenue, NE; PR Harris at 4600 Livingston Road, SE; Shadd at 5601 E. Capitol Street, SE; and United Medical Center, at 1310 Southern Avenue, SE.

1212.2 Policy EDU-3.1.1: Sustaining and Advancing UDC

Sustain, promote, and advance UDC as Washington, DC’s only public institution of higher learning and continuing education for District residents.

1212.3 Policy EDU-3.1.2: Strengthen Training and Career Programs

Strengthen CCDC as an important pathway to economic opportunity. Continue to educate students through more seamless paths to baccalaureate programs at UDC, and to build practical career skills that prepare students for current and future employment.

1212.4 Policy EDU-3.1.3: Economic Clusters and Universities

Encourage economic cluster development in areas surrounding university campuses, with a focus on entrepreneurship, mentorship, and business development.

1212.5 Action EDU-3.1.A: UDC Campus Locations

Maintain a distribution of campus locations that serves residents of all eight wards, helping advance goals of UDC’s Equity Imperative – 2022 Strategic Plan.

1212.6 Action EDU-3.1.B: Housing Archival Documents at UDC

Explore synergistic opportunities for UDC to house archival documents of Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1213** EDU-3.2 EDUCATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS {#sec-10-a1213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1213}

1213.1 The array of learning institutions is vitally important to Washington, DC and its residents, particularly its youth. Institutions of higher learning are involved in a myriad of community and educational partnerships to improve access to education, economic opportunities for residents, and investment in the community at-large. Partnerships between institutions of higher learning and DCPS and its students, have and should, continue to provide educational opportunities and advantages for the District’s children.

1213.2 Policy EDU-3.2.1: University Partnerships

Encourage partnerships among the District’s colleges and universities, anchor institutions, and K-12 schools to create additional pathways to learning for students, young adults, and lifelong learners. Support schools of continuing studies to remain open.

1213.3 Policy EDU-3.2.2: Corporate Citizenship

Support continued corporate citizenship among Washington, DC’s large institutions, including its colleges, universities, hospitals, private schools, and nonprofits. This should include a continued commitment to high-quality architecture and design on local campuses, expanded use of green building methods and low impact development, and the adaptive reuse and preservation of historic buildings.

1213.4 Policy EDU-3.2.3: Workforce Development

Strengthen connections among educational programs, skills training, and workforce development initiatives to support development of career pathways and prosperity for all.

1213.5 Policy EDU-3.2.4: Universities as Community Partners

Encourage universities to expand service-oriented partnerships that connect students with local communities and that can strengthen town-gown relationships.

1213.6 Policy EDU-3.2.5: University Research Partnerships

Encourage universities to conduct research in a manner that partners students and faculty with members of the local community to help inform thinking on community-driven topics.

1213.7 Policy EDU-3.2.6: University Offerings for Older Adults

Encourage universities to expand low-cost access to courses and other university offerings to older adults who reside in Washington, DC beyond zip codes that directly surround the university.

See also the Economic Development Element for additional policies on education and workforce development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1214** EDU-3.3 COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES, AND NEIGHBORHOODS {#sec-10-a1214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1214}

1214.1 The growth of colleges and universities, while supported by the District, has generated concerns in some Washington, DC neighborhoods. Most of the universities have limited land area for expansion and are located immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods. While neighborhood concerns relate to impacts such as traffic and parking, and to broader issues about the changing character of communities where universities are located or expanding, universities contribute unique offerings to their host neighborhoods, such as access to educational, cultural, and recreational opportunities. These opportunities include access to campus green spaces, culturally enriching offerings (including concerts and lectures), and a variety of programs for continuing education and very low-cost programming for seniors.

1214.2 Zoning regulations require the preparation of campus plans that show the location, height, and bulk of present and future improvements for all colleges located in residential zone districts. In addition to serving as physical site plans, the campus plans set floor area ratio (FAR) limits for the campus as a whole and, in some cases, establish enrollment and employment caps. Campus plans are subject to approval by the Zoning Commission.

1214.3 The campus plan requirement provides a formal process for community input on a range of growth-related issues. They are an important tool to proactively address issues that may be of concern to the neighborhood and limit campus expansion into residential areas. However, most of Washington, DC’s colleges and universities are engaged in ongoing discussions with the communities around them. Frequently raised issues include the need for student housing, the loss of historic buildings, the compatibility of proposed campus structures with nearby residential areas, and the loss of taxable land associated with university growth. Campus plans have responded to these concerns in a number of ways, such as increasing building intensity on-site to avoid the need for land acquisition, development of new dormitories, and implementation of numerous programs to manage parking, traffic, noise, and other environmental impacts.

1214.4 The post-secondary student population is significant, and local colleges and universities are powerful drivers of employment and innovation, as well as significant contributors to making Washington, DC one of the nation’s leading technology hubs. As a tech hub, the District is uniquely positioned to generate innovations that can help spawn new companies, create new jobs, and increase its economic competitiveness within and beyond the greater capital region. The District should continue to explore ways to help universities and their students meet their needs while encouraging compatibility of campus development with surrounding communities. Graduate students in particular play a vital role in university research and in helping universities to secure federal grants.

1214.5 Looking forward, the development of satellite campuses is strongly encouraged to relieve growth pressure around existing campuses. In addition to accommodating university growth, satellite campuses can provide new job and educational opportunities for District residents and help revitalize local shopping areas. Continued efforts to improve the campus planning process and promote an open dialogue between colleges and the neighborhoods around them should be strongly supported.

1214.5a Text box: Satellite Campuses

The development of satellite campuses is strongly encouraged to relieve growth pressure around existing campuses. In addition to accommodating university growth, satellite campuses can provide access to new job and educational opportunities for District residents and help revitalize local shopping areas.

1214.6 Policy EDU-3.3.1: Satellite Campuses

Promote the development of satellite campuses to accommodate university growth, relieve growth pressure on neighborhoods adjacent to existing campuses, spur economic development and revitalization in underinvested neighborhoods, and create additional lifelong learning opportunities for District residents.

1214.7 Policy EDU-3.3.2: Balancing University Growth and Neighborhood Needs

Encourage the growth and development of local colleges and universities in a manner that recognizes the role these institutions play in contributing to the District’s character, culture, and economy, and that is also consistent with and supports community improvement and neighborhood conservation objectives. Discourage university actions that would adversely affect the character or quality of life in surrounding residential areas.

1214.8 Policy EDU-3.3.3: Universities as Large Landowners and Campus Plan Requirements

Continue to require campus plans for colleges and universities located in residential and mixed-use zone districts. These plans should be prepared by the institutions themselves, subject to District review and approval, and should address issues raised by the surrounding communities. Each campus plan should include provisions that respect neighbors and neighboring property and ensure that potentially objectionable impacts such as noise, traffic, number of students, or other similar conditions are addressed.

1214.9 Policy EDU-3.3.4: Student Housing

Encourage the provision of on-campus student housing in order to reduce college and university impacts on the housing stock, especially the affordable housing stock, in adjacent neighborhoods. Consider measures to address the demand for student housing generated by non-District institutions with local branches.

1214.10 Policy EDU-3.3.5: Transportation Impacts of Colleges and Universities

Support ongoing efforts by colleges and universities to mitigate their traffic and parking impacts by promoting ridesharing, carpooling, shuttle service, bicycling, scooters, skateboarding, and other transportation demand management measures. The provision of adequate on-site parking for institutional uses also should be encouraged.

1214.11 Policy EDU-3.3.6: Faculty Housing

Support faculty and staff housing within campus plans. Encourage the housing to be created through partnerships and dedicated university programs. Provide program opportunities to persons from a wide range of incomes.

1214.12 Policy EDU-3.3.7: Inter-University Partnerships

Support partnerships and development of facilities that can enable sector-based innovations, such as inclusive incubators, which are technology incubators that offer enhanced opportunities for historically underserved residents.

1214.13 Policy EDU-3.3.8: Innovative Approaches for Augmented Educational Opportunities

Support the growth of the District’s learning landscape, including, but not limited to, that of universities, museums, and public facilities that offer innovative approaches for providing learning opportunities to augment in-classroom education.

1214.14 Policy EDU-3.3.9: Educational Facilities and Large Site Development

Explore the role educational institutions can play in activating targeted large sites in a manner that can catalyze growth, fulfill place-based physical and economic development goals, and expand educational access to District residents.

1214.15 Policy EDU-3.3.10: University-Community Task Force

Encourage universities and communities to establish a Task Force comprised of college and university representatives, neighborhood representatives, local businesses, and other non-university community stakeholders to address a range of physical planning issues relating to the college or university’s growth and operation. Among other topics, the Task Force should address community concerns regarding the enforcement of campus plans and monitoring procedures, university concerns regarding enrollment and employment caps, modifications or further processing related to the approved campus plan, and potentially, proposals for amendments to the zoning regulations as they relate to campus plans and higher education facilities.

1214.16 Policy EDU-3.3.11: Access to Recreational, Educational, and Cultural Opportunities

Support continued access by local neighborhoods to university offerings, such as concerts and lectures, campus green space, continuing education, and low-cost programming for older adults. Encourage residents to learn about and appreciate campus culture.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1215** EDU-4 CHILD DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1215}

1215.1 OSSE, under the DME provides support for and collaborates with other public and private child- and family-serving advocacy organizations to provide services and care for District children up to five years of age. OSSE also provides access to before- and after-school services for eligible children up to age 13, or 19 years of age if the child has a disability. It also manages a subsidized child-care program for eligible children and families. Waiting lists for child-care reflect a growing demand for services that support parent employment and job productivity, and provide healthy, safe, and positive learning environments for children. Child-care needs are also significant for parents who are employed in the District but live elsewhere.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1216** EDU-4.1 CHILD DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1216}

1216.a Child Care as Child Development

Recognizing that learning begins from the earliest age, OSSE now uses child development as an umbrella term that includes child care. Therefore, references to child development facilities in this section are used to refer to facilities that deliver child care and other uses relating to child development.

1216.1 According to 2017 population estimates, 45,065 children under the age of five reside in Washington, DC. OSSE reports that, in 2017, the District had 378 licensed child development facilities (258 centers and 120 homes), all of them run by private operators that were for-profit, nonprofit, or faith-based. The licensed capacity in these child development facilities for children birth to age five is 19,067; the licensed capacity for infants and toddlers (36 months and younger) is only 7,962, with approximately 28,203 infants and toddlers living in Washington, DC. However, this capacity only meets about 28 percent of residents’ needs, and does not include the needs of families outside of DC who work in the District and seek or use District child care programs.

1216.2 Washington, DC outranks all other states in access to PK programs, with an estimated 70 percent of three-year-olds and 84 percent of four-year-olds enrolled. Of the estimated 16,753 three- and four-year-old children in the District, 12,910 were enrolled in public PK programs in FY16. PK services are provided at 156 sites, and of these sites, 77 are DCPS, 59 are public charter schools, and 20 are child development facilities. The majority of students are served in DCPS or public charter schools. These facilities and programs collectively are likely to contribute to increased employment of women in Washington, DC.

1216.3 As a result of funding for the PK Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008, as well as other quality of life improvements, more families are choosing to raise their families in the District, resulting in an increased demand for child development facilities that serve children six weeks to three years of age.

1216.4 The District is also focused on expanding the use of District-owned facilities by private child development facility operators who are expanding the availability of infant and toddler care to District residents. Additionally, as of 2017, OSSE is partnering with a private philanthropic partner to increase the supply of high-quality seats in Wards 7 and 8 by 750 over the next five years.

1216.5 Policy EDU-4.1.1: Incentives Expanding Access to Child Development Facilities

Provide incentives for new and rehabilitated residential and commercial developments to set aside on-site space for child development facilities.

1216.6 Policy EDU-4.1.2: Expanding Allowable Spaces for Child Development Facilities

Allow new and expanded child development facilities and uses in all residential, commercial, and mixed-use areas and in community and District-owned facilities to provide access to affordable, quality child development facilities throughout the District. Locations should be accessible to public transit, when possible.

1216.7 Policy EDU-4.1.3: Child Development Facilities

Recognize the importance of early childhood education and related programs to the well-being of children and youth and support the development of appropriate facilities for these programs.

1216.8 Policy EDU-4.1.4: Co-location of Work and Child Development Centers

Encourage major institutional employers, including District government agencies, to provide on-site child development facilities for children of employees and encourage the opportunity to expand education, training, and research for human development professionals.

1216.9 Policy EDU-4.1.5: Continuing Education and Certification for Child Development Center Professionals

Support existing and new programs that help continuing education and certification of child development center professionals.

1216.10 Policy EDU-4.1.6: Partnerships

Explore collaborations with other District agencies educational and business partners that can help to increase the availability of quality early childhood education, child development, after-school, and pre-school programs for all residents, especially low-and middle-income households, and families of children with disabilities.

### **10-A13** INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1300** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1300}

1300.1 The Infrastructure Element provides policies and actions on the District’s water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, solid waste management, energy, information and communications technology, and enhanced coordination among these sectors. Investments in these systems are essential to Washington, DC’s future, specifically in meeting the demands of existing users, accommodating future change and development, and enhancing the District’s resiliency and sustainability. These policies are complemented by those in the Land Use, Urban Design, Environmental Protection, Transportation, Community Services and Facilities, and other elements, all of which recognize the interplay between infrastructure and related topics.

1300.2 Since the 2006 update to the Comprehensive Plan, billions of dollars have been invested in the energy, water, digital, and solid waste systems that are intrinsic to the District’s daily life and functions for its residents and visitors. Collectively, these investments have made the District a better place to live, work, and visit through the replacement of aging infrastructure, modernization of existing infrastructure, as well as environmental mitigations that are improving Washington, DC’s natural environment. However, most of these investments were not directed toward expanding capacity because existing systems had spare capacity. With the level of forecasted growth in population and jobs, Washington, DC will need to think innovatively about how to build on the substantial infrastructure investments made in the last decade.

1300.3 To meet future demands effectively, the District should take a cross-system approach to infrastructure, identify ways to use existing infrastructure more innovatively, apply new and emerging technologies to make infrastructure more efficient, and expand capacity where needed. This approach should focus on improving quality of life. The District will also need to plan for a future where infrastructure is forced to contend with increased pressures from climate change. Infrastructure should be designed in a resilient way to withstand chronic stressors and system shocks. Safe, reliable, and available infrastructure provision must be considered through an equity lens to address and eliminate gaps for underserved communities and to meet the needs of low-income residents, vulnerable populations, and communities of color.

1300.4 Infrastructure is critical to the continued success and growth of Washington, DC; infrastructure capacity and effectiveness directly impact quality of life. Infrastructure systems provide vital services to residents, workers, and visitors; shape and enhance the public realm; underlie and contribute to health, wellness, safety, security, and quality of life; are fundamental to promoting economic growth; and form a backbone that allows the District to function as a home to hundreds of thousands of persons and as the nation’s capital. In these ways, infrastructure fundamentally contributes to Washington, DC’s ability to fulfill the Comprehensive Plan’s vision of an equitable, inclusive, and resilient District.

1300.5 The District’s current infrastructure includes:

More than 1,350 miles of drinking water pipelines and 1,800 miles of sewers;

More than 2,200 miles of electrical cable;

More than 2,300 miles of natural gas pipelines;

Approximately 700 miles of fiber-optic cable owned by the District;

More than 400 outdoor Wi-Fi access points;

Thirteen communications towers strategically located across the District; and

More than 70,200 street lights.

1300.6 The planning, management, and oversight of the District’s energy, water and sewer, solid waste, and information and communications technology systems are distributed among several entities , including DC Water (formerly DC Water and Sewer Authority), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO), Washington Gas, the District’s Department of Public Works (DPW), the District’s Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO), commercial telecommunications providers, and others. In addition, the General Services Administration (GSA) contracts with Washington Gas and PEPCO to supply federal agencies with natural gas and electricity, respectively, and many federal agencies, as well as some hospitals, educational institutions, and other nonprofit organizations that avail themselves of DC-Net. This element incorporates planning and policy guidance from the short- and long-term plans of these service providers.

1300.7 The critical infrastructure issues facing Washington, DC are addressed in this element. They include:

Achieving and maintaining a state of good repair across all infrastructure systems;

Improving water quality and public health by addressing the District ’s combined sewer, sanitary sewer, and wastewater systems;

Responding to rapid changes in technology and equitably and accessibly distributing new digital technologies and services;

Modernizing the aging water, gas, and electric distribution systems;

Addressing infrastructure sufficiency for new development; and

Enhancing the District’s utility systems to increase resilience.

1300.8 Since 2006, when the Comprehensive Plan was last revised, Washington, DC has experienced rapid population and job growth, which has made the District one of the fastest growing large cities in the country. In 2018, the District’s population grew to 700,000, a figure not seen since the 1970s. Washington, DC has grown by 121,000 people, or 20.8 percent, since the 2006 update of the Comprehensive Plan. This trend puts the District on track to bypass its previous peak population of 802,000 within the next decade. Washington, DC experienced the largest share of this growth (79,000 residents) in the six years since the 2010 decennial census. Even if projected growth takes longer to achieve, addressing long-term capacity needs and investing in infrastructure is critical to meet current and future needs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1301** INFRASTRUCTURE GOAL {#sec-10-a1301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1301}

1301.1 The overarching goal for infrastructure is to provide high-quality, robust, efficiently managed and maintained, and properly funded infrastructure to meet the needs of residents, workers, and visitors in an accessible and equitable way, as well as to support future change and growth.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1302** IN-1 DRINKING WATER {#sec-10-a1302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1302}

1302.1 The water system serving the District consists of two primary components: the water supply and treatment system, and the water distribution system.

1302.2 DC Water was created by District law in 1996, with the approval of the United States Congress, as an independent authority of District government with a separate legal existence. As of 2016, DC Water distributes safe, treated drinking water to all residents, workers, and visitors in the District.

1302.3 Since 2006, there has been an evolution in the way water management is approached: while previously siloed as separate systems, potable water, wastewater, and stormwater are now managed together. This approach focuses on optimal outcomes, with all components considered together during the planning process. The whole water cycle, from capture, treatment, and reuse, is now integrated at both the local and District-wide scale. Thus, some of the policies and actions below may apply to drinking water infrastructure, as well as to wastewater and stormwater systems.

1302.4 The water supply and treatment system includes raw water sources, pipelines carrying this water to treatment plants, and the water treatment plants themselves. USACE operates and maintains these facilities and supplies treated water to several distributors. These distributors (which include DC Water) deliver water to over one million users in Washington, DC and Northern Virginia.

1302.5 The Washington Aqueduct water system was commissioned by Congress and built by USACE in the 1850s to provide the nation’s capital with a plentiful water source. It has been in continuous operation ever since and is the only public water supply in the United States where the federal government has a direct role in providing drinking water.

1302.6 The Washington Aqueduct system is composed of the Great Falls and Little Falls intakes on the Potomac River, the Dalecarlia and McMillan Reservoirs, the Georgetown Conduit and Reservoir, the Washington City Tunnel, and the East Shaft Pump Station. The sand filtration site located at the McMillan Reservoir and Water Treatment Plan was decommissioned in 1986 and is no longer part of the water treatment system. Figure 13.1 shows the Washington Aqueduct system.

1302.7 Figure 13.1: Washington Aqueduct System

(Source: Washington Aqueduct, 2018)

1302.8 The Potomac River is the source of all water treated and delivered to customers by the Washington Aqueduct, a federally owned and operated water supply agency. To ensure that this supply meets the needs of the Washington Aqueduct’s customers, the Low Flow Allocation Agreement (LFAA) was created in 1978. The agreement was signed by the federal government, Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. In addition to the Washington Aqueduct, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission and the Fairfax County Water Authority are the affected water providers. The agreement, through a formula for allocating Potomac River water, ensures that the downstream user, the Washington Aqueduct, has an appropriate allocation of available water. With the construction of the Jennings Randolph and Little Seneca reservoirs, the additional water available to be released has been sufficient to operate through major droughts in 1999 and 2002. While the provisions of the LFAA have not been triggered, every year its parties conduct a drought exercise to review the procedures that would be used in a more significant drought emergency.

1302.9 In 1982, the major water utilities and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) signed the Water Supply Coordination Agreement (WSCA), which required the major water suppliers to coordinate their operations during drought emergencies. The agreement also required that a 20-year study of supply and demand be prepared and updated every five years. Furthermore, it included cost-sharing agreements for new facilities and subsequently included the Jennings Randolph and Little Seneca reservoirs that serve as a backup water supply during droughts.

1302.10 The most recent ICPRB study, called the 2015 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Study, estimated annual demand to be 529 million gallons per day (mgd), a 12 percent increase from the 486 mgd previously estimated for 2015. The study also forecasted a growth in annual demand to 545 mgd in 2040. Although the study found that the system can meet the projected demand under normal conditions, severe drought conditions could trigger emergency water use, which would stress system reservoir volumes.

1302.11 The historic maximum production of drinking water by the Washington Aqueduct occurred in 1974 and was 284 mgd. After 1974, water demand decreased due to both declining population and increasing water conservation; however, while the District’s population has been growing since 2000, water consumption has remained stable due to conservation measures. Water demand is now relatively stable. In 2017, the average daily production from the Washington Aqueduct was approximately 131 mgd, with a maximum day use of approximately 176 mgd.

1302.12 The Washington Aqueduct treats water from the Potomac River at the Dalecarlia and McMillan water treatment plants (WTPs). Both of these plants were designed for much larger populations and higher water use projections than have been realized. As a result, their treatment capacity exceeds present-day demands and peak requirements of customers. The Dalecarlia facility has a design capacity of 164 mgd and a maximum capacity of 264 mgd. The McMillan facility has a design capacity of 120 mgd and a maximum capacity of 180 mgd. DC Water’s projected average water demand based on population in 2020 is 156.5 mgd. Both Dalecarlia and McMillan serve not only the needs of the District, but they also provide water to Arlington County and a portion of the Fairfax Water service area in Virginia. The total demand of all three water providers is easily met within the current operational capability of the Washington Aqueduct water treatment system.

1302.13 Potable water storage and pumping responsibilities are shared by DC Water and the Washington Aqueduct. DC Water operates four treated water pumping stations (Anacostia, Bryant Street, Fort Reno, and 16th and Alaska NW) and eight reservoirs and elevated tanks. The Washington Aqueduct operates the Dalecarlia Pump Station and three reservoirs: Foxhall, Van Ness, and Fort Reno.

1302.14 DC Water is the primary agency responsible for the District’s treated water distribution system, which consists of pipes, elevated water storage tanks, valves, and public hydrants that deliver water to customers and meet other municipal needs such as fire suppression. The system is divided into nine water distribution zones (also known as service areas) based on differences in ground elevation. These areas are shown on Map 13.2.

1302.15 DC Water pumps an average of 95 mgd through the distribution system, which includes almost 1,350 miles of water mains ranging in size from four to 78 inches in diameter. This system also includes more than 36,000 valves and approximately 9,000 hydrants. The median age of the water mains is 79 years old, and some have been in service for more than a century. DC Water continually assesses the reliability and integrity of the water and sewer system pipes. To the extent that maintenance, corrosion, and break reports reveal problems, specific upgrades are factored into DC Water’s 10-year Capital Improvement Program.

1302.16 Map 13.2: DC Water Service Distribution Zones

(Source: DC Water 2018)

##### **10-A DCMR § 1303** IN-1.1 ENSURING AN ADEQUATE FUTURE WATER SUPPLY {#sec-10-a1303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1303}

1303.1 While conservation efforts and other measures have been used as assumptions for the current 20-year drinking water demand forecast, which is significantly lower than demand was in 1995, important factors could affect future water availability. For example, the unpredictable effects of climate change, such as prolonged drought, could affect available water from the Potomac River, which is especially sensitive to changes in historic streamflow. One positive trend is the water conservation efforts of recent years. The 2015 ICPRB study found that the Washington, DC metropolitan area’s efforts toward sustainable demand have been successful. While the area’s population rose by approximately 18 percent from 1990 to 2015, its water demand has remained constant. The relatively consistent demand can be attributed to the falling per-household demand, which is forecasted to be reduced further by approximately 25 gallons per day between 2015 and 2040. The study also noted that supplier programs encouraging conservation were an important factor behind this trend.

1303.2 The following policy states the District’s commitment to plan for the long-term adequacy of its water supply. It is supplemented by policies in the Environmental Protection Element on water conservation.

1303.3 Policy IN-1.1.1: Adequate Water Supply

Provide a safe, adequate water supply, including in times of stress such as drought, to serve current and future District needs by working with other regional jurisdictions, USACE, and DC Water.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1304** IN-1.2 MODERNIZING DRINKING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1304}

1304.1 In conjunction with DC Water, Washington, DC must consider the impacts of new development and ensure that water infrastructure will be able to meet future demand while maintaining water quality and reliability. Planned improvements to the water system involve normal maintenance to replace aging water distribution mains and small-diameter pipes, and upgrades to keep pace with population growth and new development. This may also include adding new water storage facilities, increasing the capacity of certain water mains, and upgrading pump stations.

1304.2 Some areas in Wards 7 and 8 have historically experienced low water pressure. To improve the pressure, DC Water built a new pumping station in 2008, and in 2018, completed the construction of a new two-million-gallon water storage tower and new transmission mains at St. Elizabeths. These elements collectively created a new water service zone (new pressure area) south of the Fort Stanton area.

1304.3 In 2013, DC Water adopted Blue Horizon 2020, a strategic plan aimed at realigning the way water and wastewater are managed in Washington, DC. The plan seeks to manage water, wastewater, and stormwater more holistically, recognizing that drinking water is a scarce commodity subject to a variety of threats and challenges. One of the goals of Blue Horizon 2020 is to optimally manage infrastructure. The plan sets the objective of replacing or rehabilitating one percent of linear water infrastructure annually. It calls for an increased focus on preventive maintenance, including development of a Comprehensive Asset Management Plan. It also seeks to use alternative technologies and innovation to create more sustainable, cost-effective operations.

1304.4 Policy IN-1.2.1: Managing Water Systems

Take an integrated approach to the planning of water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities and services. The merging of these systems will serve as the basis of a single water approach for both planning and management, which will balance the water environment and lead to better water services.

1304.5 Policy IN-1.2.2: Drinking Water Quality

Drinking water in Washington, DC shall be both clean and safe to residents, workers and visitors.

1304.6 Policy IN-1.2.3: Modernizing and Rehabilitating Water Infrastructure

Work proactively with DC Water to repair and replace aging infrastructure, and to upgrade the water distribution system to meet current and future demand. The District will support water system improvement programs that rehabilitate or replace undersized, defective, or deteriorating mains. The District will also support concurrent programs to ensure that lines are flushed in order to eliminate the potential for stagnant water to accumulate at the ends of water mains.

1304.7 Policy IN-1.2.4: Providing Adequate Water Pressure

Work proactively with DC Water to provide land for new storage tanks and other necessary operations so that adequate water supply and pressure can be provided to all areas of the District. The siting and design of water storage tanks and similar facilities should be consistent with the policies of the Urban Design and Environmental Protection elements, and should minimize visual impacts, with special consideration to views of ridges or hills.

1304.8 Action IN-1.2.A: Water System Maps

Support DC Water efforts to update water system maps to accurately show pipelines, valves, and hydrants, as well as the age, material, size, and lining of pipelines.

1304.9 Action IN-1.2.B: Small Diameter Water Main Rehabilitation Program

Continue the implementation of the Small Diameter Water Main Rehabilitation Program as identified in DC Water’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Work includes rehabilitating small-diameter (12-inch diameter and smaller) water mains to improve water pressure, system reliability, and flows in the system, as well as to maintain water quality.

1304.10 Action IN-1.2.C: Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Improvements

Continue the assessment of advanced water treatment processes that use ozonation, biologically active filters, ultraviolet light disinfection, and other innovative approaches to treat water.

1304.11 Action IN-1.2.D: Residential Lead Line Replacement Program

Require identification and replacement of all lead water mains and residential service pipes District-wide, focusing on households with children, low-income residents, and communities of color. Encourage completion of such efforts within a 10-year timeline. Support and expand opportunities to assist District homeowners in affordably replacing lead service lines, complementing DC Water’s program.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional policies on drinking water quality and water conservation.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1305** IN-2 WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER SYSTEMS {#sec-10-a1305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1305}

1305.1 This section of the element addresses wastewater and stormwater needs as well as DC Water’s efforts to improve its system to meet current and future needs. Although wastewater (sewage) and stormwater disposal needs are very different, they are addressed together in this section because of the physical links that currently exist between the two systems.

1305.2 Like many older American cities, a significant portion of Washington, DC is challenged with aging infrastructure issues, including maintenance. The existing sanitary sewer system dates as far back as 1810 and includes materials such as brick, vitrified clay, and cast iron. Current sewer construction materials typically consist of PVC, ductile iron, and concrete. This wide array of materials is distributed across an approximately 1,800-mile wastewater system, creating a complex set of maintenance considerations and needs.

1305.3 A significant portion of Washington, DC is served by a combined sewer system. Such systems, which use the same pipes to convey stormwater and wastewater were common in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Combined sewer systems are prevalent in the downtown area and in older portions of the District. Under normal conditions, the water from these systems is able to be treated; however, when stressed by significant storm events, the capacity of the system is overwhelmed, and combined sewer overflows (CSOs) occur. In some of these events, the combined sewer system cannot accommodate the increase in stormwater, causing a mixture of wastewater and stormwater to overflow into local waterways. There are presently 53 CSO outfalls listed in DC Water’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES Permit Program, created in 1972, addresses water pollution by regulating its point sources and is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

1305.4 DC Water’s current CSO Abatement Program combines projects to maximize storage of stormwater and wastewater, and to minimize overflows to receiving waters. The program consists of inflatable dams, dynamically controlled weirs, outfall gates and other flow-regulating devices, sewer separations, and a swirl treatment facility. The Northeast Boundary Swirl Facility provides preliminary treatment, including disinfection and some solids removal for combined sewage overflows prior to discharge during wet weather. In addition, the DC Clean Rivers Project is a vast infrastructure program designed to capture and clean wastewater before it reaches the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, as well as Rock Creek. It is described later in this section.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1306** IN-2.1 WASTEWATER SYSTEM {#sec-10-a1306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1306}

1306.1 DC Water is responsible for wastewater collection and transmission in the District, including operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer system. DC Water operates 1,800 miles of sanitary and combined sewers, 160 flow meters, nine wastewater pumping stations, 16 stormwater pumping stations, 12 inflatable dams, and a swirl facility. With a total service area of approximately 725 square miles, DC Water also treats wastewater for approximately 1.6 million people in neighboring jurisdictions, including Montgomery and Prince George’s counties in Maryland and Fairfax and Loudoun counties in Virginia. In addition, DC Water is responsible for the 50-mile-long Potomac Interceptor System, which provides conveyance of wastewater from areas in Virginia and Maryland to the Blue Plains Treatment Plant.

1306.2 According to Climate Ready DC, stormwater and sewer collection systems will likely need to manage more frequent and severe rain events and potential inundation from sea level rise and coastal storms. Washington, DC is working to ensure water infrastructure will be able to meet future demand by enhancing the efficiency and resilience of the system.

1306.3 DC Water’s Blue Plains WTP is located at the southernmost tip of Washington, DC, covering more than 150 acres partially fronting the Potomac River. Blue Plains is the largest advanced wastewater treatment facility in the world. It treats an annual average of 290 mgd and has a design capacity of 384 mgd, with a peak design capacity to treat more than one billion gallons per day.

1306.4 DC Water’s CIP budget includes significant capital investment in several large projects, such as the Biosolids Management Program, DC Clean Rivers, and the Blue Plains Total Nitrogen Program. As of 2016, the 10-year CIP totals $3.75 billion, with a lifetime budget of $10.95 billion.

1306.4a Text Box: Biosolids Management Program

The Walter F. Bailey Bioenergy Facility, which is now operational, significantly reduces DC Water’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The innovative thermal hydrolysis process uses intense heat and pressure to treat wastewater solids, producing a much cleaner biosolid and on-site generation of up to one-third of Blue Plains’ electricity needs, enough electricity to power 11,000 homes, and cutting DC Water’s electricity bill at Blue Plains by one-third. The increased energy independence will reduce the financial burden on ratepayers while also helping to keep Washington, DC’s rivers clean and reducing its carbon footprint.

1306.4b DC Water processes up to 370 mgd of wastewater and separates approximately 400 tons of solids from that water daily. Before the biodigesters were built, DC Water produced 1,200 tons of solids a day that had to be trucked off Blue Plains at a cost to ratepayers of more than $17 million annually and more than two million trucking miles. This new thermal hydrolysis process has resulted in operational efficiencies in biosolids hauling and chemicals costs.

1306.5 Policy IN-2.1.1: Improving Wastewater Collection and Treatment

Provide for the safe and efficient collection and treatment of wastewater generated by the District’s households and businesses. Ensure that new development does not exceed wastewater system capacity.

1306.6 Policy IN-2.1.2: Investing in Wastewater Treatment Facilities

The Blue Plains treatment plant should be maintained and upgraded as needed to meet capacity needs to accommodate growth in the District and to incorporate technological advances in wastewater treatment. Provide sustained capital investment in the District’s sewer and stormwater collection system to maintain and sustain capacity. Construct the Clean Rivers Project to control combined sewer overflows and meet water quality standards. Continue to reduce overflows of untreated sewage and improve the quality of effluent discharged to surface waters.

1306.7 Policy IN-2.1.3: Unauthorized Storm Sewer Connections

Continue to take appropriate measures when illegal stormwater and sanitary sewer lines outside of the combined sanitary and stormwater system area are identified. These corrective measures include penalties and termination of service to abate unauthorized connections.

1306.8 Action IN-2.1.A: Wastewater Collection and Treatment Capital Improvement Program

Continue to implement wastewater treatment improvements as identified in the DC Water CIP. Collection system projects include the replacement of undersized, aging, or deteriorated sewers; the installation of sewers to serve areas of new development or redevelopment; replacement and rehabilitation of pumping station force mains; and the Clean Rivers Project. Capital projects are required to rehabilitate, upgrade, or provide new facilities at Blue Plains to ensure that it can reliably meet its NPDES permit requirements now and in the future.

1306.9 Action IN-2.1.B: On-site Wastewater Treatment

Encourage the use of on-site water collection and reuse systems for any Planned Unit Development. On-site water systems collect stormwater and treat it so that it can be reused in a building or at the local, neighborhood scale for non-potable needs, including toilet flushing and cooling.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1307** IN-2.2 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT {#sec-10-a1307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1307}

1307.1 The District’s storm drainage system consists of approximately 1,800 miles of sanitary and combined sewers, 16 stormwater stations, 75,000 catch basins and manholes, and 22 flow-metering stations. DC Water also maintains more than 500 separate storm sewer discharges into local rivers and creeks. Since the early 1900s, separate stormwater and sanitary sewers have been constructed within the District. In the existing combined sewer area, pipes and infrastructure have been upgraded as new developments connect to the existing system.

1307.2 Planned and programmed stormwater improvements include the replacement of undersized or deteriorated storm sewers with new and larger diameter pipes, and the installation of storm sewers to serve areas of new development or redevelopment. Rehabilitation and replacement of pumping station force mains are also planned. Regional and intergovernmental cooperation will be needed to maximize the effectiveness of these upgrades (see the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement text box).

See the Environmental Protection Element for policies and actions related to low impact development, green roofs, and other ways to reduce stormwater run-off.

1307.3 Policy IN-2.2.1: Improving Stormwater Management

Ensure that stormwater is efficiently conveyed, backups are minimized or eliminated, and the quality of receiving waters is sustained. Stormwater management should be an interagency process, with clear lines of responsibility with regard to oversight, guidelines, and sources.

1307.4 Policy IN-2.2.2: Decrease Stormwater Runoff

Reduce stormwater runoff through a variety of approaches, such as rain gardens, bioswales, green roofs, trees, cisterns, and pervious pavement. By 2032, capture, retain, or reuse stormwater from at least 10 percent of Washington DC’s land area. Focus on areas that flood regularly, have steep topography, or have known drainage capacity issues.

1307.5 Policy IN-2.2.3: Stormwater Retention Credits

Support ongoing District initiatives to reduce stormwater runoff, such as the Department of Energy and the Environment’s (DOEE’s) Stormwater Retention Credit Trading Program, which allows property owners to generate and sell stormwater retention credits to earn revenue for projects that reduce stormwater runoff through installation of green infrastructure or removal of impervious surfaces.

1307.6 Action IN-2.2.A: Stormwater Capital Improvements

Continue the implementation of stormwater capital improvements as identified in DC Water’s CIP.

1307.7 Action IN-2.2.B: Stormwater Management Responsibilities

In compliance with the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Enhancement Amendment Act of 2008, continue to refine an integrated process for managing stormwater that enhances interagency communication and formally assigns responsibility and funding to stormwater drainage management. This process should include:

An appropriate funding mechanism to consistently maintain clean water standards and reduce surface runoff;

Clear lines of responsibility with regard to which agency provides oversight, guidelines, and resources for the stormwater system and its management; and

Assurance that stormwater improvements associated with new development are coordinated with the DC Water CIP.

1307.8 Action IN-2.2.C: Rainwater Reuse

Develop guidance on the installation, treatment, monitoring controls, and inspections for rainwater reuse for non-potable purposes.

1307.8a Text Box: Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement

On June 16, 2014, the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement was signed. Signatories included representatives from the entire watershed. The agreement commits the Bay’s headwater states to full partnership in the Bay Program. This is a historic agreement, as it facilitates coordination across the Bay’s political boundaries. The agreement establishes goals and outcomes for the restoration of the Bay, its tributaries, and the lands that surround them.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1308** IN-2.3 COMBINED SEWER SYSTEM {#sec-10-a1308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1308}

1308.1 As noted earlier, a portion of the District’s sewer system includes combined wastewater and stormwater pipes. This area encompasses about 12,600 acres—or one-third of the District’s land area (see Figure 13.4). A majority of this area was developed before 1900.

1308.2 The Clean Rivers Project is DC Water’s ongoing program to reduce CSOs into the District's waterways, specifically the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and Rock Creek. The project is a large-scale infrastructure and support program designed to capture and clean wastewater during rainfalls before it reaches these water bodies. The project also aims to stop the chronic sewer overflows that have plagued Washington, DC since the early 1900s. The project is comprised of a system of deep tunnels, sewers, and diversion facilities that capture CSOs and deliver them to DC Water’s Blue Plains advanced WTP, where the water is treated and cleaned before release to the District’s rivers. Figure 13.3 illustrates the system.

1308.3 Figure 13.3: DC Water’s Clean River Tunnel System

(Source: DC Water 2018)

1308.4 The Clean Rivers Project encourages installation of green infrastructure, including green roofs, permeable pavements, and bioretention areas, such as tree boxes and bioswales to assist with reduction of CSOs to the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and Rock Creek. The Anacostia and Potomac rivers’ tunnel systems include more than 18 miles of tunnels that are larger than Metrorail’s tunnels and located more than 100 feet below the ground. With the current sewer system, practically every time it rains, untreated sewage and rainwater (combined sewage) is discharged into Washington, DC’s rivers and creeks. The Clean Rivers Project will install diversion facilities at strategic locations to capture this untreated sewage and divert it to the 157-million-gallon tunnel system where it will be stored and subsequently conveyed to the Blue Plains advanced WTP for treatment.

1308.5 The DC Clean Rivers Project is estimated to reduce CSOs annually by up to 96 percent throughout the system and by up to 98 percent for the Anacostia River. In addition, the project will reduce the chance of flooding in the areas it serves from approximately 50 percent to 7 percent (equivalent to a 15-year storm) in any given year and reduce nitrogen discharged to the Chesapeake Bay by approximately one million pounds per year.

1308.5a Text Box: Green Infrastructure and Local Employment

In addition to helping reduce CSOs, green infrastructure can also provide additional triple bottom-line (environmental, social, and economic) benefits to the District. An additional agreement between DC Water and District government will support local job creation through the implementation of green infrastructure. The agreement, signed in 2015, created the Infrastructure Academy, an ambitious local jobs program that includes training and certification opportunities for District residents interested in green infrastructure construction, inspection, and maintenance jobs. DC Water has established a goal to have 51 percent of new jobs created by this project filled by District residents. DC Water will also engage professional service firms and contractors based in Washington, DC to perform work associated with green infrastructure.

1308.6 The DC Clean Rivers Project will greatly reduce CSO discharge, but even with the project’s full implementation, CSO discharge will still occasionally occur. Additional provisions to improve water quality will also be needed.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional information on sewer overflow conditions, as well as the need to update the District’s water quality standards.

1308.7 Figure 13.4: Combined Sewer System Area and Tunnel System 1308.7 (updated to reflect new data)

(

**History**
- *Source: DC Water, 2018) 1308.8 Policy IN-2.3.1: Reducing CSO Outfalls and Overflow Events Reduce the number of CSO outfalls that drain into the region’s rivers and reduce the number of CSO events by completing implementation of DC Water’s Clean Rivers Project, which will reduce CSO outfall events by 98 percent to the Anacostia River and 96 percent system-wide when fully implemented. Encourage development of additional remediation efforts to address remaining CSO events to account for increased storm frequency and intensity from climate change and support fishable/swimmable water quality in the District’s streams and rivers. 1308.9 Action IN-2.3.A: Rehabilitate Pumps Rehabilitate and maintain pump stations to support the Clean Rivers Project and off-load stormwater in targeted combined sewer areas. 1308.10 Action IN-2.3.B: Federal Funding Pursue federal funding to cover an equitable share of the Clean Rivers Project as the federal government was the original designer and builder of the system, is a major user of the combined sewer system, and is a significant beneficiary of the effort.*
- *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 Amendment Act of 2021, effective August 21, 2021 (D.C. Law 24-20; 68 DCR 006918 (July 16, 2021)). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Comprehensive Plan 10-A DCMR § 1308*

##### **10-A DCMR § 1309** IN-3 SOLID WASTE {#sec-10-a1309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1309}

1309.1 District-owned solid waste facilities transfer roughly 450,000 tons of solid waste per year, which is collected by both public and private solid waste collectors. Municipal solid waste consists of everyday items, such as product packaging, food waste, furniture and other household items, clothing, and larger bulk items, like household appliances. DPW solid waste management administration is responsible for waste collection services from all government entities and approximately 105,000 single-family homes and residential buildings with up to three living units. Private solid waste collectors handle solid waste from commercial establishments and multi-family residential buildings containing four or more units. The Department of General Services (DGS) is responsible for managing solid waste generated at District government facilities. Approximately 63 percent of the solid waste received by the two District-owned solid waste transfer stations is from commercial sources and multi-family residences, while 37 percent is generated from DPW-serviced residential uses and the government sector.

1309.2 DPW provides trash collection, recycling collection, leaf and yard waste collection, and dead animal removal in the District. At the Fort Totten transfer station, DPW manages residential drop-off of household hazardous and electronic waste as well as paper shredding services; DPW is also responsible for street and alley cleaning. The Solid Waste Education and Enforcement Team at DPW is responsible for education, technical assistance, outreach, and all sanitation regulations in the District. The DPW Office of Waste Diversion is responsible for District-wide waste diversion policy and planning.

1309.3 The Mayor’s Office of the Clean City is the central point of contact and champion for preventing and reducing litter and trash pollution in Washington, DC. The office collaborates with other District agencies to ensure cleanliness of Washington, DC, encouraging businesses, neighborhoods, and visitors to help reduce trash, pick up litter, sweep sidewalks, and discourage graffiti. It works to strengthen existing laws aimed at improving procedures and enhancing regulations to keep the District clean.

See the Environmental Protection Element for information and policies on recycling, composting, and reducing the solid waste stream.

1309.3a Text box: Recycling Rules

Residential and commercial recycling is required in the District. DPW residential recycling includes a pickup on the same day as trash pickup. Commercial recycling is required by law. Any premise not authorized to receive municipal trash and recycling collection services, or containing a unit used for non-residential purposes, is considered a business or commercial establishment. Under District law, all commercial properties are required to implement a recycling program. In January 2018, a new list of materials required to be recycled was published. For the first time, the same items will be required to be recycled in all commercial and residential properties across the District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1310** IN-3.1 SOLID WASTE TRANSFER FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1310}

1310.1 An efficient solid waste transfer station system is essential to the District. There are currently four solid waste transfer facilities, two of which are privately owned and two of which are District-operated. The DPW-operated transfer stations are the Fort Totten Facility, located at 4900 John McCormack Drive NE, and the Benning Road Facility located at 3200 Benning Road NE. At each transfer station, waste is consolidated, sorted, and loaded onto long-haul trailers for transfer to landfills, energy facilities, recycling facilities, or compost facilities across the region. Of the municipal solid waste managed by District-owned transfer stations, approximately 60 percent is processed at the Fort Totten Transfer Station and the remaining 40 percent at the Benning Road Transfer Station. All municipal solid waste in Washington, DC is removed by truck because there are no active incinerators or landfills within Washington, DC.

1310.2 Washington, DC does not currently operate a construction and demolition (C&D) debris transfer station, but it does permit disposal of a limited amount of C&D at the Fort Totten processing station. Large-scale commercial building debris disposal is handled privately. The majority of C&D is currently processed by several transfer stations in the surrounding areas of southern Maryland and northern Virginia.

1310.3 Policy IN-3.1.1: Solid Waste Collection

Provide safe, reliable, adequate solid waste collection from residences, business establishments, institutions, and other facilities.

1310.4 Policy IN-3.1.2: Reducing Community Impacts

Reduce the adverse effects of solid waste facilities, including noise, odors, and truck traffic, on District neighborhoods.

1310.5 Policy IN-3.1.3: Zero Waste

Work to achieve zero waste in the District by 2032 by diverting 80 percent or more of waste generated in Washington, DC. This diversion can be achieved through reuse, composting, and recycling. Encourage DPW implementation of a curbside food waste pickup diversion and composting program.

1310.6 Policy IN-3.1.4: Enhancing DPW Operations

Explore approaches for enhancing DPW operations to achieve outcomes such as cleaner, healthier, and more efficient DPW services and through innovative design solutions and related partnerships. Some of these approaches are contained in the West Virginia Avenue Public Works (DPW) 2016 Campus Master Plan.

1310.6a Text Box: What Is a Solid Waste Transfer Facility?

A solid waste transfer facility is a light industrial facility where trash collection trucks discharge their loads for transfer from small collection vehicles to larger, long-haul vehicles. Solid waste is reloaded onto these vehicles (e.g., trucks, trains, and barges) for shipment to a final disposal site. Transfer facilities are typically fully enclosed. Workers screen incoming waste on the receiving floor or in an earthen pit, recovering materials from the waste stream that can be recycled and separating out any inappropriate wastes (e.g., tires, large appliances, automobile batteries). Transfer facility operators usually unload, reload, and transport waste off the site in a matter of hours.

1310.7 Action IN-3.1.A: Evaluate Transfer Station Needs

Evaluate the need for expansion of District-owned transfer stations to provide adequate space for proper handling of all types of separated waste, including refuse, recycling, organic waste, bulk waste, and hard-to-recycle items.

1310.8 Action IN-3.1.B: Waste Processing Facility Regulations

Encourage the private sector to provide more efficient, cleaner, and more environmentally friendly waste processing facilities for all types of solid waste. Collaborate across agencies, including, DPW, Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, and DOEE to address this need. Work with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and community organizations in drafting these regulations to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed.

1310.9 Action IN-3.1.C: Develop Zero Waste and Solid Waste Management Plans

Develop a holistic plan that includes all waste streams and related strategies to enable Washington, DC to reach its goal of 80 percent waste diversion. Strategies should include transfer station modernization needs, optimization of residential drop-off locations, and consideration of waste streams that include refuse, compostable materials, and recyclable materials, as well as hard-to-recycle items.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional policies and actions on waste management, recycling, and composting.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1311** IN-4 DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1311}

1311.1 The provision of high-quality digital infrastructure—wireless networks, fiber optics, and broadband telecommunications—is important to residents and businesses and is vital to economic development. Such infrastructure is critical in the 21st century, particularly given the security and information needs of the nation’s capital.

1311.2 Infrastructure solutions now include a wide variety of technologies, such as smart grids and utility systems, intelligent buildings, and mobility solutions, that contribute to greater accessibility to District services, more efficient and cost-effective management of District assets and resources, and a more resilient and sustainable ecosystem overall.

1311.3 Technology advances will continue to progress rapidly. Physical changes to infrastructure will be needed to integrate these new technologies, including enhanced wireless infrastructure and updated fiber to help accommodate the increased speed and volume needed for digital communications. The advancement of technology will also impact the way infrastructure is used in Washington, DC. Technology will create new ways for infrastructure systems to be integrated and to become more efficient. The District should start planning for potential related opportunities and the implications of these changes.

1311.4 OCTO is responsible for planning, maintaining, and expanding digital technology infrastructure and communications systems in the District, and for developing and enforcing related policies and standards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1312** IN-4.1 TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1312}

1312.1 Localities such as the District plan for and regulate telecommunications infrastructure in accordance with the 1996 Telecommunications Act, as well as other regulations and orders issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Washington, DC seeks to implement telecommunications policies that advance its initiatives to broaden technology infrastructure and wireless accessibility throughout the District, often in coordination with private industry and federal stakeholders.

1312.2 Digital access has become a need for most residents of the District. The digital divide is commonly understood to be the gap between people with useful access to digital and information technologies and those with little to no access at all. Bridging this divide will help contribute to long-term success, inclusion, and equity in the District. OCTO’s Connect DC Program works to increase digital literacy, improve access to devices, and provide digital connectivity to underserved District residents. Map 13.5 shows internet access in the District, where the most underserved areas are in predominantly Black, lower-income communities in Wards 7 and 8. Digital access, along with the training to adopt and use technologies, is increasingly critical to access education, workplaces and other services and activities.

1312.3 Map 13.5: Internet Access

(Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016, 1-Year ACS Public Use Microdata)

1312.4 OCTO’s DC-Net Program provides managed voice, data, and video services to local, regional, and federal government agencies within the District over a District-owned, high-capacity, secure and redundant fiber-optic telecommunications platform. The security and reliability of DC-Net are paramount because District agencies are highly reliant on the carrier for voice communications, public safety applications, traffic management, parking management, financial data transactions, and security operations. This standards-based platform is the foundation for next-generation government and public safety communications throughout Washington, DC and will help to enable smart city solutions across the District. See IN-4.2 Leveraging New and Emerging Technology for additional information.

1312.5 Minimizing the digital divide through solutions such as expanding public wireless internet access, digital literacy programs, and access to job opportunities and technical internships that focus on digitally underserved neighborhoods are core goals for Washington, DC.

1312.5a Text Box: Pennsylvania Avenue 2040 Initiative

The District, in partnership with the Golden Triangle Business Improvement District, the National Capital Planning Commission, and private companies, launched the Pennsylvania Avenue 2040 (PA 2040) initiative to enhance visitors’ experience on Pennsylvania Avenue by implementing smart city technologies. PA 2040 includes free broadband public Wi-Fi for the three-block corridor. Some of the initial technologies and applications tested in PA 2040 include moisture sensing in tree beds, smart waste management, and movement analytics.

1312.5b The PA 2040 project is working to create a better experience for users of the west Pennsylvania Avenue NW corridor. The project has demonstrated effective interagency collaboration, and its working model will be applied to new projects. As the District’s established test area for smart city applications, PA 2040 provides an environment to measure the impacts of smart city technology.

1312.6 Policy IN-4.1.1: Development of Communications Infrastructure

Washington, DC shall plan, coordinate, and oversee development and maintenance of communications infrastructure, including cable networks, fiber-optic networks, and wireless communications facilities to help support daily functions and goals related to equity and opportunity, economic development, transportation, public health and safety, security, resilience, and education.

1312.7 Policy IN-4.1.2: Digital Infrastructure Accessibility

Strategically expand the public wireless coverage that provides District residents, workers, and visitors access to highly reliable and secure internet-based services.

1312.8 Policy IN-4.1.3: Equitable Digital Access

Enhance access to digital services in the District to reduce the digital divide, strategically expanding public wireless coverage to serve underserved communities and providing such access at schools, libraries, and other District government facilities.

1312.9 Policy IN-4.1.4: Cyber Resiliency for Digital Infrastructure

Washington, DC’s digital infrastructure should be adequately protected from both physical and digital threats by using best practices and enhancing operational capabilities.

1312.10 Action IN-4.1.A: Guidelines for Siting/Design of Facilities

Establish locational and design criteria for under- and above-ground telecommunication facilities, including conduit systems, small cells, antennas, towers, switching centers, and system maintenance facilities. In addition, establish provisions to put cables and wires underground wherever feasible. Consult with ANCs and community groups in the development of siting criteria.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional policies and actions on the siting of telecommunication towers and transmission facilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1313** IN-4.2 LEVERAGING NEW AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGY {#sec-10-a1313 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1313}

1313.1 Digital technology is enabling Washington, DC to enhance infrastructure systems and to create new ways to serve and support neighborhoods. The District’s smart city approach leverages intelligent city infrastructure, connected devices, sensors, and data analytics to address challenges and improve the quality of life for residents, enhance economic growth and mobility, and improve operations and services.

1313.2 As digital technology advances, digital communications and information processing will become more important. The Internet of Things is the network comprised of physical devices, including computers, cellphones, vehicles, and any other device, that can connect to the internet and exchange data. This connectivity will allow new opportunities for infrastructure systems to be integrated, with electrical systems, water systems, and other infrastructure coordinating the operations.

1313.3 Testing applications of technology through pilot programs provides opportunities for the District to inform decision-making, develop new methods for integration, and create a flexible environment for investing in infrastructure. Urban prototyping allows the District to experiment with different pilots and technology applications, with the ability to learn and build on previous efforts.

1313.4 Infrastructure technologies are evolving and proliferating rapidly, and are expected to include notable changes, including the deployment of improved wireless connectivity, such as small cell/5G wireless. It is important that Washington, DC be responsive and flexible as new technologies emerge.

1313.5 Innovations in technology will create opportunities for the optimization of existing and future infrastructure. Smart city applications present promising opportunities, but also significant risks. While they can enhance infrastructure operations and address various needs, their adoption comes with risks that include the potential for rapid obsolescence, as well as a wide range of data management and security and privacy issues that will need to be addressed at federal, regional, and local levels in the coming years.

1313.6 Policy IN-4.2.1: Technology Applications

Technology-based initiatives, including pilot projects, should be designed to be user centric, prioritizing end users, such as residents for public-facing solutions, or government employees for government-facing solutions. These efforts should focus on solutions that address challenges including financial, operational, and environmental sustainability and resiliency issues. District needs should be clearly identified and rigorously evaluated before technology initiatives are deployed.

1313.7 Policy IN-4.2.2: Encourage Interdisciplinary and Cross-Sector Collaboration

Foster an environment of collaboration, cooperation, and shared opportunity across disciplines (technology, District planning, and design) and sectors (public, private, philanthropic, and think tanks) so that a range of perspectives and stakeholders participate in the identification of potential use cases and appropriate digital solutions to address identified District needs and providing an efficient use of District infrastructure, investment, and resources in smart city efforts.

1313.8 Policy IN-4.2.3: Efficient Use of District Assets and Resources

Leverage District assets and resources to reduce overall cost and complexity as new technologies are identified, evaluated, and deployed, including smart city projects.

1313.9 Policy IN-4.2.4: Neighborhood Integration

Integrate the hardware that supports digital technology in ways that minimize environmental impacts and visual intrusions or negative impacts to public space through noise, lighting, clutter, or obstructions.

1313.10 Policy IN-4.2.5: Privacy and Security

Smart-city services and solutions should strike an appropriate balance between capability and privacy so that they have or use appropriate resilience and cybersecurity measures. In all applications that involve collection and storage of user data, the District shall anonymize data to protect the privacy of individual residents, workers and visitors to the extent possible.

1313.11 Policy IN-4.2.6: Data Privacy

The privacy of residents, workers, and visitors should be protected through careful management of data in both specific and aggregate forms. Washington, DC is committed to being open and transparent about the “who, what, where, when, why, and how” of data collection, transmission, processing and use, but these factors should be balanced with data privacy and security considerations. The District should anonymize data collection to protect the privacy of individual residents, workers and visitors when possible.

1313.11a Text Box: ParkDC—Smart Parking

In large cities, approximately 30 percent of traffic congestion is caused by drivers who circle District streets in search of parking. The District Department of Transportation has initiated ParkDC, a demand-based pricing pilot initiative to manage and regulate the District’s curbside and parking assets. The program is designed to encourage parking turnover in high-demand areas to improve traffic congestion. It leverages intelligent sensors to measure parking usage and availability, then it shares this information with a mobile application to assist drivers with parking choices. The pilot is also using other sensor technologies to measure driver circling and identify whether this approach reduces traffic congestion.

1313.12 Action IN-4.2.A: Building on Pilot Project Lessons

Upon completion of pilot activities, such as PA 2040 and ParkDC, develop after-action reports that inform future work.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1314** IN-4.3 OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1314 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1314}

1314.1 The strategic and monetary value of Washington, DC’s infrastructure is likely to increase significantly. As an example, increased demand for denser, faster networks and access points for 5G and related technologies are anticipated to drive a significant increase in the value of utility and streetlight poles, as well as the District’s fiber network.

1314.2 Washington, DC should recognize these factors across related planning efforts, using caution before providing access to infrastructure assets in either the near or long term as part of public-private partnerships.

1314.3 Policy IN-4.3.1: Coordinating District Communications Infrastructure

Ensure OCTO conducts the planning, coordination, oversight, and development of District-owned communications infrastructure, including fiber-optic networks and wireless communication.

1314.4 Policy IN-4.3.2: Asset Control in Public-Private Partnerships

Encourage District retention of ownership and/or control of assets as part of public-private partnerships. Assets may include data, public rights-of-way and publicly owned elements within a public right-of-way, including light poles, sidewalks, transit shelters, and other fixtures.

1314.5 Policy IN-4.3.3: Preparation for and Responsiveness to Change

Encourage flexibility in responding to, absorbing, and incorporating technology changes as they emerge, while at the same time preparing for technology implications over longer time horizons, including potential obsolescence. Current technology changes include 5G networks, autonomous vehicles, and drone and robot delivery services. Consideration should be given to both District needs and those of private providers.

1314.6 Policy IN-4.3.4: Data-Sharing Agreements

Establish appropriate data-sharing agreements with private sector entities and others who use District infrastructure. All such agreements shall anonymize and protect the personally identifiable information of District residents, workers and visitors.

1314.7 Policy IN-4.3.5: Equitable Access to Digital Services and New Technologies

Prioritize equity in the public and private implementation of new technologies. District government shall seek to provide equitable access to digital services and encourage the application of new technologies to enhance access to services for all residents, and especially residents in Wards 7 and 8 and underserved populations, households with children, older adults, and persons with disabilities. Recognize and address potential barriers to access, adopt, and use new technologies.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1315** IN-5 ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1315 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1315}

1315.1 While population growth may entail a significant increase in energy demand, demand will be offset by the incorporation of distributed energy resources (DERs). DERs increase the efficiency and effectiveness of energy generation, storage, distribution, and use. DERs will help Washington, DC achieve a clean energy future, avoid infrastructure investments, and improve resilience and the integration of clean energy resources to the grid, if properly considered in planning for Washington, DC’s energy future.

1315.2 Local law requires that, by 2032, the District will source all of the energy it consumes from renewable sources and up to 200 megawatts from local solar generation. These efforts, paired with major energy efficiency initiatives, account for foreseeable significant changes in energy use and infrastructure needs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1316** IN-5.1 ELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1316 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1316}

1316.1 Electricity is delivered to District consumers by electric transmission and distribution facilities. Power plants generate high-voltage electricity, which is transported along transmission lines into the power grid to substations located throughout the District. From the substations, distribution lines deliver the electricity to transformers on the ground or mounted on utility poles. The transformers reduce the voltage so that it can be safely used by District consumers. Currently, PEPCO supplies 85 percent of the District ’s residential customers and 63 percent of its commercial customers; the remainder is provided by other suppliers.

1316.2 Since the decommissioning of PEPCO’s oil-fired power plants at Benning Road and Buzzard Point, the majority of electricity supplied to District residents is generated by coal-fueled power plants in Maryland. Washington, DC receives this power from point-to-point or radial transmission lines that terminate in the area they serve. With the decommissioning of the District’s power plants, PEPCO is in the process of transforming the radial transmission system to a networked system, which would create redundancy and make the District more resilient. This networked system project, called the Capital Grid Project, will connect multiple supply lines to critical substations, creating alternative pathways for power to flow that will support faster restoration and reduce the potential impact of unforeseen shocks and stressors.

1316.3 To maintain reliable power distribution in Washington, DC, PEPCO maintains a presence on various properties in the District for substations, fleet maintenance, and storage and service yards. PEPCO currently uses a 10-year planning horizon to estimate substation capacity. Its latest 10-year forecast determined that two new and four rebuilt substations will be needed to meet forecast load growth needs through 2030. These capital improvements are estimated at more than $943 million in investment.

1316.4 As part of PEPCO’s Capital Grid Project, a new waterfront substation will provide additional capacity for the South Capitol Corridor, Buzzard Point, and the Southwest Waterfront areas. A new substation is planned for Mount Vernon Triangle that will serve north of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa), Northwest One, and the Mt. Vernon Triangle. Four substations are being rebuilt as follows:

Harrison substation, which serves Friendship Heights and Chevy Chase;

Harvard substation, which serves Columbia Heights, Adams Morgan, and Mt. Pleasant;

F Street substation, which serves the western downtown area; and

Champlain substation, which is a sub-transmission substation and will provide new 69 kV and 34 kV supply to four substations.

1316.5 PEPCO is in the midst of a number of 4 kV to 13 kV conversion projects, updating aging overhead and underground infrastructure to current standards, which will allow for more growth and be able to accommodate more distributed energy resources. Conversions are taking place in Georgetown, Fort Totten, Southwest, Congress Heights, Columbia Heights, and Barney Circle.

1316.6 Beyond the 10-year horizon, PEPCO expects to construct substations when needed to relieve future overloads at stations that are approaching capacity and to respond to future growth. However, future needs should be continually assessed and closely monitored to balance investments for the future that will be needed to serve District needs at that point in time.

1316.7 Investments should be balanced with the District’s goal of reducing energy usage by 50 percent, as recommended in the Sustainable DC Plan. If this goal is met, significantly fewer upgrades in distribution infrastructure for electricity will be needed. To avoid making unnecessary improvements, Washington, DC should actively coordinate infrastructure improvements across relevant agencies and energy providers.

1316.8 Over the past several years, PEPCO has deployed an advanced metering infrastructure system and has been developing the smart grid in the District. Projects related to the smart grid include installation of smart meters, automated switching devices that isolate electrical faults and automatically restore customers by switching them to other area feeders, and underground monitoring devices that detect problems before they turn into major events. In addition to improving reliability, the smart grid also helps conserve energy through demand response and direct load control programs and supports the installation of distributed generation and conservation voltage reduction. PEPCO is leveraging the smart grid for potential projects, such as electric vehicle charging infrastructure, micro-grids, and battery installations. Collectively, these programs are anticipated to reduce overall energy consumption and demand, leading to deferral of some capital expenses.

1316.8a Text Box: Neighborhood Energy Systems

Neighborhood-scale energy systems, also known as district energy, can be a cost-effective way of improving resilience and reducing GHG emissions and energy costs. These systems can include both micro-grids and combined heat-and-power systems. Micro-grids are small, neighborhood-scale networks of electricity users with a local source of energy; while they are attached to the larger grid, they can also function independently. A combined heat-and-power system generates electricity while simultaneously producing heating and/or cooling, which is distributed through a neighborhood-scale network by steam, hot water, or chilled water. The District’s current neighborhood-scale energy facilities are operated by GSA, as well as several local universities. New systems are proposed for several major redevelopment sites by the District, DC Water, and private developers.

1316.9 Individual development projects and redevelopment on large sites will require new feeder lines to serve additional customers. Construction of these lines will impact existing development and infrastructure in a variety of ways. Underground distribution systems, which are typically required in new development, will require construction of new conduits, cables, and subsurface or pad-mounted transformers. Dense commercial or multi-family residential developments will often require the extension of new mainline underground feeder groups, potentially resulting in digging up streets and sidewalks. Public utility easements may also be needed to provide buried distribution systems inside multi-building developments.

1316.10 An increasing supply of electricity for the District is generated by a mix of renewable resources. Renewable energy requirements and incentives have resulted in deployment of 40 megawatts (MW) of intermittent solar energy to the grid, and the amount of energy supplied by solar is expected to increase in the future. As an example, by 2030 it is anticipated that 300 MW of power will be generated by solar panels in Washington, DC alone.

1316.11 The DC Power Line Undergrounding (DC PLUG) Project was recommended by the Power Line Undergrounding Task Force to significantly improve power reliability in the District. Through the collaborative task force process, the District approved a multi-year, $500 million power line undergrounding project to help prevent prolonged electric service outages during major weather events. This effort will result in the strategic undergrounding of the high-voltage feeder power lines that are responsible for the higher frequency outages in Wards 3, 4, 7, and 8. Secondary and service lines will remain above ground.

1316.12 Policy IN-5.1.1: Adequate Electricity

Ensure adequate electric supply to serve current and future District needs. This will require collaboration with PEPCO and other service providers on the location and scale of facilities to meet future development and neighborhood demand.

1316.13 Policy IN-5.1.2: Undergrounding Electric Distribution Lines

Continue to enhance the resilience and safety of electric distribution lines and reduce their visual impact through power line undergrounding. Seek equitable means to cover the high costs associated with undergrounding. Use the opportunity for undergrounding to bury other above-ground communication lines, such as telephone and fiber lines, wherever feasible.

1316.14 Policy IN-5.1.3: Modernizing the Electric Distribution System

Modernize the energy delivery system, increase sustainability, and make the system more reliable, efficient, and cost-effective. Balance these expanded capabilities with PEPCO’s basic obligation to deliver safe, reliable, and affordable energy to the District.

1316.15 Policy IN-5.1.4: Develop Neighborhood-Scale Energy Systems

Promote the development of micro-grids, District heating and cooling, and other neighborhood-scale energy strategies. Encourage large projects to assess the feasibility of neighborhood-scale energy systems.

1316.16 Action IN-5.1.A: Aging Infrastructure

Implement improvement programs that can help enhance the resilience of the transmission and distribution of electrical power, such as through system reinforcement. This may involve upgrading the system by repairing or replacing aging infrastructure or expanding the original facilities.

1316.17 Action IN-5.1.B: Undergrounding Electric Distribution Lines

Continue implementing the DC PLUG initiative, which calls for placing electric distribution lines underground throughout the District.

See the Environmental Protection Element for information about the District’s Energy Emergency Plan and Comprehensive Energy Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1317** IN-5.2 NATURAL GAS INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1317 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1317}

1317.1 Consumption of natural gas has remained stable for the past 25 years, (+/- 30 trillion BTU), even as petroleum and coal consumption have decreased dramatically and as the population has grown. District consumers receive natural gas through transmission and distribution pipelines leading to compressor stations in and around the region. Regional Washington Gas compressor stations are located in the District; Loudon County, Virginia; and in Chillum, Maryland, with additional Transco Natural Gas Compressor Stations in Manassas, Virginia, and Columbia, Maryland. It is important to be ever vigilant about the need for natural gas safety, given the potential hazards associated with gas leaks.

1317.2 Policy IN-5.2.1: Natural Gas Safety

Promote consumer education on the benefits of regular monitoring of all above-ground and buried natural gas piping on the ratepayer’s ’s side of the meter to prevent corrosion, leaking, and other safety hazards. Work with Washington Gas to assess, monitor, and address leaks from the distribution system. In addition to safety concerns relating to flammability, these gas leaks contain methane, which is a potent heat-trapping GHG.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1318** IN-6 INFRASTRUCTURE AND GROWTH {#sec-10-a1318 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1318}

1318.1 This section addresses the need to plan for, coordinate, fund, and implement capital improvements to address existing deficiencies, as well to address the impacts and cost of new development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1319** IN-6.1 INFRASTRUCTURE AND NEW DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a1319 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1319}

1319.1 One of the basic purposes of the Comprehensive Plan is to improve the linkage and coordination between the District’s development and capital improvement decisions. When well-coordinated, a state of good repair for existing infrastructure can be maintained and infrastructure sufficiency for Washington, DC’s growth can be achieved. The District anticipates potential development and/or redevelopment of various large sites in the District, including at Buzzard Point, Hill East, the Florida Avenue Market, Walter Reed, the Armed Forces Retirement Home, St. Elizabeths, Poplar Point, McMillan, Union Station/Burnham Place, Brentwood, and Bladensburg Road at New York Avenue NE, and possibly at RFK Stadium. The goal for these efforts is to create vibrant new communities that are effectively integrated with surrounding neighborhoods, and that offer a high-quality experience for residents, workers, and visitors. Having infrastructure keep pace with growth will be critical in coming years, given that existing infrastructure systems may require modernization or expansion to meet the needs of these new areas.

1319.2 The efficient and effective financing, maintenance, operation, replacement, and expansion of local infrastructure are important for a high quality of life in Washington, DC and to properly support growth and changing needs.

1319.3 The general trend in cities and counties across the country has been for the development community to bear a greater share of the cost of infrastructure expansion, rather than leaving this burden to local taxpayers and ratepayers (see text box entitled Green Century Bonds). This is already common practice in the District.

1319.4 Coordination between agencies and with the private sector is necessary to ensure that infrastructure capacity remains adequate. Coordination helps to ensure that infrastructure is modernized and developed to serve future growth needs appropriately. It also helps identify where addressing infrastructure needs together will create time and cost savings.

1319.5 Policy IN-6.1.1: Coordination of Infrastructure Improvements

Ensure infrastructure upgrades are carefully scheduled and coordinated with development and redevelopment plans to minimize traffic rerouting, pavement cuts for laying cable or placement of other infrastructure within the street right-of-way, street closings, disruptive subsurface excavation, and utility shut-offs.

1319.6 Policy IN-6.1.2: Location and Impacts of Infrastructure Improvements

Site and design infrastructure to provide safe, reliable service, address environmental impacts, and address impacts to adjacent communities, recognizing historic siting choices that negatively impacted low-income residents and communities of color. Identify strategies to minimize impacts to adjoining properties during construction and when the infrastructure is operational.

1319.7 Policy IN-6.1.3: Infrastructure Capacity for New Neighborhoods and Large Sites

Undertake planning to provide adequate infrastructure system capacity when master planning new neighborhoods and large sites.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1320** IN-6.2 PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1320 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1320}

1320.1 In general, local governments and/or independent agencies or authorities (e.g., DC Water and PEPCO) are responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of infrastructure. There are a number of ways that local governments fund infrastructure improvements. The most common are long-term financing via bonds and pay-as-you go revenues collected via taxes or utility rates. In many cases, municipalities have foregone investment in infrastructure due to revenue constraints. The result is deferred maintenance and a long backlog of unfunded repairs—an unfortunate reality in cities across the country.

1320.2 Many local governments require infrastructure costs for new development to be borne by the developer through impact fees, special assessments, or other fees or taxes. Such fees are usually proportionate to the actual costs of building new water lines, sewer lines, and other utilities to serve the development site. While impact fees are an effective way to address the impacts of new development, they usually cannot be used to address deferred maintenance. Those costs must be financed through other means—generally through higher rates that cover the cost of bonds and capital projects that address deferred maintenance.

1320.2a Text Box: Green Century Bonds

In July 2014, DC Water issued its inaugural green bond to finance a portion of the DC Clean Rivers Project. This historic $350 million issuance represented DC Water’s inaugural green bond issue and the first certified green bond in the U.S. debt capital markets. It was also the first municipal century bond issued by a water/wastewater utility in the United States. The bond will be paid back over a 100-year period, to distribute the cost among those who benefit from the significant investment. The issuance achieved its green certification based upon the DC Clean Rivers Project’s environmental benefits, which include improving water quality by remediating CSOs, promoting climate resilience through flood mitigation and improving quality of life through promotion of biodiversity and waterfront restoration.

1320.3 Policy IN-6.2.1: Creative Financing

Promote creative financing tools to fund infrastructure development, maintenance, and replacement. These could include innovative taxing programs, user fees, new development charges, improvements through Planned Unit Developments, and other innovative cost recovery mechanisms.

1320.4 Policy IN-6.2.2: Developer Contributions

Require that private developers fund the necessary relocation or upgrading of existing utilities to address limitations with existing infrastructure on or adjacent to proposed development sites. For necessary upgrades to infrastructure, including water and wastewater, developers should contribute to the cost of extending utilities to the project site or upgrading existing utilities to the specifications necessary for their proposed project.

1320.5 Policy IN-6.2.3: Infrastructure Maintenance

Support investments in infrastructure to reach and maintain a state of good repair across all systems.

1320.6 Action IN-6.2.A: Developer Reimbursement Agreements

Formulate consistent, equitable, and manageable developer reimbursement agreements for the incremental costs of utility upgrades, including water and sewer. The agreements should provide a means for the initial developer to be reimbursed by the District through payments by other developers who benefit from the initial developer’s infrastructure improvements.

1320.7 Action IN-6.2.B: Community Infrastructure Investment

Explore methods to properly assess and meet infrastructure needs associated with incremental development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1321** IN-6.3: CROSS-SYSTEMS INTEGRATION {#sec-10-a1321 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1321}

1321.1 Future improvements to the District’s infrastructure should be planned in a collaborative, integrated manner that can identify and maximize shared benefits, rather than be siloed by specific systems or agency. Examples of success, such as the DC Water Biosolids Management Program which converts byproducts of wastewater processing into energy to power the Blue Plains WTP, can become more commonplace in the District. Investments in infrastructure will require the collaboration of businesses, government, schools, community groups, and residents. Through this collaboration, and with the application of new technology, the best investments to infrastructure can be made.

1321.2 District government should also consider the importance of distributed networks, such as gas stations, in future planning efforts. The network created by standalone gas stations provides a significant energy supply to District residents, workers, and visitors. The locations of gas stations in Washington, DC are shown in Map 13.6. Future plans should consider the importance of such networks, especially in the context of emerging technologies and cross-system integrations.

1321.3 Map 13.6: Gas Station Locations in the District

(Source: DC Office of Planning, 2018)

1321.4 Policy IN-6.3.1: Infrastructure Collaboration

Encourage collaboration, cooperation, and shared opportunity across infrastructure projects, so that a range of perspectives and stakeholders participate in the identification of potential investments. Use technology to identify synergies, ensuring an efficient use of District infrastructure, investment, and resources.

1321.5 Policy IN-6.3.2: Coordination of Infrastructure Installation

Encourage enhanced coordination among relevant agencies and utilities when siting new or modernizing existing infrastructure, such as water lines and gas pipelines, telecommunications conduit, and streetscape improvements, in order to minimize duplicative efforts, such as digging, and to identify opportunities for cost and time savings.

1321.6 Action IN-6.3.A: Coordination of Infrastructure Upgrades

Continue to update a central repository for data and schedules for planned infrastructure upgrades to minimize the need for repeated street and sidewalk excavation.

1321.7 Action IN-6.3.B: Fueling Stations Shared Uses

Explore the potential for shared uses and reuses of fueling stations in the context of rapidly evolving and emerging technologies. This assessment should focus on possible cross-system uses for the facilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1322** IN-7: INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE {#sec-10-a1322 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1322}

1322.1 It is critical that infrastructure in Washington, DC be designed to withstand chronic stressors and system shocks. In recent years, the District has seen how hazardous events and climate change can stress and hurt infrastructure. For example, the destructive derecho storm of 2012 caused extensive damage to the electric grid and a prolonged power outage. Power was interrupted to more than 75,000 District residents and to public healthcare facilities for several days during a record-breaking heat wave. This event highlighted the severity and interrelated consequences of infrastructure failure, which negatively affected residents with medical needs and disproportionately harmed the lowest-income areas of the District. The storm resulted in 22 fatalities across the region and revealed the potential for cascading infrastructure impacts across critical systems that rely on electricity to operate, such as water and sewer, telecommunications, and transportation services, including transit and traffic signals.

1322.2 The District Preparedness System (DPS) forms the foundation of Washington, DC’s efforts to integrate preparedness principles District-wide, addressing protection, mitigation, response, and recovery capabilities and needs. Success of the DPS relies heavily on collaboration among District agencies with utilities across the region. By working together to identify and build the capabilities to address them, DPS stakeholders can continue to prepare for the most critical threats and hazards. DPS includes consideration of civic facilities (such as hospitals, fire and police stations, schools, libraries, and parks), as well as infrastructure.

See the Community Services and Facilities Element for more information on DPS.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1323** IN-7.1: RESILIENCE AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE {#sec-10-a1323 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1323}

1323.1 Washington, DC faces major infrastructure challenges, a growing population, and increasing risks posed by natural hazards and climate change in addition to human-made hazards and incidents. As the effects of climate change intensify and risks increase, it is critical for the District to plan for more frequent and severe impacts on infrastructure systems. This need is emphasized in the Resilient DC Strategy, which lays out Washington, DC’s approach to handling these challenges.

1323.2 This section addresses the protection and enhancement of critical infrastructure to address vulnerability to adverse effects of natural and human-made shocks, such as extreme weather events and security incidents, and to long-term stresses, such as sea level and temperature rise, which are driven by climate change. The District has adopted robust, multi-pronged strategies to address these issues. In addition to addressing sudden threats and hazards through DPS, Washington, DC is working to address chronic stressors, such as poverty, safety, and access to health care and healthy food, through a wide range of policies contained throughout the Comprehensive Plan, and these policies must be understood and implemented through an equity, particularly a racial equity, lens. While Washington, DC recognizes that many, if not most, of the Comprehensive Plan policies are connected to resilience, policies that explicitly identify resilience are contained in specific subsections of this element to provide a logical framework: this section and the CSF-2.2 Healthy Communities and Resilience section in the Community Services and Facilities Element.

1323.3 Washington, DC is investing billions of dollars in resilient and adaptive infrastructure, including the DC PLUG Program, updates to the District’s levee system, and the DC Clean Rivers Project. In addition to infrastructure hardening and other protective measures, infrastructure providers in Washington, DC should continue to focus their efforts on improving the robustness and reliability of critical systems to facilitate the continuous flow of goods, utility services, and information, particularly during times of crisis.

1323.4 This means developing adaptation plans that can include measures, such as relocation or retirement of existing infrastructure, and exploring the benefits of decentralized utility systems, which can offer greater system-wide reliability through redundancy. Adaptation plans should include consideration of projected impacts of climate change during the locational and design phases of infrastructure projects to ensure more deliberate review of proposed infrastructure investments in potentially hazardous locations and of the length of a given asset’s useful life.

1323.5 Policy IN-7.1.1: District Preparedness

Prepare Washington, DC to prevent and protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from all hazards that threaten the District, including human-made and climate change hazards. Integrate preparedness goals into relevant efforts across relevant District agencies and utilities, including through coordination with DPS. Identify and integrate equity considerations into preparedness planning.

1323.6 Policy IN-7.1.2: Consider Vulnerabilities and Mitigations when Planning Critical Infrastructure

Support efforts by utilities to consider and evaluate vulnerability and mitigations for planning and protecting critical assets and systems from human-made and natural incidents and events, as well as chronic stressors, including sea level rise and heat emergencies. Identify and prioritize major vulnerabilities and hazards, such as flooding. Incorporate risk and hazard mitigation into operational and investment planning. Mitigations can include elevating natural gas lines and hardening water systems.

1323.7 Policy IN-7.1.3: Integration of Climate Adaptability

1323.8 Policy IN-7.1.4: Technology and Resilience

Explore the use and impact of new and emerging technologies on resilience vulnerability assessment and mitigation planning.

1323.9 Policy IN-7.1.5: Energy-Resilient Infrastructure

Encourage opportunities to make energy transmission and distribution systems more resilient. Opportunities include networking the transmission system, undergrounding power lines, and incorporating micro-grids where appropriate.

1323.10 Policy IN-7.1.6 Neighborhood-Scale Systems

Explore and consider neighborhood-scale systems as a measure that can help protect infrastructure from the impacts of climate change. Neighborhood-scale systems include micro-grids, district energy, and district stormwater management.

1323.11 Action IN-7.1.A: Micro-grid-Ready Construction

Explore tools to encourage new development projects to integrate micro-grid connectivity in their designs. Such incentives should be designed to expand decentralized power generation in the District, increasing the resilience of not only the energy distribution system but also those buildings or facilities that are dependent upon it.

1323.12 Action IN-7.1.B: Community Risk Assessments

Update the Community Risk Assessment (CRA) of DPS on a recurring basis to reflect changes in the risk profiles of relevant natural and human-made systems in Washington, DC. Incorporate relevant infrastructure information in the CRA process.

1323.13 Action IN-7.1.C: Protecting Critical Infrastructure

Protect critical facilities from a wide range of threats and hazards and develop fortified and redundant systems in order to deliver essential services at all times.

1323.14 Action IN-7.1.D: Training for Protecting Critical Infrastructure

Develop a training program for protecting public utilities for law enforcement and private sector personnel.

1323.15 Action IN-7.1.E: Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure

Continue to support development of criteria and methodologies to assess the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to human-made and natural shocks, as well as chronic stressors.

1323.16 Action IN-7.1.F: Mitigating Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure

Explore approaches and tools to address identified vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure. Regional, District-wide, and site-specific factors should be taken into account, as well as near-term and long-range risks.

1323.17 Action IN-7.1.G: Emerging Technologies and Critical Infrastructure

Review and evaluate the impacts of new and emerging technologies on the District’s resilience and their potential for helping District government and utility operators to advance near-term and long-range infrastructure resilience objectives.

For other policies and actions related to resilience and critical infrastructure, see the Community Services and Facilities Element.

### **10-A14** ARTS AND CULTURE ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1400** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1400}

1400.1 The Arts and Culture Element provides policies and actions dedicated to the preservation and promotion of the arts and culture in Washington, DC. Its focus is on strengthening the role of the arts and culture in shaping the physical form of the District.

1400.2 The key issues facing the District as it seeks to foster and enhance arts and culture include:

Expanding affordable arts and cultural production, presentation, and administration spaces;

Increasing the visibility and accessibility of arts and culture as a means of diversifying resident engagement and participation;

Enhancing arts and cultural organizations’ capacity for strategic planning and partnerships;

Building capacity through investments in historically underrepresented communities; and

Celebrating community heritage through cultural spaces and programs.

1400.3 Washington, DC is one of the country’s leading cultural centers. Its breadth of artistic achievement encompasses many disciplines, cultures, individuals, and organizations. The District is home to the Smithsonian Institution, museums of fine art, symphony, ballet, and opera. From music on U Street NW to the daily literary events at local bookstores, the District’s neighborhoods celebrate Washington, DC’s distinct cultural legacy. Together, these cultural organizations’ contributions have helped Washington grow as a national cultural epicenter. Among American cities, Washington, DC is particularly notable as a leader in performance theater, featuring signature venues, award-winning local productions, and top traveling performances.

1400.4 Data included in this Element precedes the 2020 public health emergency. While the District’s economic position may be substantially affected in the early 2020’s, the District anticipates that economic trends highlighted in this chapter will hold in the long-term along with the policies contained in this chapter, which are designed to guide the District through both growth and recession cycles. Actions have been added to the Economic Development and Housing Elements of the Comprehensive Plan to address responses to and recovery from impacts of the 2020 public health emergency that affect the arts and culture sector.

1400.5 The Arts and Culture Element incorporates the DC Cultural Plan, which describes how the District will increase cultural creation, space, and consumption through shared stewardship, organizational innovation, and leveraged funding. The Cultural Plan introduces a new approach to cultural space that harnesses increased property values to generate more affordable cultural production, presentation, and administration space. This approach emphasizes strategies for shared spaces, such as studios and incubators, that will help position individuals and cultural organizations to better share in the benefits of the District’s growth.

1400.6 The DC Cultural Plan presents an equitable policy framework that is inclusive of a broader array of creative works. Culture is the universe that encompasses the arts and many segments of the larger creative economy. Culture is comprised of heritage, practices, and traditions that are important to an individual, community, or society. Arts are creative practices based in skill and knowledge. Traditional art forms, such as the visual and performing arts, trace long trajectories throughout human history as means of expressing and sharing experience and emotion. Over time, additional art forms have emerged from cultures and technologies that present different ways of communicating. These additional art forms strengthen Washington, DC’s cultural equity and facilitate its cultural evolution. The element’s policies and actions also reinforce arts and culture as expressions of local values and sources of community identity. Fostering arts and culture helps to affirm all residents’ cultural practices and increase opportunities for all residents to participate in and experience cultural and artistic expression.

1400.7 This element acknowledges the contributions of art and culture to the District’s economy and supports investments that create new jobs, goods, and services.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1401** ARTS AND CULTURE GOAL {#sec-10-a1401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1401}

1401.1 The overarching goal for arts and culture is to facilitate a cultural environment in Washington, DC that is inclusive, equitable, and accessible. This type of cultural environment will increase artistic opportunities for individual and collective cultural development by supporting cultural programs and learning experiences in the District that inspire a vibrant cultural life for all residents. This element supports physical cultural infrastructure that advances arts and culture through exchanges that elevate art and cultural works beyond passive objects to active exchanges.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1402** ARTS AND CULTURAL SPACES AC-1 CREATING AND ENHANCING ARTS AND CULTURAL SPACES {#sec-10-a1402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1402}

1402.1 This element guides expansion and democratization of cultural space by emphasizing how social, informal, and formal cultural spaces are interconnected as a system. This approach elevates locally significant practices, with an emphasis on practices that are important to historically underserved communities.

1402.2 Washington, DC’s network of cultural spaces is strong and growing. Formal cultural spaces, including museums, performance theaters, and music venues, have undergone a period of growth since the early 2000s. Informal spaces, such as libraries and recreation centers, have been extensively renovated, in part to better serve as cultural anchors with spaces for displaying artwork, presenting performances, sharing learning, and creating art and cultural work. Social cultural spaces, including parks, open spaces, and private establishments, have also been improved and expanded.

1402.3 However, many new cultural spaces house commercial entertainment and organizations that provide attractions oriented toward visitors or Washington, DC’s high-income residents. Despite the addition of new cultural spaces, many established organizations have faced serious challenges adjusting to the increasing costs of space and living in the District. Going forward, additional low-cost cultural production, presentation, and administration spaces are needed to support growth of locally significant cultural practices.

1402.4 Washington, DC is working to increase accessible, low-cost cultural spaces that enable cultural creators to connect with cultural consumers in a continuous process of imagining, testing, and scaling. This element envisions Washington, DC’s formal, informal, and social cultural spaces collectively as the District’s cultural infrastructure. Cultural infrastructure includes physical spaces, such as established theaters, shared-use production facilities, and public plazas, where arts and culture are produced and presented. The District has two primary objectives for this infrastructure: (1) increasing residents’ access to cultural creation and consumption and (2) increasing high-quality spaces that support culturally relevant activities in historically underserved communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1403** AC-1.1 EXPANDING ARTS AND CULTURAL FACILITIES {#sec-10-a1403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1403}

1403.1 The District has made great strides in preserving, rehabilitating, and expanding arts and cultural facilities. Since 2005, numerous cultural venues have been established across the District, including the GALA Hispanic Theatre, which moved into the refurbished Tivoli Theatre; the Woolly Mammoth Theatre downtown; the Howard Theatre on U Street NW; The Edgewood Arts Center, Dance Place, and the Arts Walk have anchored revitalization near the Brookland-CUA Metro station; and organizations, such as the Anacostia Arts Center and the THEARC, that are leading a resurgence of community-oriented arts and cultural facilities in Wards 7 and 8. In addition, public space and facilities have become increasingly important venues for arts and culture. In particular, the public libraries are valuable creative hubs that connect residents to technology, books, and other media in support of local arts and culture.

1403.2 Washington, DC’s wide range of commercial cultural venues also have a growing role in increasing opportunities for District residents to present and experience cultural works. These spaces range from small art galleries to large concert venues that are distributed throughout Washington, DC. For residents, small and mid-sized venues are particularly important because they support formative opportunities to present arts and cultural work. Increasing awareness and the accessibility of these spaces is an important step toward reaching the District’s cultural potential.

1403.3 Yet Washington, DC’s ability to sustain creators is threatened by its high-value real estate, which is driving higher costs for cultural facilities, as well as higher costs of living. As the District continues to grow and evolve, it faces a persistent need to preserve and enhance community-based arts and cultural facilities.

1403.4 Looking forward, a collaborative approach is needed to reach the District’s cultural potential that includes leveraged funding and financing for facility maintenance, development, and programming. The collaborative approach will foster a more equitable cultural community.

1403.5 Policy AC-1.1.1: Enhancement of Existing Facilities

Preserve and enhance existing District-owned or controlled neighborhood arts and cultural spaces. Assist in the improvement of arts and cultural organizations’ facilities to enhance the quality, diversity, and distribution of cultural infrastructure.

1403.6 Policy AC-1.1.2: Advance Libraries and Recreation Centers as Cultural Anchors

Support and promote libraries and recreation centers as community anchors that support cultural learning, production, and presentation. The District’s libraries and recreation centers are unique, community-oriented facilities that increase access to cultural space and programming.

For additional guidance on policies for libraries, see the Community Services and Facilities Element for content pertaining to library facilities. Additionally, see the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element for information on parks and recreational facilities.

1403.7 Policy AC-1.1.3: Development of New Cultural Facilities

Grow cultural organizations through shared and collaborative facilities across the District. Provide technical and financial assistance to organizations to help secure or create new facilities when needed and as appropriate.

1403.8 Policy AC-1.1.4: Distribution of Facilities

Promote improved access to facilities that offer arts and cultural resources, including development of arts facilities and venues in Wards 7 and 8 and in other parts of Washington, DC where they are in short supply.

1403.9 Policy AC-1.1.5: Cultural and Artistic Diversity

Neighborhood cultural facilities should accommodate a wide variety of arts disciplines, cultures, individuals, and organizations. Facilities should also accommodate persons with disabilities. In addition, arts and cultural organizations are also encouraged to explore virtual and other types of digital programming that can reach residents who are unable to visit events in person.

1403.10 Policy AC-1.1.6: Siting of Facilities

Encourage arts and cultural facilities to locate near public transit or sites where shared parking facilities are available.

1403.11 Policy AC-1.1.7: Performance and Events in Public Space and Facilities

Encourage the provision of spaces for performances and art events in neighborhood parks, community centers, recreation centers, schools, libraries, transit stations, streets, sidewalks, and public areas of private property. These venues can help reach new audiences and increase access to the arts for all residents.

1403.12 Policy AC-1.1.8: Using District-Owned Facilities

Encourage the shared-use of District-owned facilities, such as public schools, libraries, parks, and recreation centers for cultural uses. This may be accomplished by incorporating programming and equipment into the facilities that support cultural activity. For example, the DC Department of Parks and Recreation offers a variety of equipment and facilities that support cultural events.

1403.13 Policy AC-1.1.9: Cultural Uses in Transit Station Area Planning

Encourage cultural facilities and publicly accessible cultural space in reuse plans for transit station areas.

1403.14 Policy AC-1.1.10: Encourage Cultural Space in Planned Unit Developments

Developing long term, low-cost cultural space should be considered an important and desired benefit in discretionary development reviews. Where appropriate, it should be provided in addition to, not instead of, any affordable housing deemed appropriate for the project.

1403.15 Policy AC-1.1.11: Partner with Community-Based Organizations to Increase Access to Cultural Facilities

Encourage collaboration between cultural and community-based organizations, such as places of worship, to increase access to cultural opportunities.

1403.16 Policy AC-1.1.12: Include Cultural Facilities When Large Sites Are Redeveloped

When large sites are planned and developed, cultural facilities should be incorporated where feasible. Planning for these facilities should consider both their neighborhood-serving role and how they relate to the network of cultural facilities District-wide.

1403.17 Policy AC-1.1.13: Cultural Incubators

Support the development of facilities designed to incubate and grow arts and cultural organizations. These facilities should provide production space, technical assistance, and access to shared equipment.

1403.18 Action AC-1.1.A: Increase Public Spaces for Arts and Culture Presentation

Encourage the provision of space for arts and cultural presentation in public areas within and adjacent to new buildings. Examples include plazas designed as performance spaces or incorporation of gallery lighting in publicly accessible lobbies to provide exhibition space.

See the Urban Design Element for policies and actions on streetscape and public realm improvements.

1403.19 Action AC-1.1.B: Cultural Facilities in Wards 7 and 8

Encourage additional arts and cultural establishments that balance the distribution of facilities throughout the District, increase programming diversity, and improve residents’ access to arts and cultural facilities. including theaters and cinemas in Wards 7 and 8.

1403.20 Action AC-1.1.C: Increase Access to Public Facilities for Cultural Use

Assess opportunities for increasing public access to government-owned cultural facilities, such as increased use of recreation centers for the production and presentation of cultural work by community organizations.

1403.21 Action AC-1.1.D: Evaluate District Assets

Evaluate vacant and unused District-owned or controlled properties for use as arts and cultural facilities. This includes underused portions of occupied buildings.

1403.22 Action AC-1.1.E: Consider Cultural Space in Master Facility Planning

Explore the potential for increasing publicly accessible cultural space through the master facility planning processes for publicly owned assets, such as libraries, schools, parks, recreation centers, and public safety facilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1404** AC-1.2 ARTS AND CULTURE IN EVERY COMMUNITY {#sec-10-a1404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1404}

1404.1 A key concept in this element is culture everywhere, which is an approach for inclusive development that makes use of the cultural facilities and civic infrastructure distributed across the District as anchors for community equity building. Civic infrastructure includes the networks of libraries and recreation centers that can offer space for cultural programming and presentation. Culture everywhere is a collective impact model in which government, funders, and community members align their resources to create and sustain extensive networks of cultural clusters and arts districts that serve communities across Washington, DC.

1404.2 Every community has its own cultural identity and cultural anchors. The District partners with place-based organizations, such as business improvement districts (BIDs), DC Main Streets, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), and others to strengthen community-based networks of cultural spaces, organizations, and programming. By building up each community’s cultural networks, Washington, DC gains a more inclusive cultural environment with more opportunities for cultural expression and experiences that is reflective of its diversity.

1404.3 Washington, DC encourages the development of community-oriented cultural clusters as an approach to expand the diversity of cultural practice while increasing residents’ access to cultural opportunities. A key facet of the cultural clusters is shared-use cultural space, where performances are hosted in places of worship, restaurants, and stores.

1404.4 Additionally, the District is also committed to sustaining three centrally located legacy arts districts: the Downtown Arts District, the Uptown Arts District, and the H Street NE Arts District. These districts were established to leverage arts as a catalyst for revitalizing underfunded commercial areas. Today, these arts districts are home to many of Washington, DC’s leading arts and cultural institutions that have forged the District’s current cultural identity.

1404.5 Figure 14.1: Washington, DC’s Cultural Geography

1404.6 Policy AC-1.2.1: Culture Everywhere

Partner with cultural organizations and private sector cultural funders to create community-based networks that leverage civic infrastructure with programming and spaces that are inclusive of the cultural practices that are significant in each community. Examples include DC Commission on Arts and Humanities (CAH) programming and support from focused agencies that provide support and funding for events across the District, including the Mayor’s Office on Latino Affairs and the Mayor’s Office of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning (LGBTQ) Affairs.

1404.7 Policy AC-1.2.2: Using Civic Infrastructure as Cultural Infrastructure

Seek opportunities to increase cultural use of civic infrastructure, such as libraries and recreation centers, through partnerships with cultural organizations.

See also the Community Services and Facilities Element for additional information on civic infrastructure.

1404.8 Policy AC-1.2.3: Expand Community-Oriented Cultural Programming

Continue expanding community-oriented cultural programming through grants and programming partnerships.

1404.9 Policy AC-1.2.4: Inclusion of Arts and Culture in Business Improvement Districts and DC Main Streets

Support the inclusion of arts and cultural programming, facilities, and arts-supportive businesses as part of the District’s neighborhood commercial revitalization programs.

1404.10 Policy AC-1.2.5: Arts Districts

Sustain the Downtown, H Street NE, and Uptown Arts Districts as the preeminent locations in Washington, DC for region-serving arts and cultural venues, including theaters, concert halls, galleries, and museums.

1404.11 Policy AC-1.2.6: Support Arts and Cultural Clusters

Support existing and emerging clusters of arts and cultural establishments through aligned public and private sector investments.

1404.12 Policy AC-1.2.7: Mitigate Cultural Displacement

Reinforce and elevate existing cultural anchors, practices, and traditions in communities undergoing significant demographic change. Such efforts should reflect the history and culture of established communities in these neighborhoods and also encourage new residents to respect and participate in this history and culture. In addition, support cross-cultural programming that fosters a shared understanding of Washington, DC’s history and culture among all residents.

See also the Housing Element for more information about displacement mitigation.

1404.13 Action AC-1.2.A: Arts and Cultural Programming in Business Improvement Districts and DC Main Streets

BIDs and DC Main Streets organizations should undertake arts and cultural programming when possible. These initiatives should reflect community identity, advance placemaking, and enhance commercial revitalization.

1404.14 Action AC-1.2.B: Zones for Arts and Culture

Ensure that the incentives in special zones for arts and culture are fulfilling their intent.

1404.15 Action AC-1.2.C: Regulatory Process Support

Explore new resources at permitting agencies that assist cultural creators and organizations navigate and successfully complete permitting processes. Resources could include permitting process navigators, technical assistance programs, and event planning toolkits.

1404.16 Action AC-1.2.D: Art Galleries in Public Buildings

Explore the feasibility of using lobbies and corridors of public buildings as museum-style art galleries that feature works by local artists. The assessment should include options for curation, as well as evening and weekend operating hours.

1404.17 Action AC-1.2.E: Cultural Space Partnerships

Encourage shared space arrangements that facilitate cultural presentation in commercial spaces, such as restaurants and bookstores.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1405** AC-2 MAKING CULTURE MORE VISIBLE {#sec-10-a1405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1405}

1405.1 Culture reflects the practices and priorities of a society. The built environment is one of the most important spaces where cultural expressions are exchanged. Making culture visible creates connection points in new and existing spaces that build social cohesion through shared experiences. Both temporary and long-term cultural installations communicate community heritage, identity, and aspiration.

1405.2 CAH leads Washington, DC’s initiatives to increase cultural visibility through public art, heritage programming, and creative economy exhibitions. CAH plays a critical role by being the grant-making provider to numerous arts organizations and individuals encouraging the creation or production of art in all its forms, including music, theater, and the visual arts. The Office of Cable Television, Film, Music and Entertainment (OCTFME) also plays a role, primarily with cable television, film, and some creative economy exhibitions, mostly for profit.

1405.3 Making culture more visible is particularly important as Washington, DC continues to grow because it helps build cross-cultural understanding in changing communities by elevating heritage and shared experiences. It also helps to create links between changes in the built environment and the events that preceded them. Most importantly, making arts and culture more visible symbolically states that even though the built environment is changing, new and existing spaces are intentionally welcoming of long-standing communities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1406** AC-2.1 INCREASING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC ART {#sec-10-a1406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1406}

1406.1 Public art can provide beauty, visual interest, and a source of community pride. It can contribute to cross-cultural understanding and become a source of community dialogue and shared experiences. It also brings economic benefits in the form of tourism and work for artists. While the most familiar forms of public art in the District are its more than 150 commemorative memorials, there are many other examples. Public art includes temporary installations, as well as permanent art forms, such as frescoes and murals. The District’s public art represents diverse disciplines and media, reflecting Washington, DC’s residents.

1406.2 A large number of U.S. cities and government agencies have adopted policies to make art more visible in the design of public buildings, infrastructure, and even private development. Public art projects create a sense of neighborhood identity and provide a connection to local history and culture. These art projects document, celebrate, and define communities whose stories may once have been overlooked.

1406.3 Art of many genres has played an important role in building the civic culture of the District. From monuments inspired by the Beaux-Arts movement to the evocative murals of Adams Morgan and the Metropolitan Branch Trail, art is an integral and visible part of the cityscape. As the District evolves, it should continue to include public art in all neighborhoods, not only in federal Washington, DC.

1406.4 Since 1986, CAH has maintained the DC Creates Public Art Program that purchases, commissions, and installs artwork for public sites throughout Washington, DC. The program was established by legislation that allocates up to one percent of the District’s adjusted capital budget for the commission and acquisition of artwork. Despite this initiative, broader efforts are needed to increase public art communities where it is in short supply.

1406.5 Policy AC-2.1.1: Emphasizing Public Spaces with Art

Use public art to strengthen and reflect the District’s diversity, including its identity as a local cultural and arts center. Public art should accent locations such as Metro stations, sidewalks, streets, parks, and building lobbies. It should be used in coordination with landscaping, lighting, paving, and signage to create gateways for neighborhoods and communities.

1406.6 Policy AC-2.1.2: Funding Public Art in Capital Improvement Projects

Continue to set aside funds from the capital improvement project budget for public art and arts-related improvements. These improvements should enhance publicly-owned buildings with creative and aspirational works of art.

1406.7 Policy AC-2.1.3: Reuse of Vacant or Underutilized Buildings

Support the temporary use of commercial buildings that vacant or underused or undergoing redevelopment for cultural exhibition and production, as appropriate.

1406.8 Action AC-2.1.A: Public Art Master Plan

Maintain a Public Art Master Plan for the District. The Master Plan sets a vision for public art and basic principles for how public art can be integrated into the District’s architecture, gathering places, and natural landscapes.

1406.9 Action AC-2.1.B: Small Parks for Public Art Assessment

Assess the feasibility of using small parks that are owned or controlled by the District and federal governments for public art installation locations. The assessment should analyze how any artwork installed in the parks would be curated and maintained.

1406.10 Action AC-2.1.C: Artwork and Cultural Presentation Space in EventsDC Facilities

Encourage EventsDC to incorporate significant artwork and space for cultural presentation within any new or significantly renovated facility.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1407** AC-2.2 USING ART TO EXPRESS CULTURAL HERITAGE {#sec-10-a1407 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1407}

1407.1 Cultural installations and events help elevate and preserve the distinct history and identity of the District’s communities. For example, the Friendship Arch near the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro station celebrates the unique identity of the Chinatown neighborhood. Smaller installations, such as the District’s network of 18 heritage trails, are also important. The trails are accessible engagement tools that communicate many of Washington, DC’s important historical narratives. Cultural events, including Fiesta DC and the Caribbean Carnival, are another type of cultural program that elevates community-based cultural traditions. Together, the District’s extensive and growing array of cultural installations and events contribute to an environment that is reflective of the people who live and have lived in the District.

1407.2 Policy AC-2.2.1: Affirm Civic Identity and Community Heritage Through Space

Leverage the built environment to affirm civic identities and community heritage. Use historic preservation and adaptive reuse to maintain buildings and spaces that are culturally significant as the District continues to grow.

1407.3 Policy AC-2.2.2: Support the Presentation of Community-Based Cultural Heritage

Use interactive platforms, including cultural programming, interpretive signage, and murals, to help new and long-standing residents build community in innovative ways based on a foundation of heritage.

1407.4 Policy AC-2.2.3: Using Art to Convey Identity

Use art as a way to help neighborhoods express unique and diverse identities, promoting each community’s individual character and sense of place.

1407.5 Policy AC-2.2.4: Neighborhood Festivals

Encourage neighborhood festivals of appropriate scale and location to showcase local culture and increase connections among residents. Such festivals should be planned and managed in a way that does not adversely affect neighborhood health, welfare, and safety.

1407.6 Policy AC-2.2.5: Heritage Trails

Create and maintain heritage trails in communities across Washington, DC, including historic districts, to provide historic context and infrastructure for cultural tourism promoting the diversity and history of the District.

See also the Urban Design Element for policies and actions on streetscape and public realm improvements that reflect cultural and architectural history and the Historic Preservation Element for content pertaining to expanding preservation knowledge.

1407.7 Policy AC-2.2.6: Promote Local Cultural Identity and Traditions

Promote the sharing of local cultural and community histories. These initiatives should be designed to expand access to resources that support the cultivation and expression of cultural identity. Examples of locally significant traditions include music, food, and art.

1407.8 Policy AC-2.2.7: Community Heritage Storytelling

Continue supporting organizations that highlight community heritage through storytelling. These initiatives capture and preserve first source accounts of lived experiences that help build shared identity among residents.

See also the Historic Preservation Element for content pertaining to expanding preservation knowledge.

1407.9 Policy AC-2.2.8: Murals as Platforms for Community Building

Recognize murals as platforms for expressions of community heritage and aspiration that provide inspiration for community dialogues.

1407.10 Action AC-2.2.A: Explore a Festival Streets Program

Analyze the potential for establishing a Festival Streets Program. Festival Streets programs provide master permits to a management organization, such as a BID or DC Main Street, that enables expedited event permitting within a defined area and scope of activity.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1408** AC-3 THE CULTURAL ECONOMY {#sec-10-a1408 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1408}

1408.1 The cultural economy is the system of individuals and organizations that produce and exchange cultural goods with consumers. This system facilitates cultural advancement by connecting cultural product development with revenue streams that enable creators to devote their time to refining cultural practices and producing creative works.

1408.2 To get an accurate understanding of the size and composition of Washington, DC’s cultural economy, the DC Office of Planning (OP) conducted an analysis as part of the DC Cultural Plan in 2016. The analysis found more than 156,000 people were directly and indirectly employed in the District’s cultural economy and that they collectively earned $12.4 billion in wages that year. The workforce is employed in industries and occupations such as writing, graphic design, advertising, architecture, and media, as well as the visual and performing arts.

1408.3 This workforce helps distinguish Washington, DC’s economy. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the District has a high concentration of arts and cultural employment. The cultural workforce strengthens the District in two primary ways: growing arts and cultural industries and facilitating innovation in the broader economy.

1408.4 The District offers a host of programs that support the personal and professional creative development for residents and organizations. CAH provides grant programs that include fellowships for artists, in addition to capacity building programs that combine technical assistance with grant funding for cultural nonprofits. Additionally, the Department of Small and Local Business Development (DSLBD) offers grants and technical assistance for aspiring and established local business owners, including cultural businesses. The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) administers programs that produce and preserve affordable housing. The Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) provides capital improvement grant funding on a competitive basis to businesses in Great Streets corridors.

1408.5 The Mayor’s Offices of Latino Affairs, Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs, African Affairs, and LGBTQ Affairs issue cultural grants and promote, preserve, and support the distinct cultures of their constituencies, often in consultation and partnership with their respective advisory committees. Likewise, the Mayor’s Offices on Veterans’ Affairs and Returning Citizens Affairs provide a variety of services and support programming to build community and support individuals and families in the veterans and returning citizens communities. The Mayor’s Office of Religious Affairs, often in collaboration with the Mayor’s Interfaith Council, engages communities and faith-based organizations in the creation of District-wide programs and initiatives across multiple disciplines, bringing distinct cultural voices to a range of topics. Still other commissions, task forces, and boards promote other elements of Washington, DC’s tapestry of cultures. Together, these programs help advance the District’s cultural economy.

1408.6 The jobs, wages, and tax revenue created through the cultural economy are important; however, culture is not defined by, or limited to works that generate, financial returns. The District recognizes that less economically tangible cultural activities are also valuable. Analyzing the cultural economy has helped the District understand its size, structure, and composition. Through this analysis and numerous stakeholder interviews, the Cultural Plan identified affordable housing, business development, and cultural tourism as focus areas in the cultural economy.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1409** AC-3.1 HOUSING AND THE CULTURAL WORKFORCE {#sec-10-a1409 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1409}

1409.1 Affordable housing is important for all residents, including members of the cultural workforce. Many members of the cultural workforce are self-employed or hold a series of jobs that balance income with creative freedom. As a consequence, many cultural creators have lower and less predictable incomes. Like many other residents, the cultural workforce is facing increasing challenges securing and maintaining affordable housing as market rate housing has become more expensive.

1409.2 Washington, DC is taking unprecedented action to mitigate the impact of increased housing costs through significantly increased funding and support for a system of housing programs that includes the Housing Production Trust Fund, Inclusionary Zoning, and the Home Purchase Assistance Program. Housing produced and preserved through these and other programs is available on the basis of need and availability. Combined, these programs offer a robust base of support for affordable housing. Members of the cultural workforce who need housing assistance are encouraged to use these programs to meet their housing needs. However, some programs have persistently high levels of demand that require sustained effort to receive support.

See also the Housing Element for more information.

1409.3 Policy AC-3.1.1: Housing for the Cultural Workforce

Encourage innovative approaches that remove barriers to housing for the cultural workforce, such as work-live housing, where the residential use is an accessory to production space.

1409.4 Policy AC-3.1.2: Increase Awareness of Housing Programs

Improve cultural creators’ awareness of the District’s housing programs, including through the provision of information on eligibility for self-employed residents.

1409.5 Policy AC-3.1.3: Affordable Artist Housing

Support affordable housing for residents with low incomes who work in arts and cultural occupations. Housing provided specifically for residents with arts and cultural occupations should include dedicated facilities that support those occupations, such as loading docks, oversized doorways, and wash basins.

See also the Housing Element for additional policies and actions on affordable housing, including housing access.

1409.6 Policy AC-3.1.4: Live-Work Spaces

The District’s zoning and land use regulations should support the development of live-work space for creators in a variety of settings around the District.

1409.7 Action AC-3.1.A: Housing Toolkit

Develop a toolkit that provides arts and cultural creators information about housing programs offered in Washington, DC. The toolkit should include information on rent supplements, affordable dwelling units, inclusionary housing, home purchase assistance, and homelessness assistance.

1409.8 Action AC-3.1.B: Qualification for Affordable Housing Programs

Conduct an assessment of barriers to affordable housing programs for residents who work in the arts and culture sector who are self-employed or have more than one source of employment.

See the Housing Element for more information on affordable housing.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1410** AC-3.2 CULTURAL ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-a1410 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1410}

1410.1 Cultural organizations of all sizes help increase creative opportunities and produce diverse, culturally relevant expressions. These organizations affirm individual identities and create opportunities for residents with different backgrounds to build meaningful connections. Washington, DC had more than 600 cultural organizations and more than 4,000 self-employed artists and cultural creators in 2016. An analysis of 2014 information from SMU DataArts indicates that small and medium-sized nonprofits in the District spend a higher portion of their budgets on space and a smaller portion on employee compensation compared to larger cultural nonprofits. Further analysis determined that there are limited opportunities for increasing grant funding from the District government and local foundations to a level that is high enough to systemically reduce the financial burden of space costs.

1410.2 While Washington, DC’s economic and population growth drive higher costs for many commercial spaces, the growth also increases the base of potential cultural supporters and patrons. To address the challenge of scalable and sustainable cultural organization funding, the DC Cultural Plan introduced models for leveraged funding sources. The approach builds on existing programs to foster stronger networks of cultural organizations that have high-quality business plans, financial plans, and management practices that enable organizational innovation through leveraged funding approaches.

1410.3 Building capacity for organizational innovation and leveraged funding is designed to increase cultural equity by enabling grants from the District and other funders to achieve greater impact. Importantly, this approach empowers creators from historically underrepresented communities to present cultural works in enduring and public formats. This approach also highlights opportunities for programming partnerships, corporate partnerships, and mentoring that can provide supplemental support to the District government’s base of technical assistance programming.

1410.4 Policy AC-3.2.1: Small Business Development

Encourage individuals and organizations seeking to establish, strengthen, or expand cultural organizations to use the District’s small business development resources. These programs help creators build high-impact organizations and increase access to technical assistance and funding.

1410.5 Policy AC-3.2.2: Providing Goods and Services to the District

Encourage arts and culture organizations to become Certified Business Enterprises (CBEs), which provides preferred status in the District’s competitive contracting process for goods and services.

1410.6 Action AC-3.2.A: Directory of District-Based Arts and Cultural Businesses

Explore the feasibility of creating a directory of District-based arts and cultural businesses drawn from the District’s list of CBEs to inform organizations such as EventsDC, BIDs, DC Main Streets, and other businesses that seek products from local arts and cultural organizations.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1411** AC-3.3 PROMOTING CULTURAL TOURISM {#sec-10-a1411 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1411}

1411.1 Cultural tourism “is travel directed toward experiencing the arts, heritage, and special character of unique places.” This definition emerged from the 1995 White House Conference on Travel and Tourism, which declared U.S. involvement in this worldwide phenomenon a national priority—a way to link support of American cultural institutions with economic development goals for the nation.

1411.2 In 2017, Washington, DC achieved its eighth consecutive tourism record with nearly 23 million visitors. Additionally, there are significant indicators that cultural tourism is increasing in the District, which includes annual attendance growth at Smithsonian Institution facilities from 23 million in 2006 to nearly 30 million in 2016 and steady growth in the number of people who visit the District each year.

1411.3 The District is rich in the kinds of experiences and places cultural tourism visitors are seeking. Although some of these places, such as Georgetown and Capitol Hill, are well known, many are not. For instance, the Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks; Historic Anacostia; and Brookland are rich in landmarks that are not well known outside the District. The visitor experience should be expanded to include the dozens of cultural attractions that exist beyond the monuments and museums of the National Mall. Expanding the visitor experience beyond the Mall will bring more visibility and revenue to local cultural institutions and an expanded customer base for many of the District’s neighborhood commercial areas. Alignments should be made to connect cultural tourism visitors with ecotourism in locations including the National Arboretum and Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens. In addition, the development of new museums and cultural facilities beyond the Monumental Core, as called for by the National Capital Planning Commission’s (NCPC’s) Memorials and Museums Master Plan, can expand choices for visitors and provide growth opportunities for local tourism.

1411.4 Policy AC-3.3.1: Promoting Cultural Amenities

Promote the development of cultural amenities beyond the Mall in an effort to more fully capitalize on the economic benefits of tourism for District residents, businesses, and neighborhoods.

1411.5 Policy AC-3.3.2: Partner with Diplomatic Organizations

Increase cultural exchanges between residents and the international community by participating with embassy public diplomacy programs whenever feasible.

1411.6 Policy AC-3.3.3: Commemorative Works

Coordinate with NCPC and commemorative works sponsors to locate national museums and monuments on sites beyond the National Mall.

1411.7 Action AC-3.3.A: Marketing Cultural Events

Partner with existing organizations that promote tourism to market cultural events to local, regional, and international audiences.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1412** AC-4 SHARED STEWARDSHIP OF ARTS AND CULTURE {#sec-10-a1412 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1412}

1412.1 Shared stewardship is an approach that establishes an explicit role for all stakeholders through partnerships among institutional funders, individual funders, and participants. These partnerships help form alignment between stakeholders that yield long-lasting and high-impact cultural programs and facilities.

1412.2 Through partnerships between the District and leading regional cultural funders, the number of performance theaters has increased substantially since the early 2000s. Many of the new theaters are thriving, but there are indications that Washington, DC’s theater market is becoming saturated.

1412.3 However, there is a need to increase opportunities to produce and present cultural works in communities that are underrepresented in Washington, DC’s cultural landscape. Building on the District’s and region’s base of cultural supporters with a shared stewardship approach that enables the cultural community to achieve greater alignment among cultural funders, presenters, and consumers. This approach increases the amount, diversity, and equity of cultural presentation.

1412.4 Through shared stewardship, the District partners with foundations, nonprofits, businesses, universities, and residents to collaboratively support arts and culture. This approach includes every resident and stakeholder as important contributors who provide support proportionately with their capacity. Increasing support for the arts also requires cultural organizations to focus on programming that is culturally relevant to Washington, DC’s consumer base.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1413** AC-4.1 PUBLIC FUNDING {#sec-10-a1413 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1413}

1413.1 In Washington, DC, CAH is the primary public arts and cultural funding agency. It provides programs and services, including grants, professional opportunities, and educational enrichment, to individuals and nonprofit organizations within the District. All CAH initiatives focus on a four-part framework of advancing inclusion, diversity, equity, and access. CAH is supported primarily by District government funds, supplemented by federal block grants and other special funds awarded by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). In addition, the Commission may receive contributions and donations through the District’s Arts and Humanities Enterprise Fund. The District also provides the majority of CAH’s funding as part of its annual operating budget.

1413.2 Policy AC-4.1.1: Making Funding Inclusive

District funding for the arts should be distributed through a fair and transparent process and support the delivery of services to the broadest possible spectrum of the community, with a particular emphasis on underserved communities.

1413.3 Policy AC-4.1.2: Grant Programs for Cultural Creators

Continue to implement and refine CAH grant programs that support both individual creators and nonprofit cultural organizations.

1413.4 Policy AC-4.1.3: Provide Clear Expectations for Licenses, Permits, and Taxes Whenever possible, the District will provide clear documentation for the production, presentation, and administration of the costs for licenses, permits and taxes that includes information on any reductions or waivers available.

1413.5 Policy AC-4.1.4: Encourage Arts and Cultural Events

Support a flexible permitting process for arts and cultural events that helps facilitate highly accessible engagement opportunities while continuing to ensure the public health and safety of the events.

1413.6 Action AC-4.1.A: Sustain Grant Funding for Arts and Culture

Continue providing grant funding through CAH and community affairs agencies. 1413.6

1413.7 Action AC-4.1.B: New Sources of Cultural Funding

Explore new sources for cultural funding that increase the impact of the District’s grant funding through a new form of support, such as the models and programs outlined in the DC Cultural Plan, including social impact investment, public-private partnerships, and leverage funds.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1414** AC-4.2 PARTNERSHIPS {#sec-10-a1414 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1414}

1414.1 Partnerships are tools for organizational innovation and growth that cross-pollinate cultural organizations and consumers with new ideas and experiences. They bring two or more organizations together through a balance of investment and trust. The cultural community uses several types of partnerships, including those between the public and private sector, foundations and cultural organizations, large institutions and community-based organizations, economic development organizations and creative organizations, and cultural organizations with cultural consumers. Each type of partnership helps the cultural community create the space and cultural presentations that reflect the District’s diversity and heritage.

1414.2 Partnerships should be framed with a clear focus on goals, such as improving youth exposure and access to cultural experiences. Funding organizations, including corporations, foundations, government institutions, and individual funders, are important parts of many partnerships. Two of the most important funders are the NEA and National Endowment for Humanities. These organizations provide systemic and project funding programs that support high-impact cultural works District-wide.

1414.2a 202Creates

The District’s 202Creates Program is an innovative partnership model for promoting and supporting the District’s creative economy through showcase events, technical assistance, and promotion.

1414.3 Policy AC-4.2.1: Collective Contribution Approach to Culture

Advance a collective contribution approach to culture in which all cultural stakeholders, including funders, creators, and consumers, align time and resource contributions to generate the funding, space, and support necessary for Washington, DC’s cultural sector to reach its full potential.

1414.4 Policy AC-4.2.2: Private Sector Partnerships

Develop partnerships with the private sector to encourage monetary and nonmonetary support for arts and culture organizations and events.

1414.5 Policy AC-4.2.3: Partnerships Among Organizations

Promote the creation of partnerships among the District and federal governments, local businesses, arts organizations, schools, college and university art programs and departments, and charitable foundations to enhance arts programming, funding, and facility development.

1414.6 Policy AC-4.2.4: Colleges and Universities

Collaborate with local colleges and universities to support their contributions to arts and culture in the District and develop additional arts and cultural facilities serving the broader community. Universities are encouraged to offer cultural mentorship programs that support knowledge transfers between the institutions and the surrounding communities.

1414.7 Action AC-4.2.A: Innovative Cultural Business Models

Explore how Washington, DC can partner with other cultural funders and stakeholders to advance innovative business models that lower barriers to forming financially sustainable cultural businesses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1415** AC-4.3 ENGAGING THE CULTURAL COMMUNITY IN PLANNING {#sec-10-a1415 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1415}

1415.1 Incorporating arts and culture into community planning is part of building an inclusive District. Culture infuses new buildings and public spaces with works of art and cultural activities that are reflective of Washington, DC’s heritage and cultural identity. The District government undertakes a range of initiatives to incorporate culture in planning, including Small Area Plans that identify community assets and place-based cultural opportunities, and the Public Art Master Plan.

1415.2 Arts and culture provide context for community building in community planning. OP’s creative placemaking practice area is a leading example of how showcasing cultural practices and community heritage builds common ground in changing communities. Creative placemaking programs have taken many different forms, including evocative art installations that help build a shared vision for community change, exhibitions designed to increase cultural understanding in multicultural communities, and recreations of historic spaces to help newer residents connect with community history.

1415.3 Policy AC-4.3.1: Incorporating Arts and Culture into Community Planning

Integrate arts and culture into the neighborhood planning that the District undertakes to promote inclusive, resilient, and vibrant communities. Approaches include screening for cultural assets; identifying opportunities to enhance cultural awareness, facilities, and programming; and identifying cultural priorities for sites with significant redevelopment potential.

1415.4 Policy AC-4.3.2: Emphasizing Community Identity Through Creative Placemaking Use creative placemaking as an arts and culture-forward platform for engaging the community by creating experiences that connect people, inspire action, support creativity, and celebrate the unique aspects of neighborhoods.

1415.5 Policy AC-4.3.3: Partnerships to Support Creative Placemaking

Support commercial management and revitalization organizations, such as DC Main Streets, BIDs, and other similar organizations in deploying creative placemaking interventions.

1415.6 Policy AC-4.3.4: Engaging the Arts and Cultural Communities

Increase the involvement of the arts and cultural communities in the design of the physical environment.

1415.7 Policy AC-4.3.5: Roles of CAH

Maintain and strengthen CAH so that it can better serve the public through arts policy coordination, planning, and programming.

1415.8 Policy AC-4.3.6: Collaboration with Historic Preservation Organizations

Encourage arts and cultural organizations to work closely with historic preservation organizations to reuse historical buildings, including historic theaters, as cultural centers.

1415.9 Policy AC-4.3.7: Combine Publicly Oriented Cultural Space with Programming to Support Neighborhoods

Encourage stakeholders in the government, nonprofit, and for-profit sectors, and particularly anchor institutions, such as universities, to use art and cultural facilities, combined with programming, to support vibrant neighborhoods and inclusive real estate development.

1415.10 Policy AC-4.3.8: Coordination with Other Jurisdictions

Partner with other jurisdictions in the region to help sustain and enhance the cultural promotion of the metropolitan area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1416** AC-4.4 INCREASING ARTS AND CULTURAL EDUCATION AND PARTICIPATION {#sec-10-a1416 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1416}

1416.1 Arts and culture play a crucial role in improving students’ ability to learn and can have a significant effect on a child’s overall success in school. Research points to strong relationships between arts education and basic cognitive skills used in other core subjects, including reading, writing, and math. All children benefit from an education in, through, and about the arts. A holistic approach to education contributes to cognitive development and academic achievement, in addition to the socio-emotional development of children.

1416.2 Arts and culture are critical at all levels of human development. Ongoing access to arts and culture through classes, museum programs, tours, discussions, and other means strengthens lifelong opportunities for personal growth and expression. Participation in the arts can create a broader understanding of the world and heightened awareness of other cultures and global issues.

1416.3 Policy AC-4.4.1: Arts and Cultural Education Programs

Build a stronger foundation for art and culture in the District through pre-K through 12 education, including global education, language education, attendance at arts performances and art exhibitions, and support of adult art programs for persons of all ages and backgrounds.

1416.4 Policy AC-4.4.2: Partnerships with Educational Institutions

Strengthen collaborations among artists, arts organizations, teachers, school administrators, and others to expand the resources of the arts community and broaden the reach of arts and culture.

1416.5 Policy AC-4.4.3: Arts and Humanities Education Through Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access

Provide accessible arts information resources to persons with disabilities, non-English speakers, older adults, and other vulnerable communities and populations.

1416.6 Policy AC-4.4.4: Participation of Artists

Support and increase the participation of artists in the District’s arts education programs.

1416.7 Policy AC-4.4.5: Participation of Residents

Support programs and events for all residents, including youth and older adults, to develop and present creative work.

1416.8 Action AC-4.4.A: Partnerships for Advancement in Arts and Culture Education

Seek opportunities to partner with cultural organizations to advance youth education through improved organizational infrastructure and support systems for arts and culture education providers. Examples include the Kennedy Center’s Any Given Child initiative and CAH Education Collaborative.

1416.9 Action AC-4.4.B: Increase Youth Exposure to Arts and Culture

Explore opportunities to increase youth exposure to arts and culture through programming and events in public facilities, such as libraries and recreation centers.

### **10-A15** CAPITOL HILL AREA

##### **10-A DCMR § 1500** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1500}

1500.1 The Capitol Hill Planning Area encompasses the 3.1 square miles located east of the U.S. Capitol, north of I-695, and south of Florida Avenue NE and Benning Road NE. Boundaries of the Planning Area are shown on the Capitol Hill map. Most of this area has historically been Ward 6 and is now partially in Ward 7, although in past decades parts have been included in Wards 2 and 5.

1500.2 The Planning Area is bounded on the west by Central Washington and on the south by the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area. Because plans for this area is of particular concern to Capitol Hill residents, this chapter includes cross-references to relevant sections of the Central Washington and Lower Anacostia Waterfront /Near Southwest Planning Area Elements. Changes along the waterfront—particularly at Reservation 13 and in the Near Southeast—are extremely important to the future of Capitol Hill. The Planning Area is bounded to the north by Florida Avenue NE and Benning Road NE. To the south, the area is bounded by Southeast Boulevard. To the west, the area is bounded generally by 1st Street NE. The Anacostia River provides a natural border to the east.

1500.3 In many respects, Capitol Hill is a city within the city. The community has well-defined physical boundaries that enhance its sense of identity. Its neighborhoods are united by history, architectural tradition, and relatively consistent urban form, including a grid system of diagonal streets that has remained faithful to the 1791 L’Enfant Plan for Washington, DC. Much of the community has the feel of a small historic town, with block upon block of attractive late 19th century and early 20th century row houses, well-maintained public spaces, historic schoolhouses and corner stores, alleys, and traditional neighborhood shopping districts. The community's attractive housing stock, living history, low scale, and proximity to the U.S. Capitol Building make the Hill one of the District's most sought-after communities.

1500.4 The Capitol Hill Planning Area is comprised of several distinct neighborhoods. The original Capitol Hill neighborhood was developed on the high ground just east of the U.S. Capitol Building during the 1800s and is still the historic heart of the community. The Lincoln Park and Stanton Park neighborhoods developed around their namesake squares, with similar housing stock and street patterns. Other areas, such as the H Street residential neighborhood, are defined both by historic row houses adjacent to the corridor and also by the new, higher-density residential buildings developed on infill sites along the corridor. Since the H Street Revitalization Plan was completed in 2003, over 1,500 residential units have been constructed or are in the planning stages along the H Street corridor. Areas such as Hill East, Northeast Capitol Hill, Kingman Park, and Rosedale have their own sense of identity, shaped by such factors as geography, housing stock, architecture, public schools and parks, and commercial centers. Kingman Park was designated a Historic District in 2018. Rosedale is characterized by wood-frame row houses (rather than brick), smaller lots, and less uniform architecture. Other parts of the Hill include concentrations of flats and small apartments, including publicly subsidized housing complexes, such as Potomac Gardens.

1500.5 The major business districts in the Capitol Hill Planning Area are located along the east-west avenues that cross the community, particularly Pennsylvania Avenue, Massachusetts Avenue, and H Street NE. Historically, some of the north-south streets also supported neighborhood commercial districts, including 8th Street SE, 11th Street NE/SE, and 15th Street NE/SE. Among these, only the 7th Street/8th Street SE (Barracks Row) business district remains active today; the others have changed uses or been replaced by housing, as shopping patterns and transportation conditions have changed. Eighth Street SE, the spine of the Barracks Row Main Street, has grown into a District-wide destination due to several nationally acclaimed restaurants. As an older urban neighborhood, there continue to be small neighborhood commercial uses, such as dry cleaners, beauty salons, and corner stores, across the Planning Area. Capitol Hill is also home to Eastern Market, a lively and historic public market where independent vendors sell fresh meats, vegetables, flowers, and other goods to customers from across Washington, DC. On any given weekend, thousands of residents and visitors frequent the market.

1500.6 The Capitol Hill Planning Area has an excellent transportation network, making auto ownership an option rather than a need for many households. The scale and topography of the neighborhood, as well as wide sidewalks and street trees, create ideal conditions for walking. The southeast portion of the Hill is served by the Capitol South, Eastern Market, Potomac Avenue, and Stadium-Armory Metro stations. The northern area is served by the Union Station Metro station and the DC streetcar, which operates an east-west line from Union Station to Benning Road. The entire Planning Area is served by multiple bus lines connecting the District. Additionally, there are 30 Capital Bikeshare stations located throughout the Planning Area. Arterials like Pennsylvania Avenue SE and East Capitol Street NE provide excellent east-west circulation. The downside, however, is that Capitol Hill neighborhoods suffer from heavy volumes of commuter traffic going between downtown (or Central Washington) and areas in Wards 7 and 8. The community is also easily accessed by I-295 and the Southeast/Southwest Freeway (I-695).

1500.7 The Capitol Hill Planning Area is home to several parks, including Lincoln Park and Stanton Park, Rosedale and Sherwood Recreation Centers, and many smaller pocket and triangle parks. It is also home to the 25-acre Congressional Cemetery, a national historic landmark. The largest parks serving the Hill’s neighborhoods are along the Anacostia River, including West Anacostia Park and the lands north of RFK Stadium.

1500.8 Kingman Island, located in the Anacostia River, is the largest park owned by the District. Its unique natural setting creates a peaceful setting in the District. It continues to grow in popularity, with its access to hiking, fishing, biking, and boating. In January 2018, the site was designated as a State Conservation Area, and the southern portion of Kingman Island is a Critical Wildlife Area. Additionally, it is now home to the DC Bluegrass and Folk Festival, attracting thousands of visitors annually to the event. Future plans for Kingman Island include a nature center and additional educational programming to serve all District residents.

1500.9 The Planning Area is served by multiple public schools, including elementary and middle schools, and one high school, along with several private and charter schools. The growing number of families in the Planning Area, coupled with improvements in public schools, have increased the interest and enrollment in local public schools. Major modernization efforts have been completed or are planned for Stuart-Hobson, Elliot-Hine, Watkins, Jefferson, Brent, and Eastern schools to better accommodate growth and a modern educational system. As part of the District’s ongoing effort to renovate and modernize libraries, both the Rosedale and Northeast Libraries have undergone significant renovation to better serve Capitol Hill Planning Area neighborhoods, and significant renovations are planned for the Southeast Library.

1500.10 Much of the community’s distinctive character is protected as a historic district that is also included in the DC Inventory of Historic Sites. In fact, Capitol Hill is the largest residential historic district in Washington, DC and includes some 8,000 structures, mostly dating from the early 1800s to the 1940s. The collection of buildings portrays a rich community history in all its aspects: civic, institutional, economic, technological, spiritual, and domestic. Residential buildings range from Federal-era manors and town houses, to small frame dwellings and alley houses, to grand Italianate homes and picturesque apartment buildings. Perhaps the most numerous are the pressed- brick row houses, many of which have whimsical decorative elements. Many of the row houses have rentable English basement units, contributing to neighborhood diversity and affordability. Increased home values and an influx of higher-income professionals have increased the buying power of area residents and have helped to revitalize commercial corridors. But housing options for lower- and middle-income families have been shrinking, especially in the last decade.

1500.11 Capitol Hill has always had active and involved citizenry. The Capitol Hill Restoration Society was founded in 1955 to protect the historic fabric of the Hill neighborhood. Their efforts led to the designation of the Capitol Hill Historic District in 1976 and its later expansions. Other neighborhood groups, like the North Lincoln Park Neighborhood Association, the Barney Circle Neighborhood Association, Moms on the Hill (MOTH), and the Kingman Park Civic Association are committed to ensuring the livability of their neighborhoods. Business organizations like the Capitol Hill Association for Merchants and Professionals, Barracks Row Main Street, H Street Main Street, Capitol Hill Business Improvement District (BID), and Penn East Alliance all work to ensure that the Hill is a great place to shop, work, visit, and live.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1501** HISTORY {#sec-10-a1501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1501}

1501.1 The Capitol Hill Planning Area has played an important role in the growth of the nation’s capital since the 1700s. The neighborhood itself takes its name from what was once called Jenkins Hill. It was here that Pierre L’Enfant sought to locate the Congress House (as the Capitol Building was called). L’Enfant’s original vision was that Washington, DC’s major commercial street would extend eastward from the Capitol to the Anacostia River. A deep-water port on the river would become the District’s center of commerce. The eastern section of L’Enfant’s grand design failed to materialize, however, and the District developed to the west. However, the Hill was to achieve its own unique identity.

1501.2 During the District’s early years, privately owned buildings were constructed close to the Capitol and occupied by artisans and craftsmen. The Navy Yard, to the south of the Capitol, also attracted development. By the time the British burned the Capitol building in 1814, a small community had been established on the Hill. Capitol Hill had cemeteries, an outdoor market, places of worship, hotels, and taverns. Boarding houses were constructed for members of Congress.

1501.3 At the beginning of the Civil War in 1861, only a few blocks east of the Capitol and south near the Navy Yard had been developed. Most streets were unpaved. Shanties stood side by side with more substantial wood frame and brick dwellings. Horse-drawn streetcars served the Hill and the Navy Yard and connected these areas to the Capitol and downtown.

1501.4 The neighborhood began to expand after the Civil War. The District had endured and prospered, and investment increased. During the last quarter of the 19th century, brick row houses were built north and east of the Capitol, new stores and banks were established, and streets were graded and paved. A major public works program gave the District—and Capitol Hill—a municipal water supply and sewage system. An ethnically diverse community settled there, including Italians, Germans, and African Americans.

1501.5 By the late 1800s, there were houses as far east as Lincoln Park, where the Emancipation statue was erected in 1876. Philadelphia Row, completed in 1866 on 11th Street SE, was one of the first large-scale developments in the area. Senators, congressmen, and other public officials lived in the elegant homes around Lincoln Park and along East Capitol Street. More modest homes supported a growing middle class, employed at the Navy Yard and at the federal buildings around the U.S. Capitol. The area’s growth was spurred by the construction of electric streetcar lines in the early 1900s, which gave rise to commercial districts like H Street NE.

1501.6 The Hill has gone through several cycles of reinvestment and renewal during the last century. During the 1920s, the federal government began renting out many of the houses on Capitol Hill. The neighborhood became less fashionable than the burgeoning area northwest of downtown, and some of its more prominent residents relocated. By the late 1920s, the National Capital Park and Planning Commission had developed plans for an eastward extension of the National Mall, extending from the Capitol to the Anacostia River. While these plans were not carried out, housing conditions on the Hill continued to deteriorate through the Great Depression and World War II. The 1950 Comprehensive Plan identified much of the neighborhood as underinvested in or vacant. Congress funded public housing construction in response, and additional blocks around the Capitol were replaced with new federal offices.

1501.7 Parts of Capitol Hill were already changing by the 1950s. Many turn-of-the-century row homes on the blocks just east of the Capitol were restored, bringing a renaissance to close-in neighborhoods. However, the recovery was uneven and slower to arrive on the eastern edge of the Hill. Parts of the area continued to experience economic challenges through the 1960s, and H Street NE was heavily impacted by the 1968 unrest. Most of Capitol Hill remained an established, diverse, and economically and racially mixed community through the 1980s and 1990s. Since the early 2000s, the population in the Capitol Hill Planning Area has steadily increased. More young professionals and families with young children are moving to the Hill neighborhood for the family-size row houses, high-quality schools, and access to transit and other community amenities. Neighborhoods to the north of Capitol Hill, particularly in the areas around the H Street NE corridor, experienced growth due to the popularity of H Street amenities and significant infill residential development that has been built in the last 10 years.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1502** LAND USE {#sec-10-a1502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1502}

1502.1 Figure 15.1 Land Use Composition in Capitol Hill

1502.2 Statistics on existing land uses are estimated from the current lot-by-lot property tax data together with District and federal land ownership, parks roads, bodies of water, etc. They are not comparable to statistics originally included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used to generate the 2006 and current data. Land use statistics for the Capitol Hill Planning Area appear in Figure 15.1. Capitol Hill comprises 1,959 acres, or about five percent, of the District’s land area.

1502.3 Approximately 40 percent of Capitol Hill land is within transportation rights-of-way. This is due to the broad avenues of the L’Enfant Plan, the regularity of the street grid, the extensive system of alleys, and the wide street rights-of-way.

1502.4 Residential uses account for 29 percent of the total, which is approximately 582 acres of residential land use in the Capitol Hill Planning Area.

1502.5 Commercial and mixed-uses represent 3.5 percent of the total area, which is smaller than the District-wide total of 3.7 percent. Major commercial areas include H Street NE, Pennsylvania Avenue, SE, Benning Road NE, and 8th Street SE. There is almost no industrial development in the Planning Area.

1502.6 Parks, recreation, and open spaces comprise 18 percent of the Planning Area. The larger open spaces serving the neighborhood are along the Anacostia River, including Congressional Cemetery and the land north of RFK Stadium. Public facilities—primarily local public schools, public charter schools, recreation centers, the DC Central Correctional Facility, and former DC General Hospital complex—comprise four percent of the area. Institutional uses comprise less than two percent of the total area. In 2016, approximately one percent of the Planning Area consisted of vacant, developable land.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1503** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a1503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1503}

1503.1 Basic demographic data for the Capitol Hill Planning Area is shown in Figure 15.2. In 2017, the Planning Area had a population of 60,313. Between 2000 and 2017, it grew by over 11,000 residents, a significant increase in population, largely due to new construction of multi-family buildings throughout the Planning Area. The number of households is projected to increase from 25,082 in 2010 to 33,387 in 2045, with an attendant 52 percent increase in population during that same time frame, from 53,099 to about 86,146. The Capitol Hill Planning Area’s population growth represents about nine percent of the total growth expected in the District over the next 25 years.

1503.2 Since 2000, there are slightly fewer children and older adults living in the Planning Area, with a majority of the population (73 percent) between the ages of 18 and 65. This is slightly higher than the District-wide total of 70 percent.

1503.3 Figure 15.2 Capitol Hill at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

48,584

53,099

60,313

69,565

79,763

86,146

Households

21,894

23,200

24,473

29,172

32,433

33,387

Household Population

45,290

47,942

56,028

63,281

73,395

79,674

Persons Per Household

2.07

2.29

2.17

2.26

2.39

Jobs

34,560

23,519

24,623

25,763

31,086

37,207

Density (persons per sq mile)

15,672

17,129

19,456

22,440

25,730

27,789

Land Area (square miles)

3.1

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

7,934

35,621

15,699

19,922

5,026

16.3%

73.3%

32.3%

41.0%

10.3%

8,836

45,994

23,551

22,443

5,483

14.7%

76.3%

39.0%

37.2%

9.1%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

7,560

15.9%

5,967

10.5%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

17,350

28,091

147

804

514

699

36.4%

59.0%

0.3%

1.7%

1.1%

1.5%

37,581

18,155

145

1,834

709

1,889

62.3%

30.1%

0.2%

3.0%

1.2%

3.1%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

1,375

1.9%

3,432

5.7%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

2,528

5.3%

3,740

6.2%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

10,685

10,812

10,685

50.3%

49.7%

12,465

12,008

50.9%

49.1%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

21,497

2,591

89.2%

10.8%

24,473

2,845

89.6%

10.4%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

1,019

12,922

4,885

1,347

1,576

3,364

133

4.2%

53.6%

20.3%

5.6%

6.5%

9.2%

0.6%

1,145

13,756

4,224

1,608

1,731

4,854

4.2%

50.4%

15.5%

5.9%

6.3%

17.8%

0.0%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

1503.4 According to U.S. Census Bureau’s 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) data, approximately 30 percent of the Planning Area’s residents are Black, and approximately 59 percent are white, compared to 62 percent black and 36 percent white in 2000. About three percent of the Planning Area’s residents are Asian, and another three percent are two or more races. Only six percent of the Planning Area’s residents are foreign-born, and around six percent are of Hispanic/Latino origin. The Hispanic/Latino population increased, from two percent in 2000 to just under six percent in 2017. Both of these figures are lower than District-wide averages. Based on land availability, planning policies, and regional growth trends, the Capitol Hill Planning Area is expected to have continued growth.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1504** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a1504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1504}

1504.1 ACS data shows that in 2017, just over half of the homes (50.4 percent) in the Capitol Hill Planning Area were row houses. This is more than double the District-wide average of 25 percent. Only four percent of the housing units were single-family detached homes, compared to 12 percent for the District as a whole. The area also contained fewer units in large apartment buildings than Washington, DC as a whole. Eighteen percent of Capitol Hill’s housing units were in buildings with more than 20 units, compared to 35 percent District-wide. Conversely, Capitol Hill has more 2- to 4-unit buildings than the District as a whole—more than 15 percent in 2017 (compared to a District-wide average of 10 percent).

1504.2 The 2017 ACS data reported that less than eleven percent of the housing units in the Planning Area were vacant. The 2017 vacancy rate is slightly higher than the District-wide rate of nine percent.

1504.3 About half of all Capitol Hill households are homeowners, and half are renters, with percentages almost identical to the year 2000. The homeownership rate is higher than the District as a whole (41.2 percent).

##### **10-A DCMR § 1505** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a1505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1505}

1505.1 Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) indicate there were about 24,107 jobs in the Capitol Hill Planning Area in 2015. This represents just three percent of Washington, DC’s job base. However, the Planning Area is surrounded on the west and south by large employment centers, including the Capitol Complex, and the Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard area. The number of jobs is projected to increase from about 24,107 today to about 37,207 in 2045. Most of the increase is expected to take place on Reservation 13 on the Anacostia waterfront south of RFK Stadium, and along H Street NE, as new retail and cultural uses locate on the revitalized corridor. Additional job growth may also take place on Pennsylvania Avenue SE.

Please see the Economic Development Element for guidance on coworking location facilities in neighborhood commercial areas.

1505.2 The 2017 ACS data indicated the median income in the Planning Area was $110,208. This is higher than the District-wide average of $70,848. Today, 10.5 percent of the residents live below the federal poverty level, and the percentage of residents living in poverty decreased from 15.7 percent in 2000 and is less than the District average of 18 percent.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1506** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a1506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1506}

1506.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

1506.2 Several Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in the Capitol Hill Planning Area during 2005 and 2006. These meetings provided an opportunity for residents to discuss both District-wide and neighborhood planning issues. There were also well-attended briefings to the Capitol Hill Restoration Society, the Capitol Hill Association of Merchants and Professionals, and the local Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs). In addition, recent Small Area Plans—including the H Street Planning program and the Reservation 13 planning process—involved many Hill residents and addressed long-range planning issues such as land use, traffic, housing needs, and public facilities.

1506.3 The community delivered several key messages during these meetings. These are summarized below:

Capitol Hill residents are concerned about the effects of growth on quality of life and community character. One resident described the neighborhood as being in the “vise grip” of development, noting that large-scale changes were planned on the northwest flank (in NoMa), the eastern flank (at Reservation 13), and the southern flank (the Near Southeast and Stadium Areas). Although changes in the heart of Capitol Hill during the next 20 years will be limited, development on the perimeter will generate traffic, increased demand for community services, and the potential for land use conflicts. These issues should be dealt with proactively, recognizing that the Hill is a fine-grained 19th century neighborhood that has evolved over two centuries. In some respects, this is a testament to its endurance, but in other respects the neighborhood faces challenges that come with change. Conflicts between the booming NoMa area and nearby row house neighborhoods are of particular concern.

In addition to concerns about development on the perimeter, there is unease about the effects of future infill development within the neighborhood itself. Over the next 20 years, additional measures may be needed to conserve the moderate-density row house character that defines most Capitol Hill neighborhoods. This could include the designation of additional areas as historic districts and further limits on alley closures. Future development should be directed to the H Street corridor and to a limited number of Metro-accessible sites along the Pennsylvania Avenue corridor. These areas are already zoned for commercial use and their redevelopment could reinforce the fabric of the neighborhood and provide needed housing and retail services. The renewal of H Street, in particular, has been long awaited. Conversely, the upzoning of developed residential land should be avoided, recognizing that Capitol Hill is already one of the densest communities in the District.

Historically, Capitol Hill has had a large number of older schoolhouses and public works buildings. Some of these facilities, like the Bryan School on Independence Avenue and the streetcar barn on East Capitol Street, have been adaptively reused for housing. Such reuse has preserved important architectural landmarks; however, there are concerns that surplus schools and public buildings will be demolished and replaced with much higher-density housing in the future. Residents at Comprehensive Plan meetings were clear that any future development on surplus public property should conform to the prevailing density and architectural fabric of the surrounding community. There is a particular interest in retaining row houses and building new row houses to keep Capitol Hill sought-after by families. The redevelopment of the Ellen Wilson and Kentucky Courts public housing projects were both cited as positive examples, to be emulated elsewhere.

Compared to neighborhoods in Northwest Washington, DC, Capitol Hill is underserved by retail stores and services. Basic neighborhood services, like groceries, hardware stores, clothing stores, drug stores, movie theaters, banks, and restaurants, are in short supply in the commercial districts, and many residents travel to Pentagon City or elsewhere to shop. On the other hand, the community has long sought to control the proliferation of drive-through fast food restaurants and mini-marts along thoroughfares like Pennsylvania Avenue. As much-needed retail is finally arriving on Capitol Hill, new issues have emerged. For example, Barracks Row is seeking to balance its role as a local-serving shopping district with its potential to draw from a regional market attracted by its historic ambiance. On H Street, there are tensions as long-time businesses feel the pressure of changing consumer tastes and expectations. At Potomac Avenue, a new upscale grocery store will provide a needed retail anchor but also has raised fears of change. On the other hand, some of Capitol Hill’s commercial districts, such as Benning Road, have yet to see significant reinvestment but present opportunity for additional infill residential and commercial development.

While the upgrading of retail services in established commercial districts is a positive sign, there continue to be fears about the encroachment of non-residential uses into row house neighborhoods. This has historically been an issue around the U.S. Capitol, where many small row houses have been converted to offices, national associations, and non-profits. More recently, other issues related to the federal presence have emerged—such as street closures and new security measures around government buildings. Commercial encroachment has also become a concern along 2nd and 3rd Streets northeast of Union Station.

A different but related issue has emerged along 11th Street and 15th Street. In the early 20th century, these streets were active neighborhood commercial districts, with many small shops and businesses. These districts are now primarily residential in character, with only a few small businesses and corner stores remaining. There is some interest among the ANCs and residents in rezoning these areas from commercial to residential use. This would provide assurance that future development is compatible with surrounding uses, but it could also create non-conforming commercial uses. As the future of these commercial areas is considered, however, attention should also be given to preserving the small businesses and corner stores that now serve the community.

Capitol Hill’s parks and open spaces contribute to neighborhood stability and are an important amenity. But there are too few parks to meet neighborhood needs. Some of the community’s open spaces, like Lincoln Park and Stanton Park, were designed to be ornamental squares rather than active recreational areas. Many of the parks are small triangles with no room for recreational facilities. The new Sherwood Recreation Center has been a much-needed improvement but primarily serves the northwest part of Capitol Hill. Similar improvements are needed elsewhere. The community needs to be better connected to the Anacostia River, with its vast open spaces and waterfront amenities. As Reservation 13 is redeveloped and as the future of the RFK Stadium complex is debated, opportunities for new large parks serving Capitol Hill should be recognized. The community should be provided with a high level of access to the planned network of shoreline parks and trails, and to existing and planned boating facilities.

As a historic community, Capitol Hill faces unique urban design issues. These issues relate to the design of new buildings and infill development, the alteration of existing structures, and the treatment of public spaces like Metro plazas and streets. As noted in the Historic Preservation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, contemporary architecture can fit within the fabric of an historic community, but issues relating to scale, texture, materials, and context should be reconciled. Historic places like Eastern Market, the Sewell-Belmont House, and Friendship House should be preserved from nearby development that would reduce their architectural and design integrity. Elsewhere, greater steps may be needed to avoid demolition by neglect and so that historic preservation regulations are enforced to the greatest extent possible. The public realm also needs improvement, particularly along H Street, Benning Road, and Pennsylvania Avenue. Detailed guidelines may be needed so that lighting, building materials, street furniture, signage, sidewalk materials, street trees, landscaping, trash containers, and other aspects of the streetscape are appropriately designed.

Issues of housing affordability and displacement are present in Capitol Hill, as they are in many other parts of the District. The pressures are particularly significant in the Near Northeast area (between H Street and Florida Avenue), where home prices tripled between 2000 and 2005. In some respects, Capitol Hill may be better equipped to handle rising housing costs than other parts of Washington, DC—the prevalence of row houses with rentable basements creates affordable housing options for renters and extra income for owners. Nonetheless, some longtime homeowners have cashed out while some renters have moved elsewhere in search of more affordable housing. The 208-unit Potomac Gardens public housing project has been identified as a possible new community site, raising further fears of displacement and the loss of one of the few remaining affordable housing developments in the area. If the site is redeveloped, one-for-one replacement of the public housing units will be an important prerequisite.

Parking remains an issue on Capitol Hill, especially on the western edge of the area near the U.S. Capitol and in the Eastern Market/Barracks Row area. The reopening of RFK Stadium has created parking problems on nearby residential streets in Hill East, and the prospect of a revitalized H Street and emerging NoMa business district may bring future parking problems to nearby residential side streets. These problems are complicated by the fact that many of the homes and apartments on Capitol Hill do not have dedicated off-street parking spaces. Curb cuts serving new development have further reduced the supply of on-street spaces. Residential permit parking has achieved some success in the area, but there are issues related to enforcement and abuse of parking privileges.

As already noted, Capitol Hill is intersected by major commuter routes serving the Maryland suburbs and areas in Wards 7 and 8. Its neighborhoods are also vulnerable to overflow traffic when the freeways are congested. Residential north-south streets are often clogged with cut-through traffic as commuters weave between the east-west arterials. This creates noise, air pollution, and safety issues for residents. One-way streets have been established to facilitate traffic flow, but the streets are not always paired, leading to circuitous travel and high volumes of fast-moving commuter traffic. Street and lane closures, illegal parking, and poorly timed signals contribute to congestion problems. At one time, a freeway link was proposed between I-295 and I-395 via Barney Circle, but this project was cancelled in the 1990s. A more recent proposal calls for removal of a portion of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway, its replacement with an at-grade roadway between Barney Circle and 8th Street, and a tunnel in lieu of the elevated freeway between 8th Street and South Capitol Street. While this would remove a barrier between Capitol Hill and the waterfront, there are many questions yet to be answered about the effects on traffic and adjacent land uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1507** CH-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a1507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1507}

1507.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Capitol Hill. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the District-wide elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Element should be consulted for policies relating to the future of the adjoining Southeast Waterfront Area.

1507.2 Policy CH-1.1.1: Conserving Residential Uses

Maintain the integrity and quality of Capitol Hill’s residential uses and recognize the importance of its historic architecture and housing stock to the entire District. Ensure that Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations for Capitol Hill neighborhoods sustain its moderate density land use pattern.

1507.3 Policy CH-1.1.2: Renovation of Housing Stock

Encourage the rehabilitation and renovation of the building stock throughout the Capitol Hill Planning Area, taking steps to acknowledge and enhance its unique neighborhood character both within and outside historic districts. Where infill development occurs, its scale and character should be compatible with prevailing neighborhood densities, and its design should contribute to neighborhood continuity and quality. When evaluating compatibility of improvements designed to either enhance energy efficiency or to create more affordable housing, consideration should be given to weighing the benefits to the community and District against the benefits of preserving historic features.

1507.4 Policy CH-1.1.3: Upgrading Commercial Districts

Reinforce and upgrade the major commercial districts of Capitol Hill, including the H Street NE and Benning Road NE corridors, the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor, 7th Street SE, 8th Street SE, and Massachusetts Avenue NE between Union Station and Stanton Park. Support the further development of these areas with corridor-appropriate retail services, provided that such uses are compatible with surrounding land uses and the historic architecture and scale of the shopping districts themselves. Support the retention of existing neighborhood-serving businesses in these areas through programs that provide technical and financial assistance to small, locally owned establishments.

1507.5 Policy CH-1.1.4: Directing Growth

Direct growth in the Capitol Hill Planning Area to commercially zoned land, with a particular emphasis on the H Street NE/Benning Road NE corridor and to infill opportunities in residential zones. Along the commercial corridors in this area, mixed-use development combining ground floor retail and upper story residential uses should be supported, along with streetscape improvements that improve visual and urban design qualities and enhance pedestrian, bus, and auto circulation. In the residential zones, the scale of development should be sensitive to adjacent buildings and uses. All development should reflect the capacity of roads, infrastructure, and services to absorb additional growth.

1507.6 Policy CH-1.1.5: North of Massachusetts Avenue/Capitol Hill Transition Areas

Improve buffering and urban design transitions between the emerging office and high-density residential corridor north of Union Station (North of Massachusetts Avenue, or NoMa) and the adjacent row house neighborhoods of Capitol Hill. Use zoning, design guidelines, historic preservation review, and other measures to avoid sharp contrasts in scale and character where high-density and moderate-density areas abut one another.

1507.7 Policy CH-1.1.6: Inappropriate Commercial Uses

Prevent the proliferation of fast-food outlets, self-service gas stations, convenience mini-marts, and other drive-through businesses along Capitol Hill’s commercial corridors. The commercial corridors of Capitol Hill are part of the historic L’Enfant Plan, and they contribute to the national image of the nation’s capital and provide a walkable neighborhood environment; inappropriate and automobile-oriented uses should be prohibited.

1507.8 Policy CH-1.1.7: Alleys

Preserve Capitol Hill’s system of historic alleys and develop plans for the use of large block interior spaces where appropriate. These plans should be developed in coordination with the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), residents, and community groups.

1507.9 Policy CH-1.1.8: Encroachment of Non-Residential Uses

Strictly limit and enforce the conversion of housing to non-residential uses and the replacement of housing with non-residential uses in the Capitol Hill Planning Area. This includes the development of private clubs, museums, colleges, and universities within the Capitol Hill Historic District.

1507.10 Policy CH-1.1.9: Conversion of Non-Residential Structures

Allow the conversion of obsolete or vacant non-residential structures (including schools, places of worship, warehouses, and institutional uses) to housing, provided that important architectural resources are conserved.

1507.11 Policy CH-1.1.10: Public Housing

Rehabilitate public housing projects on Capitol Hill, ensuring that any units that are removed are replaced in-kind by new public housing units within the community. Where feasible, rehabilitation projects should provide home ownership opportunities for public housing residents.

1507.12 Policy CH-1.1.11: 15th Street SE Commercial District

Encourage the preservation and moderate expansion of commercial uses along 15th Street SE that are primarily neighborhood serving. This corridor should retain its mix of light commercial and moderate-density residential to allow it to retain the existing corner stores and small businesses that serve the community.

1507.13 Policy CH-1.1.12: RFK Stadium Area

Provide improved buffering and landscaping screening along 19th Street NE/SE and elsewhere in the vicinity of RFK Stadium in order to reduce the effects of noise, dust, vibration, and air pollution on the adjacent Hill East community. Work collaboratively with the National Park Service (NPS), District agencies, EventsDC, National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), and the community on long-range plans and through a future planning analysis for the stadium and adjacent parkland and parking lots. Waterfront open space in this area should be retained and improved for the benefit of Hill East, Kingman Park, and Rosedale residents. Improvements should include the creation and maintenance of a pedestrian and cyclist shoreline access path and well-designed public spaces. Recreational and green spaces should include features for people with disabilities and older adults. Reduce the amount of land occupied by surface parking and maximize activity along the waterfront. See the Urban Design Element for additional policies related to parks and open spaces.

1507.14 Policy CH-1.1.13: Traffic Management Strategies

Establish traffic management strategies to reduce commuter traffic on East Capitol Street NE, Independence Avenue SE, C Street NE, 17th Street SE, and other predominantly residential streets that also function as through-streets. These strategies should include limiting additional one-way streets on Capitol Hill (and possibly restoring existing one-way streets to two-way traffic), improving signal timing on Benning Road NE and Pennsylvania Avenue SE, and improving pedestrian and bicycle safety. Measures should also be implemented to route through-traffic around residential neighborhoods and to restrict trucks and heavy vehicles on local streets.

1507.15 Policy CH-1.1.14: Southeast Boulevard

Continue to evaluate the transportation and land use opportunities and impacts associated with the freeway’s redesign of the Southeast Boulevard as an at-grade boulevard to better connect Capitol Hill residents to the Anacostia waterfront by reconnecting parts of the street grid to the north. Add new residential development, where possible, along a newly designed boulevard. New pathways should safely serve both pedestrians and cyclists. Future planning efforts should reflect the importance of connecting neighborhoods to the river.

1507.16 Policy CH-1.1.15: Transit Service

Maintain and improve mass transit service in the Near Northeast section of the Planning Area, particularly along the corridor extending from Union Station along H Street NE to Hechinger Mall and continuing on Benning Road NE to the Minnesota Avenue Metro station.

1507.17 Action CH-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

Support urban design and façade improvements along H Street NE, Benning Road NE, Pennsylvania Avenue SE, and Barracks Row. Such improvements should preserve and enhance the historic features, scale, and texture of existing structures. Urban design improvements should be applied to 11th Street SE as it approaches the 11th Street Bridge in order to accommodate increased pedestrian traffic toward the 11th Street Bridge Park.

1507.18 Action CH-1.1B: 15th Street SE Rezoning

Rezone the 15th Street SE commercial district for residential uses, consistent with the corridor’s designation on the Comprehensive Plan.

1507.19 Action CH-1.1.C: Transportation Studies

Continue to implement the DC Department of Transportation’s (DDOT) Capitol Hill Transportation Study and implement its major recommendations. Also, implement the Middle Anacostia and H Street transportation study recommendations, aimed at reducing through-traffic on neighborhood streets within Capitol Hill, limiting truck traffic, and improving conditions for Capitol Hill pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Ongoing livability studies should continue to be implemented at the neighborhood level.

1507.20 Action CH-1.1.D: H Street Streetcar

Implement proposed streetscape improvements for the H Street NE/Benning Road NE corridor, including the development of a streetcar line between the Minnesota Avenue Metro station and Oklahoma Avenue NE.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1508** CH-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1508}

1508.1 Policy CH-1.2.1: Recognition of Historic Resources

Protect and preserve historic structures, places, and landmarks on Capitol Hill, including the Congressional Cemetery. Recognize the neighborhood’s defining physical features—including the L’Enfant street plan—as important and nationally significant cultural resources.

1508.2 Policy CH-1.2.2: Implementation of Preservation Programs

Consistently implement and enforce historic preservation laws and guidelines for new construction, alterations, and public space uses. Expand public access to surveys and evaluations of properties and areas eligible for historic designation in the Planning Area. Solicit additional community input on historic preservation needs and opportunities. The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) should concentrate on Capitol Hill, including the surveying of additional areas, considering expansion of existing historic districts, and potentially increasing the number of landmarked buildings in the District’s current inventory. The HPO should concentrate its efforts in the areas north and east of the Capitol Hill Historic District. Clarify and consistently implement zoning incentives intended to preserve structures along H Street NE.

1508.3 Policy CH-1.2.3: L’Enfant Avenues

Protect and preserve the special character, scale, and historic features of the major L’Enfant Plan avenues that cross Capitol Hill, especially Massachusetts Avenue NE/SE, Pennsylvania Avenue SE, and East Capitol Street NE.

1508.4 Policy CH-1.2.4: Community Facilities

Promote continued investment in, and maintenance and modernization of, important community public facilities in the Capitol Hill Planning Area, including schools, libraries, and social services facilities. Particular attention should be given to sustaining the renovated Eastern High School, the William H. Ramsey Aquatic Center, and the Hill Center as community anchors. Existing community spaces should be flexible to accommodate and support a wide range of users and activities. Renovate the Southeast Library to create more efficient and usable spaces reflecting a modern library.

1508.5 Policy CH-1.2.5: Riverfront Parks

Ensure that the proposed Anacostia waterfront parks are designed and planned to benefit Capitol Hill residents, enhance waterfront resilience, and promote access. Create safe pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections to the shoreline, and provide park facilities and services that respond to the needs of Hill East neighborhoods. Pedestrian paths should accommodate users of all ages and abilities. Benches should be available for users with limited mobility and older adults.

1508.6 Policy CH-1.2.6: Improved Park and Recreation Services

Improve parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities throughout Capitol Hill, with a priority on the Near Northeast neighborhood (between H Street NE and Florida Avenue NE). Continue efforts to improve safety, security, and maintenance levels at all parks in the Capitol Hill Planning Area. Optimize use of the many triangle parks throughout Capitol Hill. Explore design features that might include senior fitness equipment and pedestrian paths that serve a wide range of users, such as older adults and persons with limited mobility. Determine if there is a need for additional or expanded recreational spaces such as courts and fields, or additional aquatic centers.

1508.7 Policy CH-1.2.7: NPS Coordination

Recognize that most of the parkland in and around the Capitol Hill Planning Area is owned and operated by NPS, and consequently that a high level of coordination is required between the District and federal governments to ensure that this land is managed in the best interest of Capitol Hill residents. NPS parks include Lincoln Park, Stanton Park, Folger Park, Garfield Park, Seward Square, Marion Park, and the Virginia Avenue playground, as well as the RFK Stadium area. These spaces should be conserved and improved with a focus on aesthetics, recreational uses, sustainability, and resilient design.

1508.8 Policy CH-1.2.8: Streets as Open Space

Maintain and enhance functional open space within Capitol Hill, particularly the landscaped areas contained within street rights-of-way. These areas include the Pennsylvania Avenue SE esplanade, East Capitol Street, the numerous triangle parks along diagonal avenues, public plazas such as the area around Eastern Market Metro, and the front yards of most Capitol Hill row houses, portions of which are located within the public right-of-way.

1508.9 Action CH-1.2.A: Historic Surveys

Complete historic surveys for the portion of Stanton Park not currently in the Capitol Hill Historic District, and for the Near Northeast, Hill East, Rosedale, and Kingman Park neighborhoods. Based on the findings of those surveys and additional community input and recommendations, prepare nominations to the National Register as appropriate. Consideration should be given to extending the Capitol Hill Historic District eastward to the boundary of the 1791 L’Enfant Plan.

1508.10 Action CH-1.2.B: Capitol Hill Design Guidelines

Develop graphic design guidelines for the Capitol Hill Historic District, illustrating appropriate architectural design features for new construction, renovation, and alterations.

1508.11 Action CH-1.2.C: RFK Stadium Area

Actively participate in efforts by NCPC, NPS, District agencies, Events DC, local ANCs , residents, and neighborhood groups to develop a long-range plan for the RFK Stadium complex, extending from the DC Armory north to Benning Road NE. The plan should include provisions for a substantial amount of waterfront open space, as well as measures to enhance and restore the natural environment in this area. Improve shoreline access where possible, reduce land occupied by surface parking, and encourage new land uses that maximize access and activity at the waterfront. Recreational spaces and pedestrian and cycling paths should accommodate a wide range of users and abilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1509** CH-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a1509 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1509}

1509.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified five areas within the Capitol Hill Planning Area as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that provided in the prior section of this element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 15.1 and Figure 15.3). These areas are:

H Street/Benning Road NE;

Pennsylvania Avenue SE Corridor;

U.S. Capitol perimeter;

Reservation 13/RFK Stadium Complex; and

Southeast Boulevard.

1509.2 Each of these areas is addressed below. Other elements of the Comprehensive Plan may be consulted for additional policies affecting Capitol Hill, including policies for NoMa (Central Washington Element) and the Near Southeast (Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Element).

1509.3 Figure 15.3 Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Capitol Hill.

Within Capitol Hill

2.1

H Street/Benning Road NE

2.2

Pennsylvania Avenue Corridor

2.3

U.S. Capitol Perimeter

2.4

Reservation 13/RFK Stadium Area

2.5

Southeast Boulevard

Adjacent to Capitol Hill

NOMA/Northwest One

Northeast Gateway

Lower Bladensburg/Hechinger Mall

Near Southeast

Pennsylvania Av (East of the River)

1509.4 Map 15.1 Capitol Hill Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 1510** CH-2.1 H STREET/BENNING ROAD NE {#sec-10-a1510 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1510}

1510.1 At one time, the mile-long stretch of H Street NE between Union Station and the starburst intersection at Bladensburg and Benning Roads was the second busiest commercial area in the District. The area faced economic challenges during the 1950s and 1960s and was heavily damaged by the unrest in 1968. An Urban Renewal Plan sparked some reinvestment on the corridor in the 1970s and 1980s, including the Hechinger Mall development on the eastern end, but until recently, the corridor was slow to recover. H Street NE’s retail space had not been keeping up with the rapidly expanding buying power of the surrounding neighborhoods or the burgeoning office market north and east of Union Station until the last five years. Millions of public and private dollars have been invested into new housing, grocery stores, retail, restaurants, and cultural facilities.

1510.2 In 2003, OP completed a Small Area Plan for the H Street NE corridor, designed to guide community, private sector, and public agency action and investments. The plan lays out a vision for H Street NE as a great neighborhood shopping street, serving resident needs, providing connections to the larger District, and improving the livability of the surrounding community. The plan segmented the corridor into four parts, each with a unique identity and character (see Policy CH-2.1.1 below). The plan identified the potential for over 750 units of new housing, 200,000 square feet of new office space, and 300,000 square feet of retail space. However, these projections were too low. Since the plan’s completion in 2003, 1,500 residential units have been constructed or are in the planning stages. The corridor now has a healthy and vibrant mix of full-size grocery stores, small-scale retail, restaurants, and housing.

1510.3 Land use recommendations in the H Street NE Plan were accompanied by transportation recommendations, some of which are already being implemented. The first segment of the H Street streetcar began operation in winter of 2016 between Union Station and Benning Road, with plans to extend to Minnesota Avenue. Upon completion of this segment, the streetcar line will connect Union Station to Minnesota Avenue, providing a loop between Metro’s Red Line and Orange Line and increasing transit access for Northeast Capitol Hill residents. The 2003 Plan also recommended the retention of on-street parking and development of new off-street parking structures.

1510.4 Extensive streetscape, signage, and façade improvements have been completed along the H Street NE corridor, including new pedestrian crossings and a civic plaza at the eastern gateway intersection of H Street, Benning Road, and Bladensburg Road NE. This key intersection is adjacent to the 8.6-acre site locally referred to as the Hechinger Mall site, even though Hechinger has not occupied the site since the early 80s. The existing mall—a low-rise, car-centric shopping center built in 1981—is poised for future redevelopment given its size and location on the streetcar line. H Street NE has truly been transformed since the adoption of the Small Area Plan in 2003. Over 1,500 new residential units, and over 60 new retail spaces, have opened up. H Street NE is an official DC Main Street and a nationally recognized corridor revitalization success story. Further new development is expected to continue west along Benning Road NE and potentially north on Bladensburg Road NE.

1510.5 East of H Street, the Benning Road NE corridor (between 15th Street and Oklahoma Avenue) includes a mix of residential uses and auto-oriented commercial uses. The character of the street changes considerably, with higher traffic volumes, a wider right-of-way, and a much less pedestrian-oriented atmosphere. The construction of the H Street-Benning streetcar, along with accompanying streetscape improvements such as new street trees and lighting, will create opportunities for revitalization and new businesses along Benning Road NE. This will provide a needed amenity for the adjoining Rosedale and Kingman Park neighborhoods, which currently lack convenient retail services.

1510.6 Policy CH-2.1.1: H Street NE Revitalization

Support the revitalization of the H Street NE corridor between North Capitol Street and 17th Street NE in a manner that is consistent with the approved 2003 H Street NE Strategic Development Plan. This plan recommended the development of four thematic areas along the H Street NE corridor:

Western Gateway, between North Capitol Street and 7th Street NE. This area includes air rights development over the CSX railroad (Burnham Place) and an urban living district between 2nd Street and 7th Street NE. The urban living district is intended for medium- to high- density residential development, with limited ground floor retail uses;

Central Retail, extending from 7th Street to 12th Street NE. This area is envisioned as the downtown of the H Street community. Existing retail space is to be revitalized, and new mixed-use projects combining ground floor retail and upper story housing are encouraged. Parking is to be enhanced by removing on-street parking restrictions and identifying opportunities for structured off-street parking;

An Arts and Entertainment District, extending from 12th Street to 15th Street. This area builds on the established Atlas Theater, Joy of Motion Dance Center and other cultural anchors. New arts and cultural uses are encouraged, as are complementary specialty retail uses, sit-down restaurants, arts-related retail, and other community services. Moderate and medium-density residential and office space, including live-work space, also is encouraged in this area; and

Hechinger Mall (in the adjacent Upper Northeast Planning Area), located at the intersection of H Street NE, Benning Road NE, and Bladensburg Road NE. Support continued improvements to or redevelopment of the Hechinger Mall to realize the full potential of this site as an anchor for H Street NE. Any redevelopment or improvements should make the area more pedestrian-friendly, including the creation of new civic spaces and introduction of infill development to include a mix of residential and commercial uses.

1510.7 Policy CH-2.1.2: Clustering of Retail

Recognize that the existing supply of retail space on the H Street NE corridor may exceed demand, and that retail development should therefore be clustered on the 700-1100 blocks.

1510.8 Policy CH-2.1.3: Physical Improvements

Improve the infrastructure and physical appearance of the H Street NE corridor as a way to enhance its market perception and to attract investors, visitors, shoppers, and residents.

1510.9 Policy CH-2.1.4: H Street NE Transit and Streetscape Improvements

Undertake transit and streetscape improvements to enhance mobility along H Street NE, and improve the area’s accessibility from the surrounding neighborhoods and other parts of the District. Improvements should upgrade aesthetics and pedestrian safety and make walking along the street more comfortable and enjoyable.

1510.10 Policy CH-2.1.5: Parking

Retain existing on-street parking along H Street NE. As recommended by the H Street Small Area Plan adopted by the D.C. Council, encourage the development of improved transit, underground parking, and shared parking lots serving the retail and theater areas in the central and eastern parts of the commercial district.

1510.11 Policy CH-2.1.6: Historic Preservation

Encourage the preservation of historic buildings along H Street NE and promote educational and cultural tourism activities to raise awareness of the corridor’s history and unique historic character. In coordination with the affected ANC, periodically evaluate and update the implementation strategies in the H Street Small Area Plan.

1510.12 Policy CH-2.1.7: H Street Bridge

DDOT plans to replace the H Street Bridge (located directly behind Union Station over the CSX railroad tracks, and sometimes referred to as the Hopscotch Bridge) in the near future. Any future development in the air rights adjacent to the H Street Bridge should recognize the limitations of the streets beneath the bridge to serve high-volume commercial traffic and include well-designed access points to and from the bridge itself. The allowable height of any building constructed in the air rights should be measured from the bridge.

1510.13 Action CH-2.1.A: H Street Strategic Development Plan

Implement the recommendations of the 2003 H Street Strategic Development Plan.

1510.14 Action CH-2.1.B: Business Assistance

Implement programs to improve retail success along H Street NE, Benning Road NE, and Bladensburg Road NE, including financial assistance to small businesses, grant and loan programs, façade improvement programs, Small Business Administration loans, and the creation of a BID.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1511** CH-2.2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE SE CORRIDOR {#sec-10-a1511 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1511}

1511.1 Pennsylvania Avenue SE is sometimes referred to as America’s Main Street and has ceremonial, historic, and symbolic importance. In many respects, the avenue is also Capitol Hill’s Main Street, with walkable shopping areas extending up 7th Street SE to Eastern Market, and down 7th and 8th Streets SE through the Barracks Row historic area. This concentration of commercial uses is known as Capitol Hill’s Central Business District.

1511.2 East of 9th Street SE, Pennsylvania Avenue SE becomes more residential in character, although there are commercial uses at many of the intersections. Some of these commercial uses are auto-oriented (gas stations and fast food outlets) and serve the heavy volume of commuter traffic headed to or from the Sousa Bridge, as well as Hill residents. The juxtaposition of older residential row houses and drive-through commercial uses creates land use conflicts on the corridor and compromises the image of Pennsylvania Avenue SE as a gateway to the nation’s capital. Consequently, the entire corridor—from the U.S. Capitol east to the Maryland line—was designated by the District as a Great Street in 2005. Efforts are underway to improve the streetscape, and address a variety of land use, transportation, and design issues.

1511.3 Two Metro stations along the corridor present both challenges and opportunities. The Eastern Market station entrance is an unwelcoming public space located in an otherwise attractive pedestrian-friendly area. The possibility of developing the plaza as a town square has been explored in the past and should continue to be pursued.

1511.4 The Potomac Avenue Metro station area experiences poor visibility and conditions that are dangerous for pedestrians. The area could become a much more dynamic neighborhood center in the future, with new shops, housing, and public spaces. The community remains concerned about the scale of proposed development around the station, given that the area is currently characterized by two- and three-story row houses. Opportunities for new mixed-use, multi-family development should be concentrated on vacant lots and on the drive-through commercial properties along the avenue, as well as around the Metro station. New development will continue to bring much needed retail and housing to the eastern end of Capitol Hill. Infill development should emphasize moderate or medium densities. Refurbishing and renovation of older commercial buildings, particularly those with pedestrian-oriented retail storefronts, should also be strongly encouraged. Efforts to create a Main Street program in this area were initiated several years ago and should be supported in the future.

1511.5 Policy CH-2.2.1: Pennsylvania Avenue

Improve Pennsylvania Avenue SE as an important approach to the U.S. Capitol and as a neighborhood-serving corridor. The design of the avenue—including adjacent buildings, land uses, and public spaces—should adhere to high aesthetic standards and should enhance the avenue’s role as a neighborhood commercial center and walkable street.

1511.6 Policy CH-2.2.2: Neighborhood Shopping Improvements

Sustain existing businesses and encourage additional neighborhood-serving retail uses along Barracks Row, on 7th Street SE between Pennsylvania Avenue SE and North Carolina Avenue SE, and along Pennsylvania Avenue SE between 2nd and 4th Streets SE, 6th and 9th Streets SE, and 12th and 16th Streets SE. Any improvements or alterations in these areas should preserve the historic texture, scale, and features of the existing buildings and adjoining neighborhoods. Where possible, improvements should include design features to improve accessibility for older adults and persons with disabilities.

1511.7 Policy CH-2.2.3: Eastern Market Metrorail Station

Improve the urban design quality of the Eastern Market Metro Station area as a community gathering space and a connection among the Pennsylvania Avenue, Barracks Row, and Market Row corridors. Provide appropriate transitions between such development and adjacent residential areas, and take steps to manage additional traffic and parking demand and improve Metro access, including installation of an adequate number of Capital Bikeshare stations so that residents who live more than half a mile from the Metro can get to a station easily.

1511.8 Policy CH-2.2.4: Eastern Market

Continue to promote Eastern Market’s intended function as a produce, meat, farmers, and retail market, as well as a community meeting place and visual arts center. Preserve the historic character of the market and surrounding area.

1511.9 Policy CH-2.2.5: Barracks Row

Continue to promote Barracks Row as a neighborhood-serving retail center. Emphasize local-serving rather than regional or large-format retail use, and retain the area’s historic scale and character. Particularly encourage additional retail to locate along the portion of Barracks Row south of the freeway, thus enhancing the connection between Capitol Hill and the emerging waterfront neighborhoods.

1511.10 Policy CH-2.2.6: Potomac Avenue Metro Station

Support the revitalization of vacant commercial space and additional moderate to medium-density mixed-use development around the Potomac Avenue Metro station. Such development should be located on existing commercially zoned property and developed in a manner that is consistent with existing zoning (including established provisions for planned unit developments and pending programs for inclusionary housing). Any infill development should be compatible with, the character of the adjacent row house community.

1511.11 Action CH-2.2.A: Streetscape Improvements

Implement plans to beautify Pennsylvania Avenue SE, including landscaping, street furniture and street lighting improvements, maintenance of the esplanade and small parks along the avenue, pedestrian improvements, and traffic management measures. These improvements should reinforce the avenue’s symbolic importance and should complement the efforts that have already been made to improve the streetscape in the 600 block and near Eastern Market.

1511.12 Action CH-2.2.B: Eastern Market Plaza

Prepare and implement a pedestrian-focused urban design and multimodal transit improvement plan for the Eastern Market Metro station entrance, making it a more attractive town square and improving the plaza’s ability to function as a major transfer point including, if appropriate relocating bus stops to ensure safety and accessibility.

1511.13 Action CH-2.2.C: Potomac Gardens

Pursue redevelopment of Potomac Gardens as a mixed- income development, including an equivalent number of affordable units and additional market rate units. Overall densities on the site should be compatible with adjacent uses. Every effort should be made to avoid the long-term displacement of existing residents if the project is reconstructed.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1512** CH-2.3 U.S. CAPITOL PERIMETER {#sec-10-a1512 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1512}

1512.1 The proximity of Capitol Hill’s residential areas to the U.S. Capitol Complex creates a variety of land use, transportation, and urban design issues. Expansion of the Capitol Complex during the 1900s resulted in the development of large office buildings and expanded federal facilities on former row house blocks. This prompted some of the Hill’s earliest historic preservation initiatives, along with the adoption of a Capitol Interest Overlay Zone that established maximum height and floor area ratio limits in an area extending from the edge of the Capitol Complex east to 6th Street. Through the 2016 Zoning Regulations update, this area is now the Capitol Interest Zones and includes the following new zones: RA-7, RF-3, MU-23, MU-24, MU-26, and PDR-5. The intent is still the same as the original overlay. Long-range plans for the Capitol Complex are articulated in a Master Plan that is prepared and periodically updated by the Architect of the Capitol (AOC). The AOC also maintains an officially adopted historic preservation policy that guides the management of AOC heritage assets listed with the policy.

1512.2 The following policies define the District’s position on land use activities in and around the U.S. Capitol area. These policies seek to mitigate the effects of increased security requirements on neighborhood character, limit adverse impacts associated with the Capitol Power Plant, address parking and traffic impacts related to the Capitol Complex, improve urban design conditions, enhance resilience, and guide future land use decisions to be consistent with the AOC’s Master Plan and historic preservation policy.

1512.3 Policy CH-2.3.1: Capitol Master Plan Conformity

Future development and/or expansion of the United States Capitol grounds should conform with the guidelines set out in the Master Plan of the U.S. Capitol. Any land transferred from the AOC to the District or a private party should likewise be used in a manner that is consistent with the Capitol Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan.

1512.4 Policy CH-2.3.2: Capitol Area Traffic and Parking

Work with the AOC to reduce parking and traffic impacts in areas adjacent to the U.S. Capitol and to address related problems such

as motor coach parking and the enforcement of residential permit parking restrictions.

1512.5 Policy CH-2.3.3: Surface Transportation Improvements

Improve surface transportation in and around the Capitol Complex in a manner that reduces impacts on Capitol Hill neighborhoods and facilitates access within the area. This could include the use of shuttles between key destinations, such as Union Station, the new Capitol Visitors Center, and the Capitol South Metro station.

1512.6 Policy CH-2.3.4: Impacts of Security Measures

Encourage the AOC to coordinate all proposed street closings, reroutings, and security measures with District government.

1512.7 Policy CH-2.3.5: Compatibility of Federal Facilities

Work with the AOC to encourage the development of future federal buildings to be compatible with and preserves the moderate density residential character of adjacent residential areas. This includes the development of ancillary federal facilities such as child-care centers, housing and classroom space for Congressional interns, police facilities, Congressionally sponsored service institutions, improvements to public space infrastructure, and public works maintenance and storage areas used by the AOC.

1512.8 Policy CH-2.3.6: Capitol Power Plant

Encourage the Capitol Power Plant and Refrigeration Plant to operate in ways that reduce air pollution, noise, and other impacts. Update plans for the power plant as needed to reflect revised Capitol needs and community concerns.

1512.9 Action CH-2.3.A: Streetscape and Signage Improvements

Implement streetscape and signage improvements that more clearly define the boundary of the U.S. Capitol Grounds and distinguish it from adjacent residential and commercial areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1513** CH-2.4 RESERVATION 13/RFK STADIUM (HILL EAST WATERFRONT) {#sec-10-a1513 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1513}

1513.1 Public Reservation 13 lies on the eastern edge of the Hill East neighborhood on the west bank of the Anacostia River. For more than 150 years, the 67-acre site has been an isolated campus, separated from the neighborhood it adjoins and an obstacle between residents and the waterfront. Reservation 13 has contained public health facilities since 1846, when it became the location of the Washington Asylum—the District’s hospital for indigent patients. In later years, it housed a smallpox hospital, quarantine station, and crematory. Some of the site’s early buildings, such as Anne Archbold Hall, remain today. However, most of the buildings on the site were constructed in the 1930s and 1940s. The site became DC General Hospital in 1953; the hospital was closed in 2001, and later used as an emergency shelter but closed in 2018, as the District plans to construct smaller short-term housing facilities. The DC Central Detention Facility was built in 1976, replacing the old jail on the site that dated back to the 1870s.

1513.2 Reservation 13 presents itself today as a vast area of large, seemingly unrelated buildings associated only by their proximity and former use. Vast areas of the site are used for parking, and there are few areas where the natural beauty of the waterside setting can be appreciated. The site is not at all related to the low-scale row house neighborhood west of 19th Street, nor is it related to the nearby Metro station at Stadium-Armory. While the Department of Behavioral Health and the Court Supervisor and Offender Supervision Agency all use space on the site, many of the buildings are underused.

1513.3 A Master Plan for Reservation 13 was completed in 2002 and later adopted by the D.C. Council. It seeks to retain important civic uses, connect residential areas to the shoreline, and redevelop the site as an extension of the adjacent Hill East neighborhood. Since completion of the plan, transfer of the site from federal to local ownership, along with pre-zoning to reflect the uses envisioned by the Master Plan, have both been completed.

1513.4 The adopted Reservation 13 Master Plan retains the historic Anne Archbold Hall, DC Central Detention Facility, and other institutional uses, and it identifies approximately 40 acres for redevelopment. New facilities for health care and recreation are envisioned, along with new housing, offices, retail, and institutional uses. Key urban design features include extension of the Capitol Hill street grid into the site, new parks, and new access to the waterfront, including a great meadow overlooking the shoreline. Other notable elements of the plan include the extension of Massachusetts Avenue to the Anacostia River and a village square at the Stadium-Armory Metro station. The preliminary development program identifies the potential for 800 new housing units and over three million square feet of non-residential space, roughly doubling the total square footage of buildings on the site. In May 2016, Phase 1 of the Hill East development received Design Review Approval, and the District selected a development partner. The buildings are under construction and near completion. Originally, this first phase was to include over 350 residential units, with 30 percent designated for affordable housing, and additional retail and green spaces. In fall 2019, it was announced that one of the residential buildings would be converted to permanent supportive housing for persons experiencing homelessness and require supportive services.

1513.5 Immediately north of Reservation 13 lies the RFK Stadium complex. RFK Stadium was built in 1961 at a particularly prominent location along the east-west axis that includes the U.S. Capitol, Washington Monument, and Lincoln Memorial. More than 100 acres of land around the stadium is used for surface parking and unimproved open space. The area is owned by the federal government and is currently under study by EventsDC to develop a Master Plan for future uses at this site. It was identified in the 1997 NCPC Legacy Plan as a possible location for major new memorials, recreation, and open space as well as possible private development.

1513.6 Policy CH-2.4.1: Redevelopment of Public Reservation 13

Redevelop Reservation 13 as a mixed-use neighborhood that combines housing, retail, office space, health care, civic, education, institutional, and recreational uses. This site could be a future potential opportunity for an anchor employer or institution. Established uses such as the DC Correctional Facility should be retained. Health care and institutional uses on the site should be reorganized to accommodate infill uses, improve the site’s vitality and efficiency, and create an environment more conducive to pedestrian travel.

1513.7 Policy CH-2.4.2: Reservation 13 as an Extension of Hill East

Connect the established Hill East neighborhood to the Anacostia waterfront by extending Massachusetts Avenue and the Capitol Hill street grid through Reservation 13 to new shoreline parks and open spaces. Massachusetts Avenue should be designed as a grand boulevard in the tradition of the L’Enfant Plan, and should terminate in a dramatic overlook above the Anacostia River.

1513.8 Policy CH-2.4.3: Reservation 13 Parkland

Create new waterfront parklands and green spaces at Reservation 13, including a grand waterfront park designed for resilience to flooding and that includes, recreational trails along the waterfront, smaller neighborhood parks and open spaces within the site, and tree-lined pedestrian streets.

1513.9 Policy CH-2.4.4: Stadium-Armory Metro Station

Capitalize on the Stadium-Armory Metro station in the design and development of Reservation 13. This should include development of a new neighborhood center near 19th and C Streets SE that serves the unmet needs of the nearby community, as well as the development of moderate- to high-density housing on the Reservation 13 site.

1513.10 Policy CH-2.4.5: Reservation 13 Building Heights

Achieve a gradual progression in building heights on Reservation 13, with the lowest heights along 19th Street SE to buffer the adjacent low-scale row house neighborhoods. Taller buildings should be located along the Massachusetts Avenue extension and on the portions of the site where visual impacts can be minimized by slope and topography. Buildings should be designed to maximize waterfront views and vistas and minimize impacts on nearby residences.

1513.11 Policy CH-2.4.6: RFK Stadium Area

Encourage active and better use of NPS lands around RFK Stadium, including park and trail improvements that connect Hill East to the Langston Golf Course and National Arboretum areas to the north. Explore the potential of transferring NPS land to the District where appropriate.

1513.12 Action CH-2.4.A: Hill East/Reservation 13 Master Plan

Implement the Hill East/Reservation 13 Master Plan, including the Massachusetts Avenue extension and the creation of new waterfront parks. Explore creating recreation spaces that include indoor walking/indoor track opportunities. Coordinate this study with EventsDC to determine if any of these recreational needs can be met through the development of the RFK Stadium site.

1513.13 Action CH-2.4.B: RFK Stadium Planning

Work collaboratively with NCPC , EventsDC and adjacent Hill East and Kingman Park communities in planning the area between Benning Road and Reservation 13, including RFK Stadium, and in implementing these plans after they are completed.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1514** CH-2.5 SOUTHEAST BOULEVARD {#sec-10-a1514 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1514}

1514.1 As part of the ongoing implementation of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, DDOT initiated a planning study to further investigate options for transforming the existing section of the Southeast Freeway into a boulevard that would be fully integrated into the adjacent street network. After several community meetings, OP was asked to initiate a supplemental planning study, the Southeast Boulevard Planning Study. Completed in July 2015, the Southeast Boulevard Planning Study was intended to provide OP, DDOT, and the community the technical assistance needed to develop alternatives to transform the former Southeast Freeway into an urban boulevard fully integrated into the surrounding neighborhood. The study evaluated options to improve pedestrian and bicyclist connections to the waterfront and connections to the neighborhood, and it examined the future development potential of excess rights-of-way.

1514.2 The Southeast Boulevard Planning Study area includes the existing portion of the Southeast Freeway east of 11th Street SE and its immediate environs, bounded by 11th Street SE to the west, K Street SE to the north, Barney Circle to the east, and M Street SE to the south. Because the existing portion of the Southeast Freeway east of 11th Street SE was originally funded and constructed as part of the interstate Highway System, DDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) are required to conduct studies under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to understand the impacts to the environment of any proposed change to the former interstate. Agreements between DDOT and FHWA also would be required if portions of the former interstate right-of-way are to be made available for private development. The OP study also evaluated concepts in the context of District-wide planning objectives, issues raised through a previous DDOT study, the purpose and need outlined in the transportation study, the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) framework and other planning guidance, as well as legal and physical constraints to improvements within the right-of-way. The study was guided by a project advisory team that includes OP, DDOT, ANC 6B, the Ward 6 Councilmember, and the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED).

1514.3 Policy CH-2.5.1: Southeast Boulevard Land Uses

Encourage land uses around the Southeast Boulevard that enhance and strengthen the neighborhood fabric and promote safer and greater connectivity between the Capitol Hill neighborhoods and the Anacostia Waterfront. Implement future land uses that reflect community desires for mixed-use development that is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. Explore opportunities for small amounts of neighborhood-serving retail.

1514.4 Policy CH-2.5.2: Southeast Boulevard Waterfront and Neighborhood Connections

Leverage the redesign of the Southeast Freeway into Southeast Boulevard to reconnect the Capitol Hill communities to the Anacostia waterfront. Grid streets that are now currently dead ends could be extended south to the boulevard. Pedestrian and bicycle access connections could be created across the CSX rail right-of-way with stairs and ramps down to M Street SE and the waterfront. Additional opportunities to better connect neighborhood streets to the boulevard and install bike lanes and safer pedestrian access should be prioritized during future planning and implementation.

1514.5 Policy CH-2.5.3: Transformation of SE Freeway into SE Boulevard

In conjunction with DDOT and federal agencies, conduct analyses needed to satisfy the environmental and community-raised issues. Continued interagency coordination is needed to move this process forward. Continue to work with the Capitol Hill residents to capitalize on community support to implement the connections to the Anacostia waterfront as first recommended in the AWI.

1514.6 Action CH-2.5.A: Southeast Freeway Alternatives

Conduct environmental and feasibility studies to assess the preferred alternatives of the Southeast Boulevard Planning Study. Determine the most appropriate alternative to move forward based on community input and structural and financial feasibility.

1514.7 Action CH 2.5.B: Additional Land Use Planning for Southeast Boulevard

In conjunction with environmental and feasibility studies, complete additional land use and master planning studies as needed to further refine the preferred options for the transformation of the Southeast Freeway into Southeast Boulevard, recommend appropriate land use changes for the Future Land Use Map, and identify opportunities for additional neighborhood amenities.

### **10-A16** CENTRAL WASHINGTON AREA ELEMENT PENN QUARTER MONUMENTAL CORE

##### **10-A DCMR § 1600** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1600 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1600}

1600.1 The Central Washington Planning Area is the heart of Washington, DC. Its 6.8 square miles include the Monumental Core of the District, with such landmarks as the U.S. Capitol and White House, the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial, and the Federal Triangle and Smithsonian museums. Central Washington also includes the District’s traditional downtown and other employment centers, such as the Near Southwest and East End. Also located there are Gallery Place and Penn Quarter, the region’s entertainment and cultural center. Finally, Central Washington includes more recently densified urban neighborhoods like Mount Vernon Triangle and North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa).

1600.2 The area’s boundaries are shown in the map of Central Washington. A majority of the area is within Ward 2, with portions also in Ward 6. All of Central Washington is within the boundaries of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington, and the area’s streets, land uses, and design reflect this legacy. The area’s grand buildings, boulevards, and celebrated open spaces—particularly the monuments, museums, and federal buildings on the National Mall—define Washington, DC’s image as an international capital. Planning for this area is done collaboratively with the federal government, and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) has land use authority over federal lands.

1600.3 Central Washington is of great importance to the District, the region, and the nation. It is the seat of the federal government, and the economic, cultural, and historic core of the region. It contains the third largest concentration of office space in the United States, trailing only New York City and Chicago, with 475,531 persons employed within its boundaries. The area’s preeminence is underscored by its land use patterns; it includes more than 115 million square feet of office space (almost 23 percent of the region’s total), 2.6 million square feet of retail floor space, over15,000 hotel rooms, major entertainment venues, and one of the largest theater districts in the country. It is also the center of the region’s transportation network, with one of the best underground mass transit systems in the world.

1600.4 To most residents, workers, and visitors, downtown, in a broad sense, includes the area as far north as Dupont Circle, as far west as Foggy Bottom, and as far east as Capitol Hill. However, only about half of the central city workforce is located within the District’s downtown. Additionally, downtown is almost completely built out. Most of the District’s future employment growth will take place beyond its boundaries, in areas like Downtown East, NoMa, and Near Southeast (in the adjacent Anacostia Waterfront Planning Area).

1600.5 Washington, DC’s downtown includes Chinatown, the arts district around Gallery Place, the retail core near Metro Center, the mixed-use Penn Quarter and Mount Vernon Square areas, and concentrations of government office buildings at Federal Triangle and Judiciary Square. While these areas are distinct from one another, they all offer a blend of historic and contemporary development, a mix of uses, and largely pedestrian-friendly environments. Private office buildings, many built to the 12- to 14-story limit allowed by the Height Act, extend across much of the area. Downtown also contains many exceptional historic buildings and public spaces, including many District National Register of Historic Places landmarks.

1600.6 The transition from downtown to West End is seamless. The pattern of 12- to 14-story office buildings, hotels, ground floor retail space and restaurants, and historic landmarks continues almost as far as Washington Circle. There are concentrations of retail space along Connecticut Avenue NW and a cluster of global financial and banking institutions (including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund) on the area’s western edge.

1600.7 Most of the area just north of the National Mall is federal land. This includes the Northwest Rectangle of government and institutional buildings between 17th and 23rd Streets NW, the Federal Triangle, the White House and Eisenhower Executive Office Building, the Potomac Hill Campus (also known as the Observatory Hill Historic District), the U.S. Institute of Peace, and a number of parks. The Federal Triangle area, which experienced a major interior flooding in 2006 and a more minor flooding event as recently as 2019, is at a higher risk of interior flooding, and future development or retrofits of infrastructure should address this through resilient design and construction. Another major concentration of office space lies on the south side of the National Mall in the Near Southwest Federal District. This area includes the headquarters of several federal agencies, as well as private office and hotel complexes like L’Enfant Plaza and the Portals.

1600.8 On the eastern and northeastern flanks of downtown, the pattern of intense office development gives way to more varied land uses. The Walter E. Washington Convention Center occupies six square blocks north of Mount Vernon Square. A high-density residential area is emerging to the east in the Mount Vernon Triangle on land formerly used for surface parking and small businesses. After 20 years of planning, the area including Mount Vernon Triangle and adjacent Massachusetts Avenue NW corridor between Mount Vernon Square and Union Station has become one of the densest neighborhoods in Washington, DC Density on many of these sites is between 200 and 400 units per acre.

1600.9 NoMa lies north and east of the Massachusetts Avenue NE/NW corridor. This former light industrial enclave is today a vibrant and new mixed-use neighborhood between the North Capitol Street NE/NW office corridor and the row house neighborhoods of Capitol Hill, spanning over the CSX railroad tracks. Office development has moved eastward into NoMa as developable land in West End, the central business district, East End, and Capitol Hill has become scarcer. The opening of the NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro station in late 2004 made the area more attractive for investment, and many residential and office projects have been built.

1600.10 While the office market in Central Washington has remained consistently strong in general, portions of Central Washington have experienced higher vacancy rates due to lower demand for office leases from the federal government, the general office market compression due to technological and cultural changes, and the creation of new and more competitive Class A and trophy office space in new and emerging neighborhoods. The area has also reversed a decades-long decline in its role as a retail and entertainment destination. To that end, the goal of creating a living downtown with high-density housing is finally being realized, especially in the outer edges of Central Washington, where new mixed-used and vibrant neighborhoods have emerged. The development of new residential buildings and the conversion of old office space to residential in the central business district proper have been less common, as residential prices still trail office prices in neighborhoods closer to the core, with a few notable exceptions like Penn Quarter and the old convention center sites. Billions of dollars in private investment, coupled with public incentives and plans to attract that investment, have had a transformative impact since the late 1990s. The area now has first-rate restaurants, hotels, and entertainment venues that have attracted thousands of new residents.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1601** HISTORY {#sec-10-a1601 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1601}

1601.1 Before 1791, Central Washington consisted of open fields, pastureland, groves of trees, meandering creeks, and wetlands. This landscape was reshaped as work began on the new national capital, starting with the Capitol, White House, and key departmental buildings and defenses. In 1800, the government arrived from Philadelphia, and the town of about 500 households began to grow, as major buildings rose on the avenues and homes and businesses clustered along the side streets. The British invasion of 1814 ruined most of the federal buildings, but the next year’s opening of a canal along what is now Constitution Avenue helped speed the repairs. Not until 1820 was the cornerstone, still visible today in Judiciary Square, laid for a permanent city hall.

1601.2 Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, the area extending from the Capitol to the White House and from Pennsylvania Avenue NW north served as the commercial heart of the emerging District. In 1862, the first streetcar line opened along Pennsylvania Avenue between the Capitol and State Department at 15th Street NW. Six months later, extensions reached Navy Yard and Georgetown, with 7th and 14th Street NW connections to the District’s edge (now Florida Avenue NW). By 1865, another streetcar line opened along F Street NW, which eventually became the city’s primary shopping corridor. As in other cities, streetcars helped fuel the first round of suburbanization. Streetcars also promoted the conversion of downtown from a mixed-use area to a more commercial destination.

1601.3 As the District matured through the late 19th century, larger buildings for both private and government offices gradually displaced most of downtown’s residences and churches. By 1891, there were nearly 21,000 federal employees in the central District, and federal bureaus spilled into many leased buildings originally designed for other functions. Residential growth shifted to new neighborhoods to the north, east, and south.

1601.4 By the end of the 19th century, the National Mall and Smithsonian museums had taken on increased importance as American gathering places and cultural centers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) completed the Washington Monument in 1888, and the prospect of a more beautiful Washington, DC, arose as the USACE shaped spacious riverside parkland and an ornamental Tidal Basin by filling in the Potomac River mudflats. This promise was recognized and elevated by the McMillan Commission in 1901. The commission’s grand plan for the National Mall and its environs reshaped Washington, DC, for the 20th century, bringing a unified vision for Central Washington oriented around parks, fine architecture, and city-beautiful design principles. Central Washington’s physical form was further shaped by height restrictions adopted in 1894 and later revised in 1899 and 1910. Though first applied out of concern for fire and public safety, and harm to the property value of overshadowed neighbors, these height restrictions evolved to become integral to the new aesthetic vision for the national capital.

1601.5 The area continued to grow for the next 50 years. Two world wars and the New Deal swelled the federal workforce, creating the demand for yet more downtown office space. Downtown’s retail core thrived as Washington, DC’s population grew to more than 800,000 residents by 1950. Conversely, the shrinking number of residential areas in Central Washington began to deteriorate. They were among the first parts of the District targeted for urban renewal in the 1950s.

1601.6 As the metropolitan area decentralized in the 1950s, downtown’s role became more one dimensional. Its retail function waned as interstate highways were constructed and the customer base shifted to the suburbs. Office development moved from downtown to K Street NW and to the redevelopment area south of the National Mall. Plans to revitalize Pennsylvania Avenue NW and other special streets and places were developed in response, and a variety of redevelopment concepts were explored for West End, South Capitol Street, and Near Southeast.

1601.7 These plans did little to stem downtown’s economic challenges. The center of office activity continued to shift north and west, and many of downtown’s historic landmarks, department stores, and office buildings were demolished or vacated. The unrest in 1968 also took a toll.

1601.8 Creation of the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation (PADC) in 1972 set the stage for downtown’s revival. From 1972 to 1994, the PADC was responsible for bringing the first large-scale modern buildings to downtown. Despite these efforts, the area still lacked street activity and urban vitality.

1601.9 In 1982, the Mayor’s Downtown Committee, with support from the Office of Planning (OP), produced Downtown DC: Recommendations for the Downtown Plan. The proposed objectives and policies in that document were later placed into legislative format and adopted almost intact as the Downtown Element of the District’s 1984 Comprehensive Plan. The recommendations addressed the area’s economic challenges and called for more diverse uses, with a strong emphasis on housing. The plan envisioned a city center with retail uses focused on F Street NW, Gallery Place, and Chinatown; new arts uses along 7th Street NW; and significant residential development at Penn Quarter and Mount Vernon Square. Quantified targets for new housing units, hotel rooms, office space, and arts space were established.

1601.10 Downtown revitalization initiatives continued through the 1980s and 1990s. In the early 1990s, the Zoning Commission created the Downtown Development District (DDD), which required a greater mix of uses, such as housing, arts, and retail space. In 1996, the 100-member Interactive Downtown Task Force developed a Vision and Action Plan, including recommendations for new retail and entertainment venues, visual and performing arts facilities, an intermodal transportation center, a Downtown Arts Committee, and international communication and trade facilities. The plan led to the formation of the Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) in 1997 and tax increment financing legislation in 1998.

1601.11 By 2000, the targets set in the early 1980s were finally becoming approachable realities. The Downtown Action Agenda of 2000 provided an updated framework for decisions, established a new vision, and set new goals for downtown. A 2006 update of the agenda provided an opportunity to develop new goals and strategies for the coming years. These goals—except for the need to create more housing—have been mostly reached in the last decade. They include ambitions to:

Maximize and concentrate downtown housing;

Increase the vitality of street life;

Provide clear direction for downtown growth and new development; and

Connect downtown economic growth to District residents.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1602** LAND USE {#sec-10-a1602 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1602}

1602.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated using current lot-by-lot property tax data and information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, and other sources. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modelling approaches, used a decade apart, and not actual changes in land use. Land use statistics for the Planning Area appear in Figure 16.1. Central Washington comprises about 3,285 acres, or about 7.5 percent of the District. About 510 acres of the total area consists of water.

1602.2 Figure 16.1: Land Use Composition in Central Washington

1602.3 Compared to the other nine Planning Areas in the city, Central Washington contains much higher percentages of commercial, mixed-use, and federal land. Commercial and mixed-use land represent 14.6 percent of the total. Non-park federal land represents 19.9 percent of the total. Much of this land is also developed with offices, but the owner and occupant is the federal government.

1602.4 Approximately 33 percent of the Planning Area consists of transportation rights-of-way One-quarter of the land area is parks, recreation, and open space, and the portion allotted for this is slightly higher than Washington, DC’s total of 22.7 percent. Much of the open space is contained within the National Mall and almost all of the remainder comprises federal reservations managed by the National Park Service (NPS). The federal open space has significant programming restrictions, limiting its use for local purposes and District activities.

1602.5 Residential land (land that is only residential and not mixed-use) comprises just 1.7 percent of the Planning Area. Almost all of this acreage consists of mid- to high-rise apartments, with average densities exceeding 100 units per acre. The area features this low percentage because most residential developments in Central Washington also include non-residential uses within their buildings, making them mixed-use developments, which are counted under the commercial and mixed-use category. Most of the residential development is located in Dupont Circle along the Massachusetts Avenue NW corridor, Mount Vernon Triangle, and NoMa. Another concentration is located in Penn Quarter, around 7th and D Streets NW.

1602.6 The percentages of land area for other uses—or example, institutions, public facilities, and utilities —are all relatively small. Only about 1.4 percent of the Planning Area consists of vacant, unimproved private land.

1602.7 Much of the land in Central Washington is publicly owned. Government uses— classified as federal, local public (i.e., District-owned land), and transportation rights-of-way—represent just over 57 percent of the total land uses in Central Washington.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1603** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a1603 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1603}

1603.1 Basic demographic data for Central Washington is shown in Figure 16.2. In 2000, the area had a population of 10,665, or about 1.8 percent of the District’s total. By 2017, the population had increased to about 18,107, or about 2.7 percent of Washington, DC’s total.

1603.2 Relative to the District, Central Washington had a lower percentage of older adults and children in 2017. Overall, only about 19.5 percent of the population was under the age of 18 or over 65, compared to over 29.5 percent District-wide. The area’s percentage of residents aged 18 to 34 was also higher than the District-wide total.

1603.3 Central Washington experienced shifts in racial composition since 2000, when over 60 percent of the population was Black and 25.9 percent of the population was White. By 2015, the Black population decreased by just over 1,000 people, and the percentage dropped to 29 percent. Conversely, the White population more than tripled in size (from 2,757 people to 9,478), and the overall percentage increased to 52 percent. Similarly, the Asian/Pacific Islander population more than doubled, and the population increased from 9 percent to 12 percent of the total. The area also includes a higher percentage of foreign-born residents than the District as a whole.

1603.4 Figure 16.2: Central Washington at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

10,556

15,714

18,107

32,098

39,842

43,653

Households

5,159

8,975

10,159

18,316

22,407

23,986

Household Population

9,023

14,349

16,974

30,056

37,544

41,214

Persons Per Household

1.75

1.60

1.67

1.64

1.68

1.72

Jobs

375,145

441,297

475,531

511,903

543,809

567,025

Density (persons per sq mile)

2,455

3,654

4,211

7,465

9,266

10,152

Land Area (square miles)

4.3

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

1,893

7,112

3,295

3,817

1,551

17.9%

67.4%

31.2%

36.2%

14.7%

1,820

14,577

8,162

6,415

1,710

10.1%

80.5%

46.1%

35.4%

9.4%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

7,560

15.9%

3,394

19.5%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

2,757

6,450

952

247

231

25.9%

60.5%

0.3%

8.9%

2.3%

2.2%

9,478

5,272

2,191

400

737

52.3%

29.1%

0.2%

12.1%

2.2%

4.1%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

588

5.5%

1,668

9.2%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

1,788

16.7%

3,285

18.1%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

571

4,611

11.0%

89.0%

2,089

8,071

20.6%

79.4%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

5,182

698

88.1%

11.9%

10,159

1,426

87.7%

12.3%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

380

125

166

340

4,777

1.6%

6.5%

2.1%

2.8%

5.8%

81.2%

111

431

146

132

172

10,589

1.0%

3.7%

1.3%

1.1%

1.5%

91.4%

0.0%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1604** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a1604 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1604}

1604.1 The majority of the housing units (91.4 percent) in Central Washington are multi-family housing in buildings with 20 or more units. The number of new units in buildings with more than 20 units increased by almost 6,000 units, from 4,777 in 2000 to 10,589 in 2017. This indicates that most new units constructed in the Planning Area were in larger buildings.

1604.2 Similarly, the 2017 Census reported that 79.4 percent of the households in the Planning Area were renters and only 20.6 percent were homeowners. This represents a quadruple increase in owner-occupied units as more condominiums have been constructed in the Planning Area.

1604.3 In 2017, nearly 12 percent of the housing units in Central Washington were vacant. This is slightly higher than the District-wide average of 9.8 percent.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1605** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a1605 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1605}

1605.1 Data from the Department of Employment Services (DOES) and OP indicates there were approximately 475,531 jobs in Central Washington in 2017, primarily in the government, professional, and non-profit sectors. This represents about 59 percent of the District’s job base.

1605.2 According to the 2017 Census, the median household income in the Planning Area was $94,318. This is substantially above the District-wide average of $77,649. More than 19.5 percent of the area’s residents lived below the federal poverty level in 2017. The addition of thousands of market-rate condominiums and apartments since 2000 has undoubtedly brought a sharp rise in median household income in the area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1606** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a1606 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1606}

1606.1 Based on projects that are under construction, approved, or proposed; regional growth trends; and the planning policies articulated by the Comprehensive Plan, significant growth is expected in Central Washington during the next 20 years. The Planning Area is expected to grow from 10,159 households in 2017 to 23,986 households in 2045. Population will more than double, from about 18,107 residents in 2017 to about 43,653 residents by 2045. Most of the growth in Central Washington is expected to consist of new high-density housing, particularly in the Mount Vernon Triangle and NoMa areas. Medium- and moderate-density housing is also anticipated, as communities like Sursum Corda/Northwest One are redeveloped.

1606.2 The number of jobs is expected to increase from about 475,531 in 2017 to 511,903 in 2025. This represents just less than half of the total increase in employment projected for Washington, DC, between 2017 and 2045. Most of the increase will take place in NoMa and on the eastern side of downtown. Replacement of some of the aging building stock in the downtown, Near Southwest, and Golden Triangle areas also can be expected.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1607** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a1607 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1607}

1607.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

1607.2 Priorities for Central Washington were discussed at Comprehensive Plan community workshops throughout 2005 and 2006. Several meetings with the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) in Central Washington were conducted. Briefings to business and trade organizations with a stake in downtown’s future also took place. The revision process also included a small group discussion on downtown in October 2005. About 25 participants representing an array of Central Washington neighborhoods and interests were present.

1607.3 The following priorities for Central Washington were expressed through this process:

The vision of a mixed-use living downtown remains even more applicable today than it was 305 years ago when it was conceived. A priority should continue to be placed on diversifying the mix of downtown land uses to strengthen its role as the heart of Washington, DC. The area is already the center of one of the largest urban office markets in the world. Strengthening Central Washington as a creative, vibrant urban center will require more housing, retail, and arts and entertainment venues. It will also require facilitating the expansion of the traditional downtown to the east and southeast. Capital projects, financial and development incentives, and continued strong leadership will be needed to create the desired mix of uses.

The Central Washington Planning Area should be a diverse place and its diversity should be reflected on many levels. Not only should it feature a mix of uses, but it should serve a variety of users, including downtown and other District residents, workers and visitors from across the region, as well as those from the rest of the country and the world. Downtown retailers should serve customers with a variety of income levels, and retailers themselves should include small, locally grown businesses, as well as national chains. Non-profits and those who cannot afford Class A office rents could also provide diversity. Participants in Comprehensive Plan discussions stated that further efforts should be made to nurture downtown’s developing mix of restaurants, theaters, galleries, clubs, and retail shops and to complement these uses with attractive public spaces to achieve the vibrant character that defines cities like London and New York.

In addition to being diverse, downtown should be authentic. This should be expressed through appreciation and celebration of its history, culture and heritage. Thus, a priority should be placed on the preservation of buildings, places, and uses that express these qualities. Recent efforts to restore the former Carnegie Library Building, create farmers markets, and improve the Martin Luther King, Jr. (Central) Library to provide space for cultural celebrations are examples of actions that contribute to the feeling of authenticity. Chinatown presents an interesting case. While on the one hand, preserving Chinatown’s authenticity has to be about more than just preserving facades or using the Chinese language on street signs, on the other hand, there has been a marked reduction in the number of Chinese businesses. It remains to be seen if Chinatown can maintain an authentic role as the center of a dispersed Asian community. Historic preservation should be strongly promoted downtown where the historic fabric is still largely intact, but contemporary architecture also should flourish in places where new construction is appropriate.

One issue raised during the Comprehensive Plan revision was the question of who Downtown Washington belongs to. The Mall may be a national gathering place, but many District residents do not perceive it as theirs. Downtown should function as the Washington, DC’s Common, a place where residents can come, feel welcome, celebrate good times and, when necessary, even protest. The former Convention Center site should provide a great physical site for the expression of the Commons. There is a need for other public gathering places, events, and activities that reinforce Central Washington’s role as a melting pot that serves all of the District’s neighborhoods.

Central Washington’s design is unique among American cities. Its distinguishing qualities, including its diagonal avenues, monumental buildings, low building heights, and open spaces, are viewed as some of the District’s unique assets. It is essential that new buildings reflect this character and add to the sense of place. In particular, attention should be paid to how buildings meet the street. Curb cuts, blank walls, and inactive ground floor uses should be minimized. Loading and parking entrances should be off of alleys as much as possible. As noted in the Urban Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the identity of Central Washington’s multiple centers needs to be more clearly defined, and the connections between them need to be improved.

While recognizing Central Washington’s national and international role, the area should also play a special role for District residents. It should serve the needs of all residents and users of all abilities, without regard to age, income level, race, and gender. Many activities serving very low-income persons, persons with disabilities, including social services, low cost housing, and emergency shelter, have faced displacement as land values and rents have increased. Given the area’s location, urban character, and accessibility, a significant number of housing units for persons with disabilities and older adults and human service facilities should be retained in the future. This should be achieved by preserving the remaining affordable housing units, preserving (or replacing) emergency shelter space, and creating new forms of affordable housing that work best in a downtown setting such as Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels. Other social service facilities, such as day care centers and job training facilities, are needed to sustain downtown as a community hub.

Central Washington is the hub of the metropolitan transportation system with 15 Metrorail (Metro) stations, commuter and interstate rail terminals, and major bridges, freeway, and surface street infrastructure. However, to retain its central role, it must overcome transportation challenges including:

Some Metro stations that are nearing capacity;

Security-related street closures that have constricted traffic;

Conflicts between street activities, such as truck deliveries, bus stops, taxi stands, and parking;

Conflicts between building perimeter security and pedestrian circulation;

An inadequate supply of parking to meet shopper and visitor needs;

Confusing signage and a lack of information about routes and transportation services; and

Improvements to the DC Circulator, which has been essential in connecting Central Washington destinations; however, additional improvements are needed. Improving east-west and north-south circulation and improving parking management continue to be high priorities. Supporting Metro’s efforts to increase capacity, especially at Metro Center, also should be a priority.

The federal District and domestic District should be connected as one, as they are in other great national capitals. The Mall’s museums and attractions are ringed by federal office buildings that offer few amenities or opportunities for visitors, or even their own employees, and little indication of what lies a few blocks beyond. The expansion of development and redevelopment around the Mall should begin to diminish these distinctions and provide more amenities closer to the Mall. There will need to be special efforts to draw tourists into downtown, such as signage and streetscape improvements, new transportation modes, such as the DC Circulator, and the development of new attractions, such as Spy Museum in downtown’s center. In addition to the urban design benefits of unifying the Mall and downtown, there are other benefits as more visitors choose to dine, shop, and stay in the District. Waterfront park improvements provide another way to tie Washington, DC together; developing a continuous 11-mile band of waterfront open space from Georgetown to the Arboretum was an important theme of the NCPC Legacy Plan and will continue to be a priority in the future.

Downtown’s growth and vibrancy should continue to benefit District residents. Downtown already plays a vital role in the District’s economic health, producing a net benefit of $600 million per year in tax revenues. In addition, the growth of retail, hotels, restaurants, and other services will create many entry-level jobs. The continued development of office space will create new clerical, professional, mid-level, and management jobs in emerging and growing professions. Job placement, apprenticeships, and training programs are needed to ensure that District residents can take advantage of these opportunities.

While downtown has been among the top office markets in the world for decades, the health of that market should not be taken for granted. Changes in security policies on the part of the U.S. Department of Defense will result in the abandonment of over four million square feet of office space in Arlington alone, most of it proximate to Metro stations, and already less costly per square foot than downtown office space. This situation will require achieving a delicate balance between using the strength of the downtown office economy to leverage public benefits without hindering its ability to compete with other jurisdictions for office tenants.

Central Washington should continue to lead the way in the city’s overall efforts toward environmental sustainability. While downtown’s density of uses, and its extensive reliance on public transportation help it to score high on any index of sustainability, more can be done.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1608** CW-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a1608 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1608}

1608.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Central Washington. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

1608.2 Policy CW-1.1.1: Promoting Mixed-Use Development

Expand the mix of land uses in Central Washington to attract a broader variety of activities and sustain the area as the hub of the metropolitan area. Central Washington should be strengthened as a dynamic employment center, a high-quality regional retail center, an internationally renowned cultural center, a world-class visitor and convention destination, a vibrant urban neighborhood, and the focus of the regional transportation network. New office and retail space, hotels, arts and entertainment uses, housing, and open space should be encouraged through strategic incentives and preservation so that the area remains attractive, exciting, and economically productive.

See also the Urban Design and Land Use elements for additional policies related to downtown growth.

1608.3 Policy CW-1.1.2: Central Washington Office Growth

Retain Central Washington as the premier office location in the greater Washington region. Office development should generally be guided eastward from its current area of concentration. Capitalize on the strong demand for office space in Downtown East, along North and South Capitol Streets, and in the vicinity of the NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro station. A range of office space should be planned to meet the needs of high-end, mid-range, and low-end office space users, and this space should also include modern workspace concepts such as shared workspaces, membership offices, rental conference rooms, and virtual offices.

See also the Economic Development Element for additional policies related to growth of the office economy.

1608.4 Policy CW-1.1.3: Incentives for Non-Office Uses

Take action to attract non-office uses within the area to create a vibrant collection of central neighborhoods. Continue using zoning and other regulatory mechanisms to incentivize mixed-use development, including housing, ground floor retail, educational uses, and arts facilities in locations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

1608.5 Policy CW-1.1.4: New Housing Development in Central Washington

Continue to encourage the development of new high-density housing in Central Washington, particularly in NoMa and east Mount Vernon Square, including Mount Vernon Triangle, Northwest One, and the L’Enfant Plaza/Near Southwest areas. Ground floor retail space and similar uses should be strongly encouraged within these areas to create street life and provide neighborhood services for residents. A strong downtown residential community can create pedestrian traffic, meet local housing needs, support local businesses in the evenings and on weekends, and increase neighborhood safety and security.

1608.6 Policy CW-1.1.5: Central Washington Housing Diversity

It is important to keep Central Washington a mixed-income community and avoid the displacement of lower-income residents. Preserve Central Washington’s existing low- to moderate-income housing, including public housing, housing (both contracts and vouchers), and other subsidized units. The District has taken a proactive approach to preserving affordable units at the Museum Square, Golden Rule, and other Central Washington Area redevelopment sites. The District should continue to expand the number of affordable units through land disposition with affordability requirements and through the use of zoning and other regulatory incentives.

1608.7 Policy CW-1.1.6: Capturing Visitor and Employee Spending

Capture a greater share of the demand for goods and services generated by the 475,531 persons working in Central Washington and the millions of visitors who come to the area each year by supporting additional retail and restaurant development. This will generate a substantial amount of jobs, tax revenues, and social and economic benefits for the city.

1608.8 Policy CW-1.1.7: Central Washington Arts and Entertainment Uses

Retain, enhance, and expand Central Washington’s arts and entertainment uses, including theaters, cinemas, galleries, studios, museums, and related services. Cultural uses should be actively encouraged in the area along 7th Street NW (between the National Mall and the convention center), the E Street corridor (between 5th and 15th Streets NW), Pennsylvania Avenue (between 3rd and 15th Streets NW), and 10th Street SW. The clustering of arts uses in these areas should complement the significant cultural institutions already present or planned, such as the Smithsonian museums (including the National Portrait Gallery, Renwick Gallery, and Smithsonian American Art Museum), the Corcoran School of the Arts & Design, the National Museum of Women in the Arts, and the numerous downtown theaters.

See also the Economic Development Element, for more policies relating to the growth of the tourism and hospitality economy, and the Arts and Culture Element, for policies on the promotion of downtown arts and live-work housing for artists.

1608.9 Policy CW-1.1.8: Promote Central Washington Retail

Develop and promote Central Washington as a regional retail destination with a mix of retailers that serve the local office market, as well as District-wide and regional customer bases. Particular emphasis should be placed on sustaining concentrated regional shopping areas at:

The F and G Street corridors between 7th and 15th Streets, NW;

7th Street, NW in the Gallery Place and Penn Quarter neighborhoods; and

CityCenterDC.

The design of streets and facades in these areas should be conducive to pedestrian-oriented shopping, with wide sidewalks, window displays, well-managed on-street vending activities, outdoor seating areas, and other shopper amenities. A mix of traditional large-format retail anchors and specialty shops should be encouraged, with a focus on shopping goods retail. In particular, support should be provided to attract new and retain existing department stores in these areas and attract supermarkets to support residential development in these areas.

See also the Economic Development and Urban Design elements for additional policies relating to the retail sector.

1608.10 Policy CW-1.1.9: Neighborhood-Serving Retail in Central Washington

Encourage Central Washington’s retail uses to serve not only the regional market, but also the local neighborhood market created by residential development within the area. This should include basic consumer goods like drug stores, hardware stores, and grocery stores, to supplement the major anchors and specialty shops.

1608.11 Policy CW-1.1.10: Leveraging Major Development Sites

Use major development sites—such as urban renewal sites, air rights, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) joint development sites, and federal property disposition—to implement key objectives and policies of the Central Washington Area Element, especially with respect to land use and urban design. These sites should be viewed as a portfolio of assets that to be strategically managed to meet the District’s long-term needs.

1608.12 Policy CW-1.1.11: Reinforcing Central Washington’s Characteristic Design Features

Reinforce the physical qualities that set Central Washington apart from all other major American city centers. Balance the symbolic monumentality of the national civic center with a respectful, but distinct and impressive, expression of local life. Blend historic, traditional, and contemporary architecture to express the vitality of a diverse and growing District that is as proud of its neighborhood amenities, architectural heritage, and character as it is of its position as the seat of the national government.

1608.13 Policy CW-1.1.12: Creating Active Street Life and Public Spaces

Promote active street life throughout Central Washington through the design of buildings, streets, and public spaces. This should include:

Discouraging second-level pedestrian bridges, underground walkways, and underground or privatized cafeterias that drain activity from Central Washington streets;

Encouraging multiple entrances in large projects to increase street-level activity;

Managing certain streets so they can be easily closed to traffic on special occasions for pedestrians;

Providing streetscape improvements that make downtown streets more comfortable and attractive;

Encouraging active ground floor uses and discouraging wide building entrances, large internal lobbies, and street-facing garage entrances and loading areas;

Creating and managing well-designed public spaces that provide space for spontaneous performances, programmed entertainment, social interaction, and activities like farmers markets;

Supporting collaboration with NPS to accommodate national and local needs at federally owned parks in the heart of the central business district, such as Pershing and John Marshall Parks, Freedom Plaza, and Franklin, McPherson, Lafayette and Farragut Squares, while emphasizing the need for federal agencies to maintain their open spaces, parks, and monuments in a timely and proper manner; and

Making Pennsylvania Avenue NW a destination showcasing Washington, DC’s economic, cultural, and civic strength on local and national levels.

See also the Urban Design Element for additional policies relating to improving the public realm and creating active downtown street environments.

1608.14 Policy CW-1.1.13: Central Washington Multi-modal Transportation System

Develop and maintain a balanced multi-modal transportation system for Central Washington that makes optimal use of the existing street network, the Metro and commuter rail networks, the bus system, and public spaces, including sidewalks and alleys. Mass transit, walking, and biking should be supported as the dominant forms of transportation to, from, and around the area. To achieve this, mass transit requires dedicated facilities and infrastructure to give transit priority over automobile traffic.

1608.15 Policy CW-1.1.14: Reduce Single-Occupancy Trips in Central Washington

Reduce single-occupancy trips in Central Washington by promoting alternative modes of transportation like transit, biking, walking, and carpooling to achieve the District's goal of having 75 percent of all commuter trips be achieved by non-single-occupancy vehicle modes. For this District-wide goal to be achieved, Central Washington, where most commuter trips begin and end, needs to reach a commuter trips share mode of non-single occupancy of 75 percent or higher. Regional policies like those on congestion pricing should also be explored. Public transit, and other non-single-occupancy vehicle modes, should be emphasized as the preferred means of access to and around Central Washington by:

Giving priority to public transit vehicles on the area’s streets;

Promoting the use of public transit for commuting;

Encouraging direct connections from Metro stations to adjacent development;

Improving the availability of information and signage about public transit service;

Developing new forms of transit, such as circulators and trolleys;

Improving public transit service, particularly during off-peak hours; and

Encouraging and supporting biking, bike sharing, and walking—as the primary means of travel between areas in Central Washington—with appropriate infrastructure.

1608.16 Policy CW-1.1.15: Central Washington Parking Management

Develop creative, effective solutions to manage downtown parking demand. These solutions should be responsive to the needs of local retailers and businesses without inducing excessive auto traffic or discouraging transit use. Incentives for short-term parking within private garages, the sharing of parking by multiple uses with different demand characteristics, and better parking signage are all strongly encouraged. Additionally, with autonomous vehicle (AV) technology progressing, the District should continue studying and planning for AVs’ impacts on parking demand and land uses.

See also the Transportation Element for additional policies on shared parking and parking management.

1608.17 Policy CW-1.1.16: Making Central Washington’s Streets More Pedestrian Friendly

Enhance Central Washington’s pedestrian network and improve pedestrian safety. This should be achieved through such measures as:

Improving certain streets for pedestrian use;

Providing safe and accessible pedestrian waiting space on the widest thoroughfares;

Maintaining sufficiently wide sidewalks and regulating sidewalk obstructions;

Restricting curb cuts and parking garage access along major streets;

Providing safe and accessible pedestrian detours at construction sites;

Encouraging sidewalk widening within private development; and

Enforcing traffic and parking laws, such as no parking zones.

1608.18 Policy CW-1.1.17: Crosstown Circulation

Strengthen transportation connections between Central Washington and the rest of the District by improving east-west connections—including F Street NW, H Street NW, and I Street NW, and by implementing a transitway on K Street NW to give public transit dedicated lanes. Enhance north-south connections, such as 7th and 9th Streets NW, and explore whether permanently closed streets from L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington can be re-opened or could be used to improve connections for pedestrians through easements or other mechanisms.

See also policies in the Land Use, Urban Design, and Transportation Elements for information about discouraging street closures in and around the District.

1608.19 Policy CW-1.1.18: Goods Movement and Service Delivery within Central Washington

Strongly discourage the obstruction of public rights-of-way by goods and service delivery activities, including delivery robots. Provide for the efficient and convenient movement of goods and delivery of services within Central Washington by:

Maintaining and improving interior alleys, where needed, to provide for off-street loading facilities and minimize curb cuts on streets;

Encouraging the consolidation of loading areas within new development and limiting on-street service deliveries;

Encouraging adequate off-street or below-grade loading and service parking areas;

Converting on-street loading facilities to off-street facilities whenever possible; and

Managing goods and service delivery times.

See the Transportation Element for additional policies on goods delivery.

1608.20 Policy CW-1.1.19: Wayfinding Signage

Maintain, upgrade, and manage pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular signage within Central Washington to improve connections within the area, and between the area and the rest of Washington, DC. Street signs, directional signs, and maps should provide clear information on travel routes, emergency routes and procedures, parking, and transit operations.

See the Urban Design Element for additional policies on signage.

1608.21 Policy CW-1.1.20: Design Character

Create a more coherent design character for Central Washington by improving the physical linkages among the Monumental Core, the business sub-districts on the perimeter of the National Mall, and the expanding mixed-use areas east and southeast of downtown. Urban design strategies should focus on making the entire area more walkable, discouraging monolithic architecture, improving signage and streetscape features, and adding new land uses that make the area more lively, interesting, and dynamic.

1608.22 Policy CW-1.1.21: Downtown Street and Block Pattern

Maintain a fine-grained pattern of downtown blocks, streets, and alleys, with intersections and frontages that encourage pedestrian movement and reduce the potential for immense variations in scale and fortress like office buildings. Preserve and encourage activation of historic alleys like Blagden, Naylor, and Prather’s.

1608.23 Policy CW-1.1.22: Downtown Edges

Establish and maintain scale and density transitions between downtown and adjacent lower-density neighborhoods. Use variations in height, massing, and architectural quality to respect the fine-grained pattern of adjacent neighborhoods.

1608.24 Policy CW-1.1.23: Architectural Excellence

Promote excellence in the design of downtown buildings and landscapes. Particular attention should be focused on ground floor levels, with greater architectural details used to improve visual image.

1608.25 Policy CW-1.1.24: Federal Coordination

Coordinate with the federal government to achieve a consistent urban design vision for Central Washington. As applicable, the District should incorporate design concepts from the NCPC’s Legacy Plan and similar design-oriented plans for the Monumental Core of Washington, DC, into its own design plans and strategies.

1608.26 Policy CW-1.1.25: Pedestrian Bridges and Tunnels

Discourage the construction of second-level downtown pedestrian bridges that drain activity from the street level. Subterranean tunnels between buildings also should be discouraged, unless they improve access to Metro and are necessary for pedestrian safety.

1608.27 Policy CW-1.1.26: Interagency Flood Risk Management

Coordinate with NCPC and DC Silver Jackets to reduce flood risk and enhance stormwater management in the Federal Triangle neighborhood, and to encourage federal agencies to use preservation design standards to guard against future flood risks when they develop or redevelop lands located in other known flood-prone areas. This includes ensuring compliance with implementation guidelines for the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard.

1608.28 Action CW-1.1.A: Land Use and Transportation Planning for Central Washington

Conduct land use and transportation research and planning for Central Washington, including the collection and analysis of data on the area’s employment, population, housing, visitors, land use, development, travel patterns, and economic characteristics. Research and planning are necessary to monitor Central Washington’s competitive position in the nation and region and to make policy recommendations to maintain its health. This activity should be done in concert with the NCPC, the Washington DC Economic Partnership (WDCEP), and the local BIDs.

1608.29 Action CW-1.1.B: Central Washington Urban Design Planning

Develop plans and guidelines for the design of buildings, streets, and public spaces in Central Washington. Design guidelines should help implement the Comprehensive Plan by reinforcing the unique identity of Central Washington’s sub-areas and neighborhoods, improving connections to the National Mall, encouraging pedestrian movement, creating active street life, preserving historic resources, promoting green roofs and other sustainable design principles, and achieving high-quality architectural design.

See the Federal and District elements on Land Use, Urban Design, and Economic Development for related policies.

1608.30 Action CW-1.1.C: Focused Planning and Implementation for Catalytic Sites

Develop detailed plans for catalytic sites with the potential to significantly shape the future of Central Washington, and work on implementing existing ones. These sites include the I-395 air rights north of Massachusetts Avenue NW, the Northwest One neighborhood, and the air rights north of Union Station. Work with the federal government to prepare plans or implement existing plans for similar sites under its jurisdiction, such as Freedom Plaza, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Labor Department buildings, Old Naval Observatory Hill, the federal buildings near L’Enfant Plaza in support of the SW Ecodistrict Plan and the Maryland Avenue SW Small Area Plan, and the area around the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

1608.31 Action CW-1.1.D: Public Space Regulations

Simplify public space regulations for downtown to avoid duplicative or incompatible standards and overly complex permitting requirements.

1608.32 Action CW-1.1.E: Residential Development Incentives

Continue developing financial and non-financial incentives for the conversion of lower-performing retail/office buildings into new housing or mixed-use development throughout Central Washington.

1608.33 Action CW-1.1.F: Reduce Downtown Congestion Through the Implementation of moveDC.

Implement the recommendations from moveDC that pertain to Central Washington and are aimed at reducing downtown congestion issues through the use of multimodal transportation planning tools and policies like congestion pricing.

See Near Northwest Area Element for more information on planning and implementation for Foggy Bottom and West End.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1609** CW-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1609 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1609}

1609.1 Policy CW-1.2.1: Enhancing the Identity of Central Washington Neighborhoods

Enhance the sense of identity of the different neighborhoods within Central Washington based on their history and natural features, their ethnic and cultural heritage, the design and scale of their buildings, and the types of activities and uses they support. Unique identities should be established in the emerging areas around downtown, rather than replicating existing development patterns.

1609.2 Policy CW-1.2.2: Preservation of Central Washington’s Historic Resources

Preserve and enhance Central Washington’s historic resources by continuing the current practices of:

Preserving the area’s historic buildings and districts;

Requiring that renovation and new construction is sensitive to the character of historic buildings and districts;

Applying design incentives and requirements to encourage preservation, adaptive reuse, and appropriate relationships between historic development and new construction;

Encouraging the adaptive reuse of historic and architecturally significant buildings; and

Preserving the original pattern of streets and alleys from L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington, especially alleys that provide for off-street loading, deliveries, and garage access.

Historic resources should be recognized as essential to downtown’s economic vitality and competitive edge, particularly for retail, tourism, and entertainment activities.

See also the Historic Preservation Element for additional policies related to historic resources.

1609.3 Policy CW-1.2.3: Central Washington Open Space

Provide high-quality, readily accessible, multigenerational outdoor public spaces that are adequate in size and use throughout Central Washington and that support the goal of attracting residents and families to central neighborhoods. This should include the development of new open spaces and substantial improvements to old ones for underserved central neighborhoods like Mount Vernon Triangle, Chinatown, NoMa, and Downtown East. New parks serving NoMa and Mount Vernon Triangle, the rehabilitation of Franklin Park and Chinatown Park, and enhancements to Judiciary Square (in accordance with the approved Judiciary Square Master Plan) are also priorities. In addition, the area’s triangle parks should be enhanced as accessible neighborhood parks and important elements of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington. Parks and open spaces in Central Washington should be well maintained, well designed, and appropriately programmed based on the future growth of the area, the demand of their users, and their location, context, historic significance, and design features.

1609.4 Policy CW-1.2.4: Recreation for Current, New, and Future Downtown Residents and Workers

Ensure that emerging residential and employment centers such as Northwest One, NoMa, Downtown East, and Mount Vernon Triangle include adequate parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities for residents, workers, and other users, as well as public access to these spaces. Such parks and open spaces should feature attractive designs, comfortable street furniture, and a wide range of amenities to serve different users. The use of payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOTs) to fund such improvements should be explored.

See also the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element for policies regarding new parks.

1609.5 Policy CW-1.2.5: Central Washington Economic Opportunity

Develop programs to maximize the economic benefits of development in Central Washington for District residents. Priority should be placed on programs that link District residents to jobs in the area; programs that retain, assist, and expand small and minority businesses; and programs that avoid the displacement of small or locally-owned businesses.

See also the Economic Development Element for policies relating to small businesses and commercial displacement.

1609.6 Policy CW-1.2.6: Central Washington Social Services

Continue the important role that Central Washington plays in the District’s social service delivery system, particularly in the provision of health care and medical services, and services for persons experiencing homelessness, older adults, and persons with disabilities. Ensure that centrally located facilities providing these services are retained or added as the District’s population and employment base expand.

1609.7 Policy CW-1.2.7: Central Washington Leadership and Management

Achieve Central Washington planning objectives through leadership and management strategies, as well as land use, transportation, and design strategies. Support the activities of local BIDs or Community Improvement Districts (CIDs) to coordinate special events, marketing, planning and design, business development, maintenance and security, transportation, and joint development activities.

1609.8 Policy CW-1.2.8: Building a Sense of Community in Central Washington

Encourage the involvement of Central Washington residents in planning and community development decisions. Given the continued influx of new residents into the area and the historically transient character of its population, this will be important in creating a stronger sense of community ownership and neighborhood pride.

1609.9 Action CW-1.2.A: Business and Community Improvement Districts

Support the activities of the CIDs within Central Washington. Encourage partnerships between these entities and District government to achieve local job training, job placement, and business assistance goals.

See also the Economic Development Element for additional policies related to economic and business development.

1609.10 Action CW-1.2.B: Central Washington Open Spaces, and Arts and Culture Planning

Work with NCPC and NPS13th arts and cultural, and open spaces. In addition, work with the federal government to develop unique management policies and procedures for the smaller (non-National Mall) Central Washington federal parks.

1609.11 Action CW-1.2.C: Identification and Designation of Historic Properties

Complete the identification and designation of historic properties in Central Washington. Make information about eligible properties widely available to the public, and encourage property owners and preservation groups to cooperate on designations.

See the Policy Focus Areas below for more specific actions relating to community resources.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1610** CW-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a1610 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1610}

1610.1 The Comprehensive Plan identifies eight areas in Central Washington as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance beyond that provided in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements. These eight areas are:

Metro Center/Retail Core;

Gallery Place/Penn Quarter;

Chinatown;

Mount Vernon District;

Downtown East/Judiciary Square;

Golden Triangle/K Street NW;

L’Enfant Plaza/Near Southwest/Maryland Avenue SW; and

NoMa /Northwest One.

1610.2 With a few exceptions, these areas exclude what is commonly thought of as the federal city or the portions of Central Washington under federal jurisdiction. Planning for that area which includes the Kennedy Center, Federal Triangle, the Northwest Rectangle, the Southwest Federal Center, and East Potomac Park— is the responsibility of NCPC. In 2009, NCPC adopted the Monumental Core Framework Plan (Framework Plan), which addresses the future of these areas. NCPC and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) developed the Framework Plan to expand the civic qualities of the National Mall beyond its boundaries and to integrate the District’s vitality into adjacent federal precincts. It also identifies how to transform the architectural monumentality of the core to more contextual placemaking, proposing new destinations as prestigious locations for future cultural attractions, distinguished settings for government offices, and inviting places to enrich the experience of people who live, work, or visit the capital city. Where connections between these destinations do not exist, they will be established; where they do exist, they will be reinforced. NCPC and NPS are also engaged in planning for the National Mall. Similarly, the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is engaged in an update of the U.S. Capitol Master Plan. The details below are complementary to federal policy initiatives and result in a unified vision for the future of central Washington, DC.

1610.3 Figure 16.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Central Washington

Within Central Washington

2.1

Metro Center/Retail Core

2.2

Gallery Place/Penn Quarter

2.3

Chinatown

2.4

Mount Vernon District

2.5

Downtown East/Judiciary Square

2.6

Golden Triangle/K Street NW

2.7

L’Enfant Plaza/Near Southwest/Maryland Avenue

2.8

NoMa/Northwest One

Adjacent to Central Washington

Foggy Bottom/West End

Dupont Circle

14th Street/Logan Circle

Shaw/Convention Center Area

N. Capitol St/Florida Av/New York Avenue

U.S. Capitol Perimeter

South Capitol Corridor/Buzzard Point

Southwest Waterfront

1610.4 Map 16.1: Central Washington Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 1611** CW-2.1 METRO CENTER/RETAIL CORE {#sec-10-a1611 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1611}

1611.1 For the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, the Metro Center/Retail Core area includes the traditional Downtown Retail Core along F and G Streets NW, as well as other District blocks in the area roughly bordered by 15th Street NW on the west, 9th Street NW on the east, New York Avenue NW on the north, and Pennsylvania Avenue NW on the south. (Note: The Retail Core also extends east to 6th Street NW, but the eastern blocks are addressed in the next section on Gallery Place/Penn Quarter.)

1611.2 This area includes the 11-acre site of the former Washington Convention Center, now the location of CityCenterDC, one of the District’s premier shopping and dining destinations. The area also includes one of downtown’s largest department stores, other major retailers, many large office buildings, hotels, theaters, and restaurants. At the heart of this area, the Metro Center subway station is one of the busiest stations in the Metro system and is a major transfer point between intersecting Metro lines.

1611.3 The Retail Core has enjoyed a comeback since 2000. Many buildings long underused have been modernized and converted to retail spaces, providing a better mix of retail and office space in the downtown core. The retail energy that for many years shifted eastward toward Gallery Place is now equally present in the Metro Center area. Metro Center, once perceived as an office district, rather than a regional shopping destination, has undergone years of renovations and investments. The opening of national retailers has been a positive sign of a reenergized downtown.

1611.4 The Retail Core of the District should continue to be strengthened. Retail strategies should continue building off the success of nearby Gallery Place and the Capital One Arena (formerly Verizon Center), increasing the synergy between these areas and the historic F Street shopping district. Since the opening of CityCenterDC on the site of the old convention center, connectivity between the two areas has improved to create an expanded Central Washington shopping district for the region. New department stores, major national retailers, and smaller independent specialty shops have opened. These types of retail offerings should be strongly encouraged to continue to promote the continued success of downtown.

1611.5 Future renovations should continue to include ground-level retail space within new and renovated office space in the Metro Center area to create the critical mass necessary to make Central Washington a vibrant shopping hub. Strategies to address parking needs, improve public transit links, and create a more comfortable and attractive street environment can support the goal of increasing the area’s prominence as a retail center.

1611.6 Policy CW-2.1.1: Strengthening the Retail Core

Strengthen the traditional Retail Core along F and G Streets between 9th and 15th Streets NW. Encourage the extension of the Retail Core eastward to 6th Street NW to create greater synergy between this area and Gallery Place. Large-scale retail and entertainment uses should continue to be strongly encouraged as buildings in the Downtown Retail Core are adaptively reused, and as new infill development takes place.

1611.7 Policy CW-2.1.2: Promoting Central Washington Shopping

Facilitate District and private sector efforts to market the Central Washington Retail Core as a shopping destination for District residents, as well as for visitors and suburban residents, and to promote Central Washington as a preferred alternative to suburban shopping malls. Retail strategies for this area should be structured to avoid damaging the vibrant and strong regional retail economies in Georgetown and Friendship Heights.

1611.8 Policy CW-2.1.3: Creating a Critical Mass of Retail Choices

Improve downtown’s viability as a shopping destination by encouraging additional small retailers to locate around existing retail anchors, adding new major retail anchors, and requiring continuous ground floor retail space wherever appropriate. Encourage the greatest possible variety of goods, services, and pricing so that the Retail Core meets the needs of a diverse range of residents, employees, and visitors.

1611.9 Policy CW-2.1.4: Establishing a Unique Identity for Downtown Shopping

Enhance the identity of the downtown Retail Core as a unique shopping area. Design attention should be focused on the lower levels of buildings, with at-grade retail frontages and frequent street-level store entrances. Special features such as canopies, signs, and lighting should be used to create a vibrant shopping environment. Streetscape and landscape design, street lighting, and signage should contribute to the area’s unique sense of place.

1611.10 Policy CW-2.1.5: Pedestrian Movement in the Retail Core

Emphasize and encourage pedestrian movement in the Downtown Retail Core, particularly along F, G, and H Streets NW. Future development in this area should create and support street-level activity. Interior or underground pedestrian arcades, cafeterias, or passageways should be discouraged.

1611.11 Policy CW-2.1.6: Connections to Adjacent Areas

Improve pedestrian connections within the downtown Retail Core, with a particular emphasis on improving the north-south connections along 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th Streets NW to better connect the area to Federal Triangle and the National Mall on the south and the convention center and Franklin Square areas on the north. Use strategies such as improved signage and streetscape design to draw visitors from the National Mall.

1611.12 Policy CW-2.1.7: Complementary Activities

Encourage new activities in the Downtown Retail Core that complement and support its function as a regional shopping district, including hotels, restaurants, and entertainment activities.

1611.13 Policy CW-2.1.8: Parking in the Retail Core

Encourage the provision of sufficient parking and loading areas in and adjacent to the Downtown Retail Core. Provide short-term parking for shoppers at appropriate levels to meet demand in a transit-oriented downtown. Wherever feasible, access to parking should be from alleys or, if alleys are not available, from E and H Streets NW and from the north-south streets, rather than from F and G Streets NW.

1611.14 Policy CW-2.1.9: Pennsylvania Avenue

Promote and maintain Pennsylvania Avenue NW between the U.S. Capitol and the White House as a distinguished, high-quality, mixed-use, multimodal boulevard for residents, workers, and visitors. It should contain an actively programmed, pedestrian-oriented, and inviting public realm that enhances the avenue’s symbolic character and function and connects Downtown Washington, DC, and the National Mall. Honor the avenue’s iconic reciprocal views of the U.S. Capitol and White House grounds through a cohesive streetscape design.

1611.15 Action CW 2.1.A: Redevelopment of FBI Headquarters Site

Any future redevelopment of Squares 378 and 379 on Pennsylvania Avenue NW, where the FBI’s headquarters at the J. Edgar Hoover Building is currently situated, will be subject to the Square Guidelines adopted unanimously by NCPC in 2017.

1611.16 Action CW 2.1.B: Update the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Plan

Work with federal and local partners to update the 1974 PADC Plan to further strengthen physical and programmatic connections across Penn Quarter, downtown, and the National Mall.

1611.17 Action CW-2.1.C: Retail Revitalization Programs

Continue to use retail revitalization programs—such as tax increment financing, grants and loans for façade improvements, and small business development loans—to boost downtown retail development. Periodically assess whether programs are achieving desired outcomes.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1612** CW-2.2 GALLERY PLACE/PENN QUARTER {#sec-10-a1612 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1612}

1612.1 This Policy Focus Area is located east of Metro Center and the Retail Core. It is roughly bounded by 9th Street NW on the west, 5th Street NW on the east, Pennsylvania Avenue NW on the south, and I Street NW on the north. The area includes the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro station and the Archives-Navy Memorial-Penn Quarter Metro station. Its character is more diverse than the Metro Center area, with a large number of housing units, galleries, theaters, museums, and hospitality uses, as well as offices and retail shops.

1612.2 Gallery Place/Penn Quarter is a thriving retail destination, cultural center, and activity hub for the District. Since opening in 1997, the 20,000- seat Capital One Arena has brought millions of sports and concert patrons to the area. The arena has ushered in a boom in restaurants, bars, night clubs, and entertainment-oriented retail. The opening of the 250,000-square-foot Gallery Place mixed-use complex in 2005 has further boosted the area’s reputation as the center of Washington, DC’s nightlife and entertainment scene.

1612.3 In addition, the reopening of the National Portrait Gallery/Smithsonian American Art Museum in 2006, and the presence of major art galleries and theaters, has made the area the city’s preeminent center for arts and culture. The Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company, Gallery Place and E Street cinemas, and Shakespeare Theater Company theater bring additional evening foot traffic to the area and further support the restaurant and gallery scene.

1612.4 The area is also an important residential neighborhood and includes Penn Quarter buildings like the Lansburgh and the Pennsylvania.

1612.5 Meanwhile, reinvestment in public and private buildings is prompting a discussion on Pennsylvania Avenue’s role in the 21st-century capital. Regarding this issue, NCPC, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), NPS, and the District government formed an executive committee and launched the Pennsylvania Avenue Initiative to consider near- and long-term improvements to the avenue. Pennsylvania Avenue is one of Washington’s—and the world’s—most recognized streets, physically and symbolically connecting the U.S. Capitol with the White House. As a home to federal headquarters, businesses, museums, residents, civic activities, and lively downtown events, it plays a significant economic and cultural role in the capital city. Presently, the avenue retains a strong civic identity and character but does not provide a consistently engaging experience. With public input and the guidance of the executive committee, the initiative is exploring potential physical, economic, and operational changes to strengthen the avenue’s national and local presence in Washington, DC.

1612.6 The continued development of this area as an arts and entertainment district should be supported. As thousands of new housing units have come online in Mount Vernon Triangle and along Massachusetts Avenue, the area’s resident customer base continues to expand. Its position as Washington, DC’s top location for arts and entertainment should be sustained by encouraging additional venues, providing new amenities, and strengthening connections to the National Mall, Retail Core, and Mount Vernon District.

1612.7 Policy CW-2.2.1: Arts and Entertainment District

Continue to promote Gallery Place and 7th Street NW area as a pedestrian-oriented arts and entertainment district, with nightlife and restaurants, theaters, galleries, and independent and national retailers. Continuous ground floor retail, arts, and entertainment uses should be encouraged along 7th Street NW between Mount Vernon Square and Pennsylvania Avenue NW.

1612.8 Policy CW-2.2.2: East End Theater District

Promote the area bounded by 6th Street, 14th Street, F Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue NW as an internationally recognized theater district, capitalizing on the presence of long-existing theaters—such as the National, Warner, Ford’s, Woolly Mammoth, and the Shakespeare Theatre Company’s Lansburgh—and theaters such as the Harman Center for the Arts and the Washington Stage Guild. Marketing, promotion, signage, and special programs should be used to brand the area as the region’s top performing arts center. Complementary evening uses, such as restaurants, should be encouraged in this area.

1612.9 Policy CW-2.2.3: Penn Quarter Neighborhood

Continue to develop Penn Quarter as a mixed-use urban neighborhood. Residential uses should be complemented by additional arts, cultural, retail, and office use, as well as open space.

1612.10 Policy CW-2.2.4: Urban Design in the Arts and Entertainment District

Retain and adaptively reuse historic buildings within the Penn Quarter/Gallery Place area. The area’s historic features are an essential part of the Quarter’s success and ambiance as an arts district and must be preserved. New construction in the area should respect the historically low-scale building features along 7th Street NW, stepping down as appropriate to preserve the scale and context of important historic buildings.

See also the Urban Design and Historic Preservation elements for additional policies relating to historic resources and design.

1612.11 Policy CW-2.2.5: Links to Adjacent Areas

Improve the linkages from the Gallery Place/Penn Quarter area to the National Mall on the south, the Retail Core on the west, and the Mount Vernon Square and Mount Vernon Triangle area on the north. The north-south linkages along 7th, 8th, and 9th Streets NW are particularly important. Given the low traffic volumes along 8th Street NW between F Street NW and Pennsylvania Avenue NW, the street’s role as a pedestrian-oriented space linking the National Archives and National Portrait Gallery should be emphasized. Its potential as a large, flexible, programmable open space should be recognized.

1612.12 Action CW-2.2.A: Gallery Place/Penn Quarter Streetscape Improvements

Prepare streetscape improvement plans for 7th, 8th, and 9th Streets NW that physically reinforce the desired character of the area as the District’s Arts Walk and provide space for performance, street theater, public art and exhibitions, and other activities that reinforce its role as an entertainment district. Streetscape improvements should be compatible with the approved PADC Plan for this area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1613** CW-2.3 CHINATOWN {#sec-10-a1613 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1613}

1613.1 The distinctive Friendship Arch at the intersection of 7th and H Streets NW is the center of Washington, DC’s Chinatown. Decorative metal latticework and railings, Chinese signs, and Chinese façade and roof details greet visitors to the blocks of H Street between 5th Street and 8th Street NW. The area has been a center of Chinese culture since the 1930s, when the District’s original Chinatown along Pennsylvania Avenue was displaced by development of Federal Triangle.

1613.2 Today, Chinatown is facing challenges retaining its identity as the area around it booms with new retail, office, entertainment, and housing development. The Chinese population in the area has been declining for decades, and many of the Chinese businesses are having a difficult time keeping pace with rising rents and land costs. OP’s 2009 Chinatown Cultural Development Small Area Action Plan found that in 1970, there were 3,000 Chinese Americans living in and around Chinatown. That number had declined to fewer than 300 by 2009.

1613.3 Keeping Chinatown a viable ethnic commercial district and neighborhood will require proactive measures to assist its businesses, attract new Chinese enterprises and cultural activities to the area, and support the institutions and services that sustain the Chinese community today. The area can capitalize on its proximity to the convention center and Gallery Place without losing its special character. Although the Chinese population in the neighborhood itself is small, the area serves as a cultural and symbolic hub for a metropolitan area with almost 100,000 Chinese American residents. It is also a destination for visitors (including visitors from Asia) and the home of the Chinatown Community Cultural Center at Gallery Place, which opened in 2006.

1613.4 Policy CW-2.3.1: Sustaining Chinatown

Retain and enhance Chinatown as a thriving downtown community, including housing, community, and cultural facilities; ethnically oriented, street-level retail; related wholesale operations; office and professional uses; and hotels.

1613.5 Policy CW-2.3.2: Preserving Chinatown as a Viable Community

Preserve and conserve Chinatown, not only by installing Chinese-inspired building facades and street signs, but also by supporting the cultural traditions of the local Chinese community, assisting Chinese-owned businesses within Chinatown, sustaining the social services that serve the Chinese population, and attracting new activities that expand the area’s role as a regional center for Chinese culture and education.

1613.6 Policy CW-2.3.3: Chinatown’s Architectural Character

Support architectural, streetscape, and landscape design criteria for new and renovated buildings that reinforce the identity of Chinatown as a special cultural district. These criteria should provide for the use of Chinese design features in a way that does not harm the historic character or structural integrity of Chinatown’s landmark buildings.

1613.7 Policy CW-2.3.4: Chinatown Wholesaling

Support the retention of small food wholesalers and other small non-retail businesses that contribute to the success of Chinatown and help sustain its economic vitality.

1613.8 Policy CW-2.3.5: Chinatown as a Destination

Continue to enhance Chinatown’s role as a destination for residents and workers from the District and surrounding jurisdictions, as well as for leisure and business visitors. This can help strengthen the vitality of Chinese-owned businesses, and support the development of new enterprises. Focus in particular on pedestrian connections along 7th Street between H Street NW and the convention center.

1613.9 Action CW-2.3.A: Chinatown Design Review

Continue to implement design review procedures that support the authentic expression of Chinese culture in new and rehabilitated development, including, as appropriate, building design, signage, streetscape, and open space criteria. Periodically review the procedures and update them as necessary.

1613.10 Action CW-2.3.B: Chinatown Park at 5th Street and Massachusetts Avenue NW

Support the redesign of the park reservation at 5th Street NW and Massachusetts Avenue NW with a public space design that responds to the cultural and historic context of its Chinatown setting. This will provide a symbolic gateway to Chinatown from Massachusetts Avenue NW while maintaining enough open space to accommodate cultural programming for the enjoyment of residents and visitors.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1614** CW-2.4 MOUNT VERNON DISTRICT {#sec-10-a1614 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1614}

1614.1 The Mount Vernon District includes the blocks adjacent to and including historic Mount Vernon Square and the more recently developed Mount Vernon Triangle area on its east. Located at the crossroads of New York and Massachusetts Avenues NW, the Mount Vernon District provides a transition between the lower-scale residences of Shaw on the north and the high-density commercial areas of downtown on the south. The area experienced disinvestment and was underused during the late 20th century. Much of its building stock was abandoned or demolished, and large areas were converted to parking or became vacant. The area has undergone a turnaround since 2000 and is currently one of the District’s most active development areas.

1614.2 Mount Vernon Square itself was designed to be a focal point in Washington, DC’s ensemble of great civic landmarks. Its focus is the 1902 former Carnegie Library building, an elegant historic structure that is now used by the Historical Society of Washington, DC and is the home of a new global Apple flagship store. Facing the north edge of the square is the 2.3-million-square-foot Washington Convention Center, completed in 2003. To the southwest, sits CityCenterDC, a 10.2-acre, mixed-used development and one of downtown’s largest commercial, residential, and office developments. Immediately northwest of the square is the Marriott Marquis, a 1,175-room hotel, which complements the convention center functions. Large-scale office buildings occupy other sides of the square, framing it as a great public space.

1614.3 In 2004, OP prepared a design workbook for Mount Vernon Square to enhance the square’s identity as the heart of a new urban neighborhood. The workbook explored alternatives to make the square more accessible to pedestrians, more active and animated, and more visually dramatic. Its recommendations include enhancing L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington’s bowtie parks along Massachusetts and New York Avenues NW, improving access to the square, using placards to formalize the identity of Mount Vernon Square as an urban center, and re-inventing the square itself as a 21st-century landmark.

1614.4 East of Mount Vernon Square, the 30-acre Mount Vernon Triangle is bordered by Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York Avenues NW. An Action Agenda for this area was developed in 2003. Since then, the District also completed the Mount Vernon Triangle Transportation and Public Realm Design Project, leading to major streetscape investments, and supplemented this work in 2018 with the Downtown East Re-Urbanization Strategy to further guide its transformation to a thriving and livable mixed-use neighborhood. Projects like Sovereign Square, the Meridian, and 555 Massachusetts have redefined the area and generated momentum for additional development. A 55,000 square foot Safeway grocery store and more than 600 housing units have been constructed under the City Vista Project at 5th and I Streets NW, and more new units are in the construction or planning stages nearby. While office uses are present, the emphasis is on housing, with supporting retail and cultural uses.

1614.5 The Mount Vernon District provides an important opportunity to draw residents from outside Washington, DC, and to attract residents looking for a unique urban experience not available in other Washington neighborhoods. The expected population growth will require the improvement of public facilities, parks, streets, transit, infrastructure, and community services. It will require ongoing planning to preserve historic resources, respect the fabric of adjacent communities, and ensure that new uses are compatible with and connected to their surroundings. As Mount Vernon Triangle and Mount Vernon Square evolve, coordinated public and private investment will be needed to create economic value and to ensure that a quality environment for visitors, new and existing residents, and workers is created.

1614.6 Policy CW-2.4.1: Re-envisioning Mount Vernon Square

Improve Mount Vernon Square as a center of cultural activity, a memorable civic landmark, and a crossroads between downtown on the south and the historic Shaw neighborhood on the north. The square’s function should be reinforced by encouraging active ground floor uses and prominent entries on the blocks that front it and promoting high-quality architecture and streetscape design on its perimeter. Redesign of the square itself should be explored. Such a design should retain it as an important civic open space but modify pathways, landscapes, paving patterns, street furniture, lighting, and access points to make it more usable and inviting.

1614.7 Policy CW-2.4.2: Emphasizing the Avenues and Visual Axes

Emphasize and reinforce the historic elements of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington in the planning and design of the Mount Vernon District. This should include the creation of more dramatic and well-lit gateways along Massachusetts and New York Avenues NW, capitalizing on the 8th Street NW view corridor (mitigating the effects of the TechWorld bridge), creating a park-like promenade along the K Street NW axis (on both sides of the square), and reinforcing the continuity of 7th and 9th Streets NW as access points to the square.

1614.8 Policy CW-2.4.3: Convention Center Area Land Uses

Encourage land uses around Mount Vernon Square that capitalize on the presence of the Washington Convention Center. Such uses include hotels, restaurants, retail, and entertainment uses. Convention-related hotel construction should be focused on vacant or underused land immediately adjacent to the convention center to minimize impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.

1614.9 Policy CW-2.4.4: Mount Vernon Triangle Residential Development

Continue developing the Mount Vernon Triangle (east of Mount Vernon Square) as a high-density residential neighborhood. Zoning incentives for this area should encourage the production of housing, as well as local-serving ground floor retail, arts, and small office uses. Public and private sector improvements to parking, infrastructure, transit, and other community services and facilities should be provided as development takes place.

1614.10 Policy CW-2.4.5: Creating a Sense of Community in Mount Vernon Triangle

Foster a stronger sense of community in Mount Vernon Triangle by including affordable housing, as well as market rate housing; providing family-oriented amenities such as larger housing units and parks; encouraging small-scale cultural uses and small businesses; and preserving historic landmarks within the area. The 5th and K Streets NW area should be emphasized as the area’s neighborhood center, and the 3rd and K Streets NW area should be emphasized as its residential core.

See also the Near Northwest Area Element and the Urban Design Element for additional policies regarding development along the edges of Central Washington.

1614.11 Policy CW-2.4.6: Mount Vernon District Parks

Improve the network of public open spaces in the Mount Vernon Square and Mount Vernon Triangle areas to meet the needs of residents, workers, and visitors. Special attention should be given to enhancing the bow-tie shaped park reservations on Massachusetts and New York Avenues NW and improving Cobb Park, at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and H Street NW, to serve the recreation and open space needs of the surrounding community. Support the efforts of the Mount Vernon CID in providing more active, programmed uses in Mount Vernon Square itself. This requires coordination with NPS and NCPC. Eventual transfer of park management responsibilities to the District should be pursued for these spaces.

1614.12 Policy CW-2.4.7: Creating Pedestrian-Oriented Streets in the Mount Vernon District

Promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets throughout the Mount Vernon District. Place a particular emphasis on improving K Street NW as a major east-west pedestrian route, with wide sidewalks and abundant street trees and landscaping. Pedestrian amenities should also be provided along 5th, 7th, 8th, and 9th Streets NW to improve the connections between the Mount Vernon District and the Gallery Place and Chinatown areas to the south.

1614.13 Action CW-2.4.A: Parking Management Program

Develop and implement parking management programs to buffer residential areas from spillover parking associated with the convention center, downtown office and retail growth, new attractions on the old convention center site, and elsewhere on the northern edge of downtown.

1614.14 Action CW-2.4.B: Create an Iconic Neighborhood Park for Mount Vernon Triangle

As one of the only District-owned park spaces within the area, Cobb Park should be prioritized as a centrally located and welcoming urban park for the surrounding communities. If Cobb Park is found not to be a viable location for a park, another space of equal or bigger size within the neighborhood should be improved with the same objectives. It should be designed and constructed to be an iconic neighborhood gathering space to adequately meet the open space needs of the rapidly growing neighborhood. Special care should be made to improve pedestrian access at street crossings. Streetscapes at surrounding sites should be enhanced to extend the experience of the park beyond its immediate borders.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1615** CW-2.5 DOWNTOWN EAST/JUDICIARY SQUARE {#sec-10-a1615 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1615}

1615.1 The Downtown East/Judiciary Square Focus Area is a major gateway to the District, lying at the foot of the historic front entrance to Union Station, and is roughly bounded by Massachusetts Avenue NW on the north, North Capitol Street and Louisiana Avenue NW on the east, Pennsylvania Avenue NW on the south, and 5th Street NW on the west. The area has been anchored by government and institutional uses for several decades, including offices for the U.S. Department of Labor, General Accountability Office, and U.S. District Court; the District Municipal Building and Superior Court; Georgetown University Law Center; and the National Building Museum. More recently, however, Downtown East has experienced considerable investment in the form of new private office space, largely due to demand from law firms and other knowledge-based professions that prioritize proximity to the U.S. Capitol and federal courts. The most significant of these new developments, Capitol Crossing, is an expansive 2.2-million-square-foot project that reconstructs three new city blocks atop the existing I-395 interstate. The area has a small but vibrant cluster of hotels, many of which are located between Union Station and the Capitol and largely cater to business travelers seeking proximity to the U.S. Capitol.

1615.2 The challenge for the Downtown East/Judiciary Square area is a weak sense of identity, as there are few residents and limited or un-activated public spaces. East-west circulation between Union Station and the broader downtown area is interrupted by I-395, which effectively carves a wide channel through the area between 2nd and 3rd Streets NW. While the Capitol Crossing development reconnects F and G Streets, NW over the freeway, some other buildings in the area inhibit circulation and obstruct historic sight lines. Many of the existing federal office buildings and courthouses are devoid of ground-level retail uses and present block-long street walls, making for an inactive street life outside of the typical 9-to-5 business hours.

1615.3 As an employment hub and gateway to downtown, Downtown East has the potential to be an iconic neighborhood. To flourish, the area needs well-designed, interesting, and human-scaled public spaces to better serve users, as well as improved connections to surrounding neighborhoods. As federal offices and other major single-tenant users move to locations outside the downtown core, new development opportunities may arise at sites like the U.S. Department of Labor and the Metro headquarters to create new, vibrant, mixed-use developments that are active past 5 pm and that include the needed residential component that is a requirement to create a more active downtown.

1615.4 The District should encourage place-based design goals at these sites that promote mixed-use development with active building frontages, high-quality architecture, and more varied facades.

1615.5 Up to 10 percent of residents in Downtown East live in some form of group quarters, including older adults in assisted living housing, student dormitories, and shelters. This is in contrast to the six percent of District residents who share a similar type of housing. The Federal City Shelter, also known as the Community for Creative Non-violence (CCNV), in Downtown East is the biggest temporary home for many people experiencing homelessness in the District and links them with nearby supportive services and nonprofits, such as DC Central Kitchen. The shelter houses up to 150 long-term guests and provides an additional 1,000 beds each evening. There is an active proposal to redevelop the site to smaller-scale supportive housing of approximately 300 beds within a larger mixed-use redevelopment project.

1615.6 Policy CW-2.5.1: Judiciary Square Improvements

Maintain the primary function of the Judiciary Square area as a judicial center, and enhance the area’s appearance as a great pedestrian-oriented civic space with a strong sense of identity. Consistent with the 2005 Master Plan for the site, buildings in the area should be better related to one another and to the square itself.

1615.7 Policy CW-2.5.2: Connecting Judiciary Square to Gallery Place/Penn Quarter

Improve pedestrian connections between Judiciary Square and the Gallery Place/Penn Quarter area by encouraging active ground floor uses along E and F Streets NW, improving signage, upgrading surface transit, and supporting compatible infill development.

1615.8 Policy CW-2.5.3: Connecting Union Station to Downtown and Gallery Place/Penn Quarter

Improve pedestrian and transit connections between the historic front entrance of Union Station to the greater downtown area, where access is currently blocked and the grid could be reestablished, including at C Street NW. Encourage active ground floor uses along streets that provide east-west routes to and from Union Station, with improved signage and support for compatible infill development.

1615.9 Policy CW-2.5.4: Establish Louisiana Avenue NW as the Primary Route Between Union Station and the National Mall

Louisiana Avenue NW provides the most direct and visible route between Union Station and the National Mall, and its design should be encouraged to reflect its importance to tourists and other users. Improved sidewalks, pedestrian street crossings, bicycle facilities, and wayfinding should be installed to enhance this corridor. Alternative locations for vehicle parking for congressional staff should be explored to eliminate the need for angled parking on Louisiana Avenue.

1615.10 Policy CW-2.5.5: Enhancing the Identity of Downtown East

Strengthen Downtown East as a geographically distinct mixed-use area of hotel, commercial, retail, and residential development, taking advantage of its strategic location as a crossroads community between Capitol Hill, downtown, and Union Station. New buildings and redevelopment sites should incorporate well-designed architecture and provide high-quality streetscape improvements that provide amenity spaces for the public to reduce the canyon-like feel that many large-scale developments impose on the sidewalk. Sites such as the Labor Department building and the Federal City Shelter should be designed to enhance the beauty of the neighborhood and provide spaces for an active street life to flourish. Branding and marketing strategies, particularly around new or renovated public parks, should be pursued to give the area a stronger identity and sense of place.

1615.11 Policy CW-2.5.6: Designate Downtown East as a Placemaking Pilot Zone

Create a Downtown East placemaking pilot zone where property owners, the BIDs, and other area stakeholders can conduct innovative, creative, and tactical placemaking interventions within the public right-of-way and in publicly accessible private spaces, such as office lobbies. Encourage uses that are open to the public, create visual interest from the street, provide pedestrian or neighborhood amenity space, and promote local retailers.

1615.12 Policy CW-2.5.7: Increase Affordability and Services for People Experiencing Homelessness in Downtown East

The District shall prioritize additional public housing and services for people experiencing homelessness throughout the Downtown East area. Emergency shelters for people experiencing homelessness should be accessible 24 hours a day, year-round, and contain high-quality services co-located on-site. New shelters should also include short-term housing designed for the needs of youth under age 24 and permanent supportive housing.

1615.13 Policy CW-2.5.8: Using the Avenues as a Design Framework

Take advantage of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington avenues that cross Downtown East—including New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Louisiana Avenues NW, and North Capitol Street —to create a framework for the area’s future development. The avenues should be enhanced as pedestrian-friendly streets, with streetscape designs that are consistent from block to block and buildings designed to frame important views and landmarks.

1615.14 Action CW-2.5.A: Link and Expand a Network of Neighborhood Parks and Gathering Spaces

Identify space for new public parks or other gathering spaces and renovate existing open spaces to form a broader network of small parks across Downtown East and the surrounding neighborhoods. The parks network should provide a variety of open space amenities that are equitably dispersed so that no one park is required to serve the needs of all user groups in the area. A wide range of open space features, programming, and landscapes should activate currently underused spaces; maximize comfort with shade and seating; encourage site features that accommodate social interactions, gathering, and lingering; provide choices for active and passive recreation and play for all ages; and maximize the use of durable and easily maintainable materials and plantings.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1616** CW-2.6 GOLDEN TRIANGLE/K STREET NW {#sec-10-a1616 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1616}

1616.1 The Golden Triangle/K Street Policy Focus Area includes the Golden Triangle BID and the area to the east around Franklin Square. The area is roughly bounded by Massachusetts Avenue NW on the north, New Hampshire Avenue NW on the west, and Pennsylvania (west of the White House) and New York Avenues NW (east of the White House) on the south.

1616.2 This is the largest concentration of office space in Central Washington, encompassing more than 60 square blocks almost completely developed with office buildings. The area also includes complementary land uses that support the office market, such as hotels, retail stores, and restaurants. It also contains important open spaces, such as Farragut, McPherson and Franklin Squares. Golden Triangle/K Street shares its southern edge with major institutional and federal neighbors, including the White House, the Corcoran School of the Arts & Design, the Renwick Gallery, and the Executive Office Building. The area around 19th and G Streets NW has emerged as the District’s international financial center, accommodating global banking and monetary institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank.

1616.3 On the eastern side of this Focus Area, lower 16th Street NW has a unique and historic character that sets it apart from the area around it. The five blocks between H Street NW and Scott Circle are the ceremonial gateway to the White House and provide significant vistas of the White House and Washington Monument. The street’s green space and exceptionally wide right-of-way (including 40 feet between the sidewalks and property lines) are defining elements of its character. In addition, the corridor includes notable architecture and a mix of uses, including high-density housing. For these reasons, this section of lower 16th Street NW was designated as an extension of the 16th Street historic district.

1616.4 The Golden Triangle/K Street area was Central Washington’s major development area from 1950 to the early 1980s. Today, the area is almost completely built out and almost no vacant land remains. Some of the area’s buildings are being replaced or modernized as Class A and trophy class office space. This is especially true for its 1950s and 1960s vintage office buildings, many of which lack current amenities. These buildings have seen sustained elevated vacancy rates since the Great Recession and the emergence of newer and more competitive office development in other parts of the District. As infill and renovation take place, there will be opportunities to introduce new uses, such as housing, and to improve architectural quality and street-level activity.

1616.5 Because the area has been so heavily dominated by a single use (office space) in the past, its streets are often empty at night and on the weekends. The lack of residents forces many of the retailers to limit hours of operation. Organizations such as the Golden Triangle BID should continue to activate and program private and public spaces to add vibrancy to the area throughout the day and evening. The area’s architecture is also repetitive, with many buildings almost identical in height and width and similar in exterior design. This should change in the future as the area takes on a more mixed-use character and high-quality architecture becomes more valued as an amenity. More work needs to happen to create a strategy to bring residents and vibrancy to this part of Central Washington. Some of the strategies may require public funding, subsidies, or creative financing tools. Others might include design and urban policies that make this area more appealing to future residents.

1616.6 Housing and retail uses should be considered in this area to balance the office concentration and create after-hours street life. The area has some of the best transit access in the District, with four Metro stations. The Circulator bus on K Street NW has improved connectivity between this area and the rest of downtown, as well as the Mount Vernon District and NoMa area.

1616.7 Policy CW-2.6.1: Golden Triangle/Franklin Square as a Prestigious Employment Center

Sustain the Golden Triangle/Franklin Square area as a prestigious employment center, strongly supporting reinvestment in its office buildings to meet market demand. Continue to develop programs to meet the transportation needs of the local workforce, manage congestion on area streets, address security needs, and improve access for transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists.

1616.8 Policy CW-2.6.2: Diversification of Land Use

Encourage the gradual diversification of land uses in the Golden Triangle, capitalizing on opportunities for housing and ground floor retail use as the aging building stock is replaced.

1616.9 Policy CW-2.6.3: Golden Triangle/K Street Amenities

Retain and enhance the unique characteristics of the Golden Triangle/K Street area. Specifically, Franklin Square, McPherson Square, and Farragut Square parks, should be retained as attractive, high-quality open spaces, with programmed activities that encourage their use and enjoyment. Historic buildings throughout the area should be restored, preserved, and adaptively reused. As the area is renovated and older buildings are refurbished and replaced, the streetscape and public realm also should be improved.

1616.10 Policy CW-2.6.4: Connecticut Avenue Corridor

Support the continued concentration of active ground-floor retail uses along the Connecticut Avenue corridor between K Street NW and Dupont Circle.

1616.11 Policy CW-2.6.5: Pennsylvania Avenue NW West of the White House

Pennsylvania Avenue NW between 17th Street NW and Washington Circle should become a cultural destination, using its position next to the White House and proximity to the World Bank, IMF, numerous embassies, and other international institutions. Because of the avenue’s importance in the context of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington, it should be treated as a showcase for public space design, public art, mobility, and green infrastructure.

1616.12 Policy CW-2.6.6: Cultural Destinations South of Dupont Circle

Build on existing cultural assets like the Heurich House Museum and support the creation of one or more cultural destinations in the area south of Dupont Circle, between Connecticut Avenue NW and New Hampshire Avenue NW from M Street NW northward, to enhance the cultural elements of the neighborhood’s dining and nightlife.

1616.13 Policy CW-2.6.7: East-West Circulation Improvements

Improve east-west circulation through the Golden Triangle to better connect the area to the Retail Core, Gallery Place, and Mount Vernon areas on the east, and the West End and Georgetown business districts on the west. These improvements should reinforce K Street’s NW role as the area’s Main Street.

1616.14 Policy CW-2.6.8: Lower 16th Street NW

Preserve and enhance the special character of lower 16th Street NW between H Street NW and Scott Circle. The street’s historic, ceremonial role as the approach to the White House and Lafayette Park should be recognized and conserved. Future development shall be compatible with the street’s established architectural character and scale. Uses and activities that are appropriate to maintain the street’s appearance and historic significance, particularly its open space and greenery, should be encouraged.

1616.15 Policy CW-2.6.9: Downtown West Transportation Study

Improve east-west travel for pedestrians and cyclists on Pennsylvania Avenue NW and persons using public transit along H and I Streets NW.

1616.16 Action CW-2.6.A: K Street Transitway

Implement the K Street Transitway Project, including exclusive transit lanes from 12th Street NW to 21st Street NW.

1616.17 Action CW-2.6.B: Strategic Park Investments

The District, in partnership with NPS and NCPC, should invest in capital improvements and programming at Farragut Park and Franklin Park in order to create vibrant, central public squares in Central Washington.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1617** CW-2.7 L’ENFANT PLAZA/NEAR SOUTHWEST/MARYLAND AVENUE SW {#sec-10-a1617 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1617}

1617.1 The L’Enfant Plaza/Near Southwest/Maryland Avenue SW Policy Focus Area is bounded by 15th Street NW on the west, 2nd Street NW on the East, Independence Avenue on the north, and I-395 on the south. The area includes a mix of private commercial development and numerous federal office buildings, including the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Education, and Housing and Urban Development. Recently, L’Enfant Plaza has experienced an exciting renewal of interest from non-federal entities looking to relocate headquarters in a prestigious and central area of the nation’s capital, including the International Spy Museum, the Urban Land Institute, and WMATA. These three developments alone will add thousands of new employees and attract new visitors to the area. With a workforce of about 65,000 employees, Near Southwest is one of the major employment hubs of Central Washington.

1617.2 Near Southwest reflects the Modernist design philosophies of the 1950s and 1960s. Although some of its buildings were constructed in the late 1930s, the area’s character was largely defined by the urban renewal projects of the post-war era. Many of its mid-century buildings are set back from the street by vast plazas and are accessed by raised roadways like the 10th Street SW promenade. The vision for the area as a coherent set of futuristic buildings was never realized, and today the area is disconnected.

1617.3 In addition, Near Southwest’s former role as a federal industrial district is evident in a number of places. Elevated railroad tracks bisect the area, and there are still active heating plants, warehouses, and even quasi-manufacturing activities like the Bureau of Printing and Engraving. Navigating the area on foot can be confusing, and the relationships between buildings, streets, and the area’s larger context is often unclear.

1617.4 In 2012, the District adopted the Maryland Avenue Southwest Small Area Plan. The plan envisions the transformation of the area to a mixed-use neighborhood with streets redesigned to improve connectivity and walkability. Economic trends suggest the area can support at least 1,000 new units of housing, as well as additional hotel, retail, and visitor-oriented uses. Maryland Avenue SW is envisioned as the heart of this reimagined district, with a deck atop the rail tracks and pedestrian-oriented retail uses along the ground floor of new mixed-use buildings facing the avenue. Attracting development to the area will require a range of livability improvements, including new streetscapes and public realm enhancements, better connections to the L’Enfant Plaza Metro station, and Virginia Rail Expressway commuter rail, as well as new and restored parks and open spaces.

1617.5 Some of Near Southwest’s private complexes, including the Portals and L’Enfant Plaza, are zoned in a way that allows additional development on their plazas and open spaces. Design measures, such as the zoning changes in 2016 that emphasized the preservation and re-opening of L’Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington street rights-of-way, are needed to guide this development so that it can help resolve the harsh pedestrian conditions within the area and humanize the streetscape. Streetscape improvements are also needed to better connect Southwest Washington with the Southwest Waterfront (via the Banneker Overlook at the end of 10th Street SW) and the National Mall. Planning for the area should be done collaboratively with NCPC, which has jurisdiction over much of this area. NCPC’s SW Ecodistrict Plan Addendum and Programmatic Design Concept for 10th Street SW and Banneker Circle SW contain extensive recommendations for improving circulation and streetscape in this area, while also addressing security concerns for major federal tenants. In addition, the area is addressed by NCPC's Monumental Core Framework Plan.

1617.6 Policy CW-2.7.1: Enhancing Near Southwest

Work collaboratively with NCPC redevelop SW Federal Center as a mixed-use community anchored with national civic and cultural uses. Plans for the area should identify streetscape and signage improvements, pedestrian circulation changes, measures to mitigate the scale of the area’s monolithic buildings, guidelines for new (or replacement) buildings within the area, and the potential for new residential uses if federal properties transfer from federal use.

1617.7 Policy CW-2.7.2: Independence Avenue SW

Support redevelopment opportunities along Independence Avenue SW while respecting the civic qualities of adjacent cultural institutions and views along the south side of the National Mall. Buildings located along Independence Avenue within the Monumental Core should complement the character of Smithsonian buildings and minimize visual impacts from the National Mall.

1617.8 Policy CW-2.7.3: 10th Street Promenade and Banneker Overlook

Enhance and activate 10th Street SW as a major point of access between the National Mall, L’Enfant Plaza, the Southwest Waterfront, and the new Wharf development. Encourage a nationally significant cultural attraction at Banneker Overlook that provides a clear connection across Southwest quadrant, the Washington Channel, and East Potomac Park. The recent addition of the International Spy Museum—with its exciting and colorful design and its promise to diversify the visitors of L’Enfant Plaza beyond workers and to lure tourists south of the National Mall—is a great first step in the quest to create a more vibrant neighborhood. Enhance on-street vibrancy with permanent and temporary art, cultural programming, appropriate lighting, and beautiful landscaping. To create more street vibrancy, work with future developments to bring food courts, restaurants, and retail on the street level of new and renovated buildings rather than creating more underground attractions. Encourage civic destinations and ground level uses at the Maryland Avenue SW intersection. Encourage vertical connections between upper and lower elevations of 10th Street SW, such as at D Street SW. Encourage motor coach parking under 10th Street SW.

1617.9 Policy CW-2.7.4: Restoring Maryland Avenue

Support Maryland Avenue SW redevelopment as an urban boulevard and L'Enfant Metro station expansion for intermodal transit, allowing Maryland Avenue SW to be partially restored as a connecting diagonal street. Develop Maryland Avenue SW as an important corridor that respects L'Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington’s intent for reciprocal views between historic landmarks and pedestrian movement. The Maryland Avenue Southwest Small Area Plan provided detailed guidance for the reconstruction of Maryland Avenue as a 160-foot-wide boulevard and for improvements to 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th Streets SW (and underpasses) along D, 4th, 6th, and 7th Streets SW. The reconstructed streets should reconnect the grid at grade with Maryland Avenue where possible. New buildings should be sited to add definition to the street, framing its edges and highlighting the view to the U.S. Capitol. The plan also calls for optimization of building height, recognizing the area’s urban context, central location, and proximity to transit.

1617.10 Policy CW-2.7.5: Create a Vibrant, Mixed-Use Neighborhood in the Southwest Rectangle

Establish a mix of uses that will ultimately include at least 1,000 new residential units as federal properties are redeveloped in the future. Support a mix of residential, commercial, and cultural development throughout the area to achieve a more balanced mix of uses to complement the office presence. Encourage ground floor retail uses, with a goal of up to 100,000 square feet of retail at full build-out to encourage lively street-level activity.

1617.11 Policy CW-2.7.6: Activate Key Public Spaces

Initiate physical improvements to the Maryland Avenue SW streetscape and transform Reservation 13 into a dynamic urban park. Provide attractive settings in the public realm to help activate and beautify the neighborhood.

1617.12 Policy CW-2.7.7: Transit Access

Capitalize on the presence of multiple modes of transportation by emphasizing alternatives to single-occupancy driving, improving transit stations, and focusing activity and future development around transit stops.

1617.13 Policy CW-2.7.8: 7th Street SW

Support the development of 7th Street SW as a retail street, gateway to and from the National Mall, and intermodal transit connection.

1617.14 Policy CW-2.7.9: 12th Street Expressway and SW Freeway

Support development over 12th Street Expressway and SW Freeway. Encourage the lidding of expressways and freeways to reconnect street grids and encourage mixed-use infill development.

1617.15 Policy CW-2.7.10: Virginia Avenue SW and C Street SW

Restore Virginia Avenue SW and C Street SW between 9th and 12th Streets SW, to achieve the L'Enfant’s 1791 plan for the City of Washington’s intent for pedestrian and vehicular movement and reciprocal views between historic landmarks.

1617.16 Policy CW-2.7.11: Redevelopment of Maryland Avenue SW and Surrounding Lands

Encourage residential uses and neighborhood livability standards for the creation of a new mixed-use neighborhood as part of any redevelopment of the Maryland Avenue SW area. Provide for the reconstruction of Maryland Avenue SW, including cultural use and public space, as appropriate.

1617.17 Action CW-2.7.A: Design Planning for Near Southwest

Work collaboratively with NCPC support the transformation of this area into a mixed-use, livable new community through rezoning and design guidelines. Support new high-density mixed-use development, highly sustainable infrastructure, use of small energy production plants to produce energy needs for local buildings, and other best management practices found in the SW Ecodistrict Plan.

1617.18 Action CW-2.7.B: Residential Uses in Near Southwest

Use the innovative zoning in ZR16, as appropriate, to link development potential to identified infrastructure improvements, and coordinate with NCPC to identify infrastructure compatible with local and federal planning goals for the area. Innovative zoning may include establishing a direct correlation between maximum zoning entitlements and infrastructure construction and requiring minimum residential densities.

1617.19 Action CW-2.7.C: Activating L’Enfant Plaza

In the future, as new development comes in and old buildings are renovated, work with federal partners and private developers to create buildings that contribute to street activation and vibrancy. Refrain from supporting new underground attractions and food courts, and instead, encourage new developments to create retail and restaurant space on the street level. Retrofit streets with new landscapes, attractive lighting, public art, temporary activations, and cultural programming. Key to creating more vibrancy will be the extent to which local stakeholders will be able to improve connectivity to and from new and old attractions and neighborhoods around L’Enfant Plaza, including the planned renovation of the South Mall campus, the Wharf, and the Southwest Waterfront neighborhood, which is also experiencing significant growth and redevelopment.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1618** CW-2.8 NOMA AND NORTHWEST ONE {#sec-10-a1618 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1618}

1618.1 The NoMa and Northwest One Policy Focus Area includes the area roughly bounded by New Jersey Avenue NW on the west, Massachusetts Avenue NW/NE on the south, New York Avenue NW/NE on the north, and 2nd and 3rd Streets NE on the east. This 350-acre area includes the Union Station and NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro stations.

1618.2 For much of the past century, NoMa has been an industrial and warehousing area and a back-office district supplementing downtown. Its proximity to the CSX railroad and the established concentration of industry along New York Avenue NE attracted light manufacturers, wholesalers, and distributors throughout the mid- to late 1900s. During the 1990s, the area was viewed as the District’s best prospect for high-technology uses, and plans were developed to attract new media and biotech enterprises, as well as telecom hotels, to the area.

1618.3 NoMa’s proximity to the U.S. Capitol has also made it a desirable location for government office space. During the 1980s and 1990s, office development moved steadily northward along North Capitol Street NE and, by 2000, was also moving eastward toward Capitol Hill. This trend accelerated after 2000 with the opening of Metro’s first infill station at NoMa-Gallaudet U, the renovation of a historic printing plant in Eckington, the leasing of more than one million square feet at Station Place (1st and F Streets NE) to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and the development of a new headquarters facility for the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives at 1st Street and New York Avenue NE.

1618.4 Very few areas of NoMa remain vacant or underused today. The strong demand for downtown housing has shifted the vision for NoMa’s future, and it is now an exemplary modern neighborhood of mixed-use development, rather than just technology and back-office uses.

1618.5 Planning for NoMa should also accommodate established uses. The area includes important historic buildings like the Government Publishing Office (GPO) and the recently refurbished Uline Arena. It also includes active light manufacturing and wholesale uses north of Florida Avenue and east of the CSX tracks. These uses should not be driven out by rising land values and speculation, but should be retained.

1618.6 In 2006 the District completed the Vision Plan and Development Strategy for NoMa establishing more detailed policies for the area. The strategy envisions an area of high-density commercial and mixed-use development between North Capitol Street NE and the CSX railroad tracks, and a less intense and primarily residential area east of the tracks, stepping down to the moderate-density residential areas of Capitol Hill. A similar transition was envisioned on the north, with vacant land and industrial uses north of Florida Avenue NE and west of the railroad gradually giving way to housing over the next 20 years. The strategy also envisions air rights development over the Amtrak tracks (adjacent to the H Street NE overpass) north of Union Station, helping bridge the railroad barrier and support the revival of the H Street NE commercial district to the east. The Union Station Expansion and Air Rights Development projects present a significant opportunity not only to underscore the role of the station as one of the most important regional transportation hubs in the Northeast and as one of the District’s most distinctive historic landmarks, but also to reinforce the many additional roles it plays in the District. It acts as a critical center of multimodal transportation; a vital community asset to District residents; a place of civic, cultural, and commercial activity; and a national gateway to the downtown, Capitol Hill, and NoMa neighborhoods, which include mixed uses, job centers, hotels, and cultural and entertainment uses that attract millions of visitors and workers each year.

1618.7 West of NoMa, the Northwest One neighborhood is roughly bordered by North Capitol and K Streets NW, and New Jersey and New York Avenues NW. The area includes several public housing developments, including the Sursum Corda Cooperative, Tyler House, Sibley Plaza, and Golden Rule Center. In 2017, approximately 19.5 percent of households were at or below the poverty line. In 2004, Northwest One was selected as the pilot site for the District’s New Communities Initiative, a District government program designed to revitalize severely underfunded public housing and redevelop neighborhoods into vibrant mixed-income communities. Subsequent planning guidance was provided through the Mid-City East Small Area Plan, which was completed in 2014. (See the Mid-City Area Element for more information.) Plans are currently underway to rebuild the Sursum Corda Cooperative as a mixed-income community, providing one-for-one replacement of existing public housing while adding market rate housing and new community anchors and amenities.

1618.8 Policy CW-2.8.1: NoMa Land Use Mix

Promote NoMa’s development as an active mixed-use neighborhood that includes residential, office, hotel, commercial, creative, arts, maker, light industrial, and ground floor retail uses. A diverse mix of housing, serving a range of household types and incomes, should be accommodated.

1618.9 Policy CW-2.8.2: East of the Tracks and Eckington Place Transition Areas

Create a production/arts and live/work, mixed-use area east of the CSX railroad tracks between H Street NE and Florida Avenue NE and in the area east of Eckington Place and north of New York Avenue. Some of this area is shown as Mixed-Use Production Distribution Repair/Residential areas on the Future Land Use Map. The intent of this designation is not to blend industrial uses with housing, but rather to retain viable industrial activities while supporting the creation of live/work space, housing, artists’ studios, and similar uses. Mixed-use squares in the NoMa area have unique characteristics that allow for a balance of industrial, residential, and office uses. The industrial striping on the Future Land Use Map anticipates some office use. These two areas should generally not be developed as large-scale commercial office building areas. Mixed-use development, including housing, should be encouraged in both locations.

1618.10 Policy CW-2.8.3: NoMa Transportation Improvements

Design NoMa to accommodate a wide array of transportation options, with a particular emphasis on walking, bicycling, and improved transit connections. Improve the accessibility, functionality, and safety of the area’s street grid, introducing new streets as needed to improve circulation through the area. This should include the redesign of 1st Street NE as NoMa’s Main Street and the New York/Florida Avenue NE intersection to improve pedestrian safety, enhance access to the New York Avenue Metro station, and create a landscaped neighborhood gateway, possibly including a new national memorial.

1618.11 Policy CW-2.8.4: Preserving Neighborhoods Abutting NoMa

Provide appropriate scale transitions between NoMa and existing adjacent residential neighborhoods in Eckington and Capitol Hill to conserve the fine-grained row house fabric of these communities. Service facilities, loading docks, and other potentially objectionable features should be located away from sensitive uses, such as housing.

See also the Urban Design Element and the Capitol Hill Area Element for policies on scale transitions.

1618.12 Policy CW-2.8.5: NoMa Architectural Design

Establish a unique architectural and design identity for NoMa based in part on the area’s heritage as an industrial area. This identity should preserve, renovate, and adaptively reuse NoMa’s important historic buildings.

1618.13 Policy CW-2.8.6: Redevelopment of the Parking Lots West of the Government Publishing Office

Encourage the reduction of parking spaces to the west of the GPO building and promote the space as a redevelopment site for new mixed-use commercial and residential buildings, with ample public park or plaza space. Consider closing segments of 1st and G Streets NW, currently blocked off with Jersey barriers, to incorporate these unused portions of the public right-of-way as new and well-designed community-gathering spaces.

1618.14 Policy CW-2.8.7: Union Station Expansion and Rail Yard Air Rights Development Projects

Prioritize Union Station’s vital role, now and in the future, as an intermodal transportation hub, while recognizing the importance of its preservation as a key historic landmark and function as a community asset. Future expansion and air rights development projects should appropriately respond to surrounding land use and design programs and plans, including those for Downtown East, Capitol Hill, and NoMa neighborhoods.

1618.15 Action CW-2.8.A: Implement the NoMa Vision Plan

Implement the NoMa Vision Plan and Development Strategy, including its recommendations for land use, infrastructure, transportation, environmental improvements, streetscape, open space, identity, and neighborhood quality.

See the Mid-City Area Element for additional information about the proposed Eckington Small Area Plan, including the North Capitol Street area between Florida and New York Avenues.

1618.16 Action CW-2.8.B: Northwest One New Community

Redevelop Northwest One as a mixed-income community, including new market rate and public housing, a new school and recreation center, a library and health clinic, and neighborhood-serving retail space. Redevelopment of Northwest One should:

Restore the District street grid through Sursum Corda;

Emphasize K Street NW as a main street that connects the area to NoMa and the Mount Vernon District;

Maximize private sector participation;

Include one-for-one replacement of public units;

Provide family-sized housing, including for multigeneration families;

Build affordable units first to minimize displacement and maximize the return of residents to their community; and

Include tenants’ rights of return and comprehensive relocation plans for tenants prior to the redevelopment.

1618.17 Action CW-2.8.C: Mid-City East Small Area Plan

Implement recommendations detailed in the MidCity East Small Area Plan as it relates to neighborhoods in the Central Washington Area Element.

1618.18 Action CW-2.8.D: Union Station Expansion Project and Rail Yard Air Rights Development

Continue participating in the Union Station Expansion Project and continue coordinating with related projects, including the H Street NE Bridge reconstruction and future air rights development projects.

1618.19 Action CW-2.8.E: Public Participation in Union Station Air Rights Development

Because of the Union Station air rights’ uniquely diverse surroundings—including rowhouses, historic landmarks, and dense office development—and its potential to spur other investment in the neighborhood, encourage a process that requires public participation in the review of any development application for that site.

See the Transportation Element for additional information on the Union Station Expansion Project.

### **10-A17** FAR NORTHEAST & SOUTHEAST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1700** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1700}

1700.1 The Far Northeast and Southeast Planning Area encompasses 8.3 square miles located east of I-295 and north of Naylor Road SE. Most of the area has historically been in Ward 7, although in past decades due to Census redistricting, parts have been included in Wards 6 and 8. Its boundaries are shown in the map to the left.

1700.2 Far Northeast and Southeast is known for its established neighborhoods and its diverse mix of housing. It includes single-family communities like Hillcrest, Eastland Gardens, and Penn Branch; row house and semi-detached housing neighborhoods, such as Twining, River Terrace, and Fairlawn; and apartment communities, such as Naylor Gardens, Mayfair Mansions, and Lincoln Heights. The area has a robust transportation network, including the Minnesota Avenue, Benning Road, and Deanwood Metro stations, Interstate I-295, and several major avenues linking neighborhoods to the underserved communities in Wards 7 and 8 to Central Washington. Far Northeast and Southeast is one of the District’s greenest areas. The recently renovated Marvin Gaye Park is home to the District’s segment of the Watts Branch Tributary. Watts Branch flows aboveground through the park to the Anacostia River, bisecting the southeastern portion of Ward 7. Thanks to recent infrastructure investments, the community is now able to enjoy both the Watts Branch Trail and the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail. It is home to several of the Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, including Fort Mahan, Fort Chaplin, Fort Dupont, and Fort Davis. Fort Dupont Park and Anacostia Park are two of the largest parks in the Far Northeast and Southeast area, where residents have been able to enjoy recreational activities for generations. There are multiple shopping centers in Far Northeast and Southeast, such as East River Park and The Shops at Penn Branch (formerly Penn-Branch Shopping Center), as well as smaller neighborhood commercial districts along Alabama Avenue SE, Bowen Road SE, Division Avenue NE, Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue NE, and other local streets and arterials. The commercial area known by residents as Downtown Ward 7 can be found along Benning Road NE and Minnesota Avenue NE. It is a retail area with fast casual and some sit-down restaurants, as well as convenience stores, but it is still considered underserved regarding restaurant options and grocery stores.

1700.3 Far Northeast and Southeast has always had a strong sense of community spirit, due in part to a well-organized network of community associations, churches, and interest groups. These groups include nonprofits such as the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization, the Washington Area Community Investment Fund, and the Ward 7 Business Partnership. There are social service organizations, such as the East River Family Strengthening Collaborative. Neighborhood groups, such as the Capitol View Citizens Association, the Deanwood Citizens Association, the Fort Dupont Park Civic Association, the River Terrace Civic Association, the Benning Ridge Civic Association, the Marshall Heights Civic Association, the Penn-Branch and Hillcrest Neighborhood Associations, and the Parkside and Eastland Gardens Civic Associations, provide residents with cultural activities and opportunities for them to understand the history of their community. For decades, activities like Minnesota Avenue and Deanwood Days and the Fort Dupont Summer Concert Series have built community pride and educated, as well as entertained residents and visitors. Far Northeast and Southeast also has a historic tradition of being strongly connected to its natural landscape, dating back to its origins as an agricultural community. Small backyard gardens and community garden plots may be found throughout the community today, even in public pocket parks, vacant lots, apartment complexes, and affordable housing. As the population grows, consideration should be taken to identify park space and neighborhood-serving amenities.

1700.4 While the area is not without its challenges, between 2000 and 2017, Far Northeast and Southeast experienced a 13.74 percent increase in population but also an increase in its poverty rate by two percent. The Comprehensive Planning Area did experience an increase in its percentage of female-headed households by three percent. Its crime and unemployment rates are both above the District average. Many residents must travel long distances for shopping, higher education, and employment opportunities, as well as basic goods and services. Many middle-class families left the neighborhoods of Far Northeast and Southeast during the 1970s, ’80s, and ’90s, schools and other community services have suffered as a consequence.

1700.5 Far Northeast and Southeast has experienced investment over the last decades; however, there are still gaps in equitable opportunities relative to the District that need to be addressed to ensure that the benefits of the District’s economic and population resurgences are broadly shared. It is likely that new residents will be attracted to the area because of its relatively affordable housing and other amenities. Broader prosperity in the Far Northeast and Southeast Planning Area should not be gained at the expense of those who have helped build and sustain the community for generations. While a high priority will be placed on bringing moderate-income families back to this community, an even higher priority should be placed on improving the quality of life for the individuals and families who live there today.

1700.6 The Far Northeast and Southeast area has a 12 percent vacancy rate among its housing units. This Planning Area has seen significant change during recent years. More than 3,550 units of housing have been added, either through new construction or renovation between 2000 and 2018. New developments like Capital Gateway Estates, Parkside, Solstice, Skyland Town Center, and Park 7 are creating more diverse housing choices and opportunities.

1700.7 Non-residential development in Far Northeast and Southeast has lagged behind the rest of the District. In fact, until recently, most of the non-residential construction consisted of reinvestment in public facilities, such as schools, libraries, and recreation centers. This trend started to shift with the District government investing in relocating the Department of Employment Services (DOES) in 2009 to a new facility adjacent to the Minnesota Avenue Metro station. With hundreds of local government employees working at this site in a customer-facing agency, a new vibrancy has come to Minnesota Avenue. Park 7, the newest mixed-use development also located at Benning Road and Minnesota Avenue, has ground floor retail, including a sit-down restaurant, coffee shop, a children’s clothing store, and other popular offerings. The addition of new residents and daytime office workers has made the ground floor retail here a success, sparking more interest from the private sector to consider Far Northeast and Southeast as an upcoming retail and commercial market. Additional developments underway in Far Northeast and Southeast, such as the 137-unit Solstice at East Capitol and Minnesota Avenue and the Skyland Town Center, upon completion of Phase 1, will offer more than 250 residential units and 80,000 square feet of retail, including a much-needed large grocery store.

1700.8 Portions of the Far Northeast and Southeast Planning Area have also been identified as a priority area for resilience planning, given the vulnerabilities to climate change and flood risk as identified in the Climate Ready DC Plan published in 2016. In particular, the area around the Watts Branch, a tributary to the Anacostia River, is currently at risk of flooding and projected to be at increased risk in the years ahead. This area has a significant concentration of community resources for those at risk, such as medical services and affordable housing, including Kenilworth Courts development and Lincoln-Heights Dwellings, which both serve vulnerable populations.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1701** HISTORY {#sec-10-a1701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1701}

1701.1 Most of Far Northeast and Southeast was still countryside until the early 20th century. In fact, large tracts of land were farmed until as recently as the mid-1900s. Early settlements in the area included the communities of Good Hope (near Alabama Avenue and Naylor Road), Benning Heights (near Fort Dupont), and Deanwood.

1701.2 Far Northeast and Southeast took on strategic importance during the Civil War, when Fort Dupont, Fort Davis, and other encampments were built to preserve the nation’s capital from attack. Woodlawn Cemetery, another local landmark, was established in 1895 to provide a site for Black burials, which were largely prohibited at other cemeteries in the region at that time. By the late 1800s, Deanwood had emerged as a moderate-income community of Black and White families and was known for its self-reliance and strong sense of economic independence.

1701.3 The first large-scale urban development in the area took place during the 1920s. The pace accelerated during World War II, as defense and government workers flocked to the District. Naylor Gardens, for example, was developed for the federal government and later served as cooperative housing for returning war veterans. Rapid development continued through the 1950s, as sewers, paved streets, and sidewalks were provided to most areas. Neighborhoods like Hillcrest (originally called Summit Ridge) and Benning Ridge (originally called Bradbury Heights) date from this period.

1701.4 Following the removal of restrictive housing covenants in the late 1940s, the racial composition of the community shifted. By 1960, a majority of the area’s residents were Black. The pace of development slowed after 1970, and the community entered a period of population decline as many families left the District for suburban Maryland and elsewhere. Despite the loss of residents, many vibrant neighborhoods remain in Far Northeast and Southeast, and today, there are signs of reinvestment in nearly all parts of the community. Public investment in recent years has included the reconstruction of H. D. Woodson High School in 2011 and the opening of the Ron Brown College Preparatory High School in 2016. Four libraries in the Planning Area, including Dorothy I. Height and Francis A. Gregory, were built or modernized, as well as five recreation centers. The Benning Stoddert, Deanwood, Marvin Gaye, and Ridge Road Recreation Centers have been completely modernized, offering state-of-the-art facilities and amenities. Public-private investment brought the Nationals Youth Baseball Academy and the Unity Health Care Health Centers, delivering much-needed resources.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1702** LAND USE {#sec-10-a1702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1702}

1702.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data, together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, etc. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not to actual changes in land use. Land use statistics for this Planning Area appear in Figure 17.1. Far Northeast and Southeast comprises about 5,300 acres, or about 14 percent of the District’s land area.

1702.2 Figure 17.1: Land Use Composition in Far Northeast/Southeast

1702.3 The area is mostly a residential community, with more than 32.8 percent of the land area developed with housing. Densities are typically lower than the District-wide total, with much of the housing stock consisting of one- and two-family homes. Concentrations of more dense housing exist in Fairfax Village, Randle Highlands, Benning Ridge, Lincoln Heights, Marshall Heights, Kenilworth-Parkside, and north of Fort Dupont Park.

1702.4 Commercial uses are clustered in nodes along Minnesota Avenue, East Capitol Street, Naylor Road, Pennsylvania Avenue, Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue, Division Avenue, Central Avenue SE, H Street SE, and Benning Road NE/SE. The area’s largest commercial centers are located near Minnesota Avenue and Benning Road and at Skyland on Naylor Road. A small industrial area is located in the northwest corner of the area, parallel to the railroad and Kenilworth Avenue. Industrial uses, including the Pepco Benning Road Service Center, are also located north of Benning Road. Together, commercial and industrial uses represent just three percent of the Far Northeast and Southeast’s land area.

1702.5 Open space and parks comprise about 25 percent of the Planning Area. Much of the area’s open space, including the system of Fort Circle Parks extending from Fort Mahan to Fort Stanton and the Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens, is under National Park Service (NPS) ownership. Three of the community’s parks: Alger, Watts Branch, and Pope Branch follow natural stream valleys and provide a unique amenity for the community. Public facilities, including public schools, comprise about four percent of the area. Streets and public rights-of-way comprise 25 percent of the Planning Area. Approximately 180 acres, almost four percent of Far Northeast and Southeast Planning Area, consists of vacant, unimproved land.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1703** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a1703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1703}

1703.1 Basic demographic data for Far Northeast and Southeast is shown in Figure 17.2 In 2017, the area had a population of 83,906, or about 11.79 percent of the District’s total. The Planning Area has experienced moderate population growth since 2000, as compared to other areas in the District, and gained about 10,136 people. However, the Planning Area is expected to grow by more than 28,705 people by 2045. This trend may occur in the coming years as former public housing complexes are replaced by new single-family homes, townhomes, and multi-family dwellings as infill development takes place on vacant land. 1703.1

1703.2 Approximately 93.2 percent of the area’s residents were Black in 2017, which is significantly higher than the District-wide total of 47.7 percent. Only about 3.7 percent of the Planning Area’s residents were of Hispanic/Latino origin, and fewer than four percent were foreign born. Relative to the District, the area had higher percentages of children and older adults in 2017. More than 24 percent of the residents were under the age of 18, compared to a District-wide total of 17.6 percent. More than 13.7 percent were over the age of 65, compared to the Districtwide total of 11.9 percent. However, the percentage of the population under the age of 18 dropped by about four percent between 2000 and 2017, while the population between the ages of 18 and 65 increased by about the same percentage. 1703.2

1703.3 Figure 17.2: Far Northeast and Southeast at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

73,770

74,065

83,906

90,168

100,291

112,611

Households

30,681

31,178

32,965

37,279

40,880

45,933

Household Population

73,026

73,276

82,822

88,708

98,603

110,471

Persons Per Household

2.38

2.35

2.51

2.38

2.41

Jobs

12,297

5,856

8,135

9,986

14,490

19,698

Density (persons per sq mile)

8,888

8,923

10,109

10,864

12,083

13,568

Land Area (square miles)

8.3

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

20,230

43,442

15,332

28,110

10,098

27.4%

58.9%

20.8%

38.1%

13.7%

20,167

50,493

20,822

31,671

11,246

24.0%

62.6%

24.8%

37.7%

13.4%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

18,233

24.7%

22,187

26.7%

17.4%

Race Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

957

71,231

201

216

362

821

1.3%

96.5%

0.3%

0.5%

1.1%

1,966

78,218

163

467

2,007

1,085

2.3%

93.2%

0.2%

0.6%

2.4%

1.3%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

636

0.9%

3,145

3.7%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

1,045

1.4%

3,065

3.7%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

12,416

18,242

40.5%

59.5%

12,103

20,862

36.7%

63.3%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

30,658

4,452

87.3%

12.7%

32,965

4,501

88.0%

12.0%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

6,257

9,782

5,032

5,374

5,921

2,711

17.8%

27.9%

14.3%

15.3%

16.9%

7.7%

0.1%

6,135

10,710

5,041

5,536

6,627

3,360

16.4%

28.6%

13.5%

14.8%

17.7%

9.0%

0.2%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1704** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a1704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1704}

1704.1 The 2013-2017 Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates reported that 16.4 percent of the homes in Far Northeast and Southeast were single-family detached homes, and 28.6 percent were single-family attached homes (row houses and townhouses). These are slightly higher than the 25.1 percent for the District. Conversely, only nine percent of the area’s housing stock consists of multi-family buildings of 20 units or more, compared to 35.4 percent for the District. Relative to the rest of the District, Far Northeast and Southeast has a much higher percentage of small apartment buildings. About one-third of the area’s housing units were in buildings with 5 to 19 units—almost twice the District-wide proportion. In 2017, nearly 12 percent of the housing units in Far Northeast and Southeast were vacant.

1704.2 The 2017 Census Bureau ACS reported that 36.7 percent of the households in the Planning Area were homeowners and 63.3 percent were renters. These percentages are less than the District-wide percentage, which shows 41.1 percent are homeowners and 58.3 percent are renters.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1705** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a1705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1705}

1705.1 Data from the District DOES and the Office of Planning (OP) indicates that there were 7,575 jobs in Far Northeast and Southeast in 2015, primarily in local-serving businesses, public schools, and government. This represents just under one percent of the District’s job base and reflects the fact that this Planning Area is primarily residential. As of the 2017 Census, median household income in the Comprehensive Planning Area was $38,438, compared to a District-wide median of $77,649. About 17 percent of the Planning Area’s residents were living in poverty in 2017, an increase compared to 2000 and over the District-wide total of 18 percent.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1706** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a1706 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1706}

1706.1 Based on land availability, planning policies, and regional growth trends, Far Northeast and Southeast is projected to add households, population, and jobs during the next five years and continue growing through 2045. The Planning Area is expected to experience an increase in households from 31,178 in 2010 to 32,965 in 2017. Forecasts in housing trends show, that an increase to 45,933 households is expected by 2045 with an attendant increase in population from 83,906 in 2017 to a projected 112,611 in 2045. The addition of more than 5,000 projected new homes (including more than 1,000 homes on former affordable housing sites at Capitol Gateway Estates, Lincoln Heights, Richardson Dwellings, and Eastgate Gardens, as well as infill development at Kenilworth-Parkside) will bring new vitality and energy to the community. Much of the growth in Far Northeast and Southeast is expected to consist of new low-density housing, particularly on vacant single-family lots in Deanwood and Marshall Heights. Higher- -density housing and mixed-use development will be concentrated around the Metro stations, on redeveloped public housing sites, and along corridor streets.

1706.2 The number of jobs is expected to increase from about 7,575 today to 19,698 in 2045. Most of the increase will take place around the Minnesota Avenue Metro station, at Kenilworth-Parkside, at the revitalized Skyland Shopping Center, and along East Capitol Street.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1707** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a1707 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1707}

1707.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

1707.2 Four Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in Far Northeast and Southeast during 2005 and 2006. These meetings provided an opportunity for residents to discuss both District-wide and neighborhood planning issues. The Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and groups such as the Ward 7 Leadership Council also provided a voice for local priorities and concerns. There have also been many meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan, but focusing on long-range planning issues. These meetings have covered topics such as Kenilworth Avenue road improvements, the future of Watts Branch, reuse plans for Skyland Shopping Center, and the upgrading of Great Streets like Pennsylvania Avenue SE.

1707.3 The community delivered several key messages during these meetings, summarized below:

The low-density character that typifies most Far Northeast and Southeast neighborhoods should be maintained. While it is recognized that the area contains much vacant land with the potential for infill development, this development should generally be similar in density to what exists today. This is one of the few areas in the District with opportunities to build three- and four-bedroom homes suitable for families with children. Whereas the neighborhood lost families to Prince George’s County and elsewhere in the past, it may gain families from these areas in the future if it builds appropriately designed housing, provides quality schools, and improves public services.

While preserving established single-family neighborhoods is a priority, Far Northeast and Southeast recognizes the need to provide a variety of new housing choices. More density is appropriate on land within one-quarter mile of the Metro stations at Minnesota Avenue, Benning Road, and Deanwood, and on the District side of the Southern Avenue and Capitol Heights stations. The commercially zoned land along the Nannie Helen Burroughs, Minnesota Avenue, and Pennsylvania Avenue Great Streets corridors also offer opportunities for somewhat denser uses than exist today. These areas may provide opportunities for apartments, condominiums, townhomes, assisted living facilities and other types of housing, provided that measures are taken to buffer adjacent lower-density neighborhoods, address parking and traffic issues, and mitigate other community concerns.

The neighborhood is underserved by retail stores and services, including the basics such as sit-down restaurants, banks, hardware stores, drug stores, and movie theaters. These uses should be accommodated in the future by encouraging both public and private reinvestment in the established commercial districts. The upgrading of Skyland and development of Capitol Gateway should go a long way toward meeting these needs—but these centers are not conveniently located for everyone in the community. Neighborhoods like Deanwood and Fairlawn would benefit from additional quality retail services. The Minnesota-Benning commercial district, in particular, should evolve into a stronger, more vital shopping district in the future, attracting customers from both sides of the Anacostia River.

Renovation and rehabilitation of the housing stock should continue to be a priority, especially for the aging post-war apartment complexes and for developments with affordable units. Steps should be taken to preserve affordable units in these complexes as they are renovated. In some cases, as was the case at East Capitol Dwellings and Eastgate Gardens, the best approach may be to replace deteriorated multi-family housing with new housing that better meets community needs. In other cases, the renovation of older apartments could be coupled with conversion to owner-occupancy, with provisions to help tenants become homeowners.

Code enforcement continues to be one of the top issues in the community. Residents are concerned about illegal dumping and unpermitted construction, inadequate notification of zoning changes, and the need for cleanup of underused and abandoned properties. While these are operational issues that cannot be resolved through the Comprehensive Plan, the District should strive toward responsive, effective enforcement, maintenance, and customer service in the future.

More steps should be taken to improve environmental quality, especially along Watts Branch. Far Northeast and Southeast was impacted for years by the now defunct Benning Road incinerator and continues to face noise, air pollution, and truck traffic from I-295 and other thoroughfares. Programs to reduce these impacts, while improving physical connections to the Anacostia River, the Civil War Defenses of Washington, DC, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, and other open spaces in the area are high priorities. Indeed, much of the discussion at public meetings during the Comprehensive Plan revision focused on the need for better parks, cleaner streams, and more trees. While the community has more green space than many other parts of the District, this space has been neglected. Greater stewardship by Far Northeast and Southeast residents, coupled with more attention from the District and federal governments, will help restore the natural landscape as a place of beauty, spiritual enrichment, and diverse habitat.

Additional improvements are needed to reduce traffic congestion, especially around the I-295/Pennsylvania Avenue intersection and along Kenilworth Avenue. Parts of Far Northeast and Southeast are more than one mile from Metrorail and need better, more reliable bus connections to Metro. The safety of pedestrians and bicyclists continues to be an issue in many neighborhoods and at many intersections.

Schools, libraries, recreation centers, and other public facilities in Far Northeast and Southeast should be upgraded to meet the needs of the community . The recent modernizations of Kelly Miller Middle School and Randle Highlands Elementary School are a promising start, but there is more to accomplish. Investment in schools should take place in tandem with investment in new housing, shopping, libraries, and other services, as it is at Eastgate Gardens, to create whole communities and not simply tracts of homes.

With an unemployment rate that is twice the District-wide total, more should be done to strengthen the occupational skills of the Far Northeast and Southeast labor force. Job training, adult education, and vocational education programs are an essential part of the equation. Good access to Metrorail is also critical, to connect residents to jobs downtown and elsewhere in the region. As noted in the District-wide elements of the Comprehensive Plan, establishing a community college or branch campus of the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) would go a long way toward helping Far Northeast and Southeast residents prepare for good, quality jobs in the District economy.

Additional facilities and services for children and youth are needed in the Far Northeast/Southeast Area. More than one in four residents of the in the Planning Area are under 18. Further increases in the number of children are likely as additional family housing is completed. New and expanded recreation centers, playgrounds, child care facilities, and similar facilities are urgently needed today and will continue to be needed in the future. The District should place a high priority on investment in these facilities to create a healthy environment for children and all residents. 1707.3

##### **10-A DCMR § 1708** FNS-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a1708 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1708}

1708.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Far Northeast and Southeast. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the District-wide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

1708.2 Policy FNS-1.1.1: Conservation of Low-Density Neighborhoods

Recognize the value and importance of Far Northeast and Southeast’s established single-family neighborhoods to the character of the local community and to the entire District. Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations for these neighborhoods reflect and preserve the existing land use pattern while allowing for taller and denser infill development that is compatible with neighborhood character.

1708.3 Policy FNS-1.1.2: Development of New Housing

Encourage new mixed-use, mixed-income development for area residents on vacant lots and around Metro stations and on underused commercial sites along the area’s major avenues. Strongly encourage the rehabilitation and renovation of existing housing in Far Northeast and Southeast and seek to ensure that the housing remains affordable for current and future residents.

1708.4 Policy FNS-1.1.3: Directing Growth

Concentrate employment growth in Far Northeast and Southeast, including office and retail development around the Deanwood, Minnesota Avenue, and Benning Road Metro station areas; the East Capitol Street Gateway; the Fletcher-Johnson property; the former George Washington Carver Apartments site; the Skyland Shopping Center; and along I-295 adjacent to the Parkside neighborhood, along Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue NE, Minnesota Avenue NE/SE, Benning Road NE, and Pennsylvania Avenue SE Great Streets corridors, as well as along the 58th Street, Eastern Avenue, and Dix Street corridors. Provide improved pedestrian, bus, and automobile access to these areas, and improve their visual and urban design qualities. These areas should be safe, inviting, pedestrian-oriented places.

1708.5 Policy FNS-1.1.4: Retail Development

Support the revitalization of the neighborhood commercial areas listed in Policy FNS-1.1.3 encouraging a vibrant and diverse mix of new businesses and activities that provide needed retail services to the adjacent neighborhoods and that are compatible with surrounding land uses.

1708.6 Policy FNS-1.1.5: Prince George’s County

Work closely with Prince George’s County and the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) to guide the development of land along the Maryland/District line, especially around the Capitol Heights and Southern Avenue Metro stations. Safe pedestrian access to these stations should be provided. Given the proximity of the Capitol Heights and Naylor Road Metro stations to the District line (about 1,000 feet, respectively), collaborative transit-oriented development planning around these stations is also encouraged.

1708.7 Policy FNS-1.1.6: Residential Rehabilitation

Encourage the rehabilitation of single-family homes in the Fairlawn and Twining neighborhoods, as well as the renovation of vacant deteriorating apartment units, especially in Marshall Heights, Lincoln Heights, Northeast Boundary, Greenway, Randle Highlands (south of Pennsylvania Avenue SE), and along 29th Street between Erie and Denver Streets.

1708.8 Policy FNS-1.1.7: Row House Neighborhoods

In the Fairlawn and Twining neighborhoods, encourage infill housing constructed so as to be compatible with the architectural style and materials of the brick row houses and semi-detached homes that predominate in these areas.

1708.9 Policy FNS-1.1.8: Buffering

Improve the interface between the I-295 freeway/rail corridor and adjacent residential uses, especially in the Deanwood, Eastland Gardens, Fairlawn, Greenway, Kenilworth, Mayfair, Parkside, River Terrace, and Twining neighborhoods. These improvements should preserve the neighborhoods from noise, odors, pollution, vibrations, and other freeway impacts while also providing a more positive visual impression of the community from the highway itself.

1708.10 Policy FNS-1.1.9: Multimodal Management

Reexamine traffic control and management programs along major Far Northeast and Southeast arterial streets, particularly along Pennsylvania and Minnesota Avenues SE, Nannie Helen Burroughs and Kenilworth Avenues NE, I-295, East Capitol Street, Benning Road SE, Branch Avenue SE, and Naylor Road SE. Consider additional bikeshare stations at Metro stations and along key corridors in Far Northeast and Southeast to provide additional transit options. Develop measures to improve pedestrian and cyclist safety and mitigate the effects of increased local and regional traffic on residential streets.

1708.11 Policy FNS-1.1.10: Transit Improvements

Improve bus service to the Metro stations from neighborhoods throughout Far Northeast and Southeast, particularly in the southern part of the Planning Area. Preserve crosstown routes and prevent fragmentation of bus service.

1708.12 Action FNS-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

Encourage urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial districts along Naylor Road, Minnesota Avenue, Benning Road, Branch Avenue, Alabama Avenue, Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue, Division Avenue, Sheriff Road, and Pennsylvania Avenue SE. These improvements should respect and enhance historic structures and landmarks in these areas.

1708.13 Action FNS-1.1.B: Restart the Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Program

Revive the Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Program or a similar effort once operated by the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization (MHCDO) to expand into additional neighborhood commercial areas such as East Capitol Street NE/SE and Benning Road NE/SE in Far Northeast and Southeast. Community-based organizations that could lead this effort include the Ward 7 Business Partnership, the Washington Area Community Investment Fund, or the MHCDO.

1708.14 Action FNS-1.1.C: Joint Planning Agreement with Prince George’s County

Develop a joint planning agreement with MNCPPC/Prince George’s County to coordinate the mutual review of projects and area plans on both sides of the District/Maryland line.

1708.15 Action FNS-1.1.D: Kenilworth Avenue Transportation Study

Implement the recommendations of the Kenilworth Avenue transportation study to better manage truck traffic and to separate local traffic from through traffic on neighborhood streets.

1708.16 Action FNS-1.1.E: Parkside Livability Study

An access and circulation study is underway in the Parkside neighborhood. When implemented, it will improve pedestrian and vehicle safety and operational efficiency for all modes of transportation and the delivery of goods and services in and out of the neighborhood. Focus additional planning efforts on neighborhoods along the Anacostia River Future studies of Parkside and Kenilworth should include a retail analysis to guide future growth and development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1709** FNS-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1709 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1709}

1709.1 The watershed of Watts Branch, a tributary of the Anacostia River, was identified as a priority area for resilience planning in the Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of Climate Ready DC. The Watts Branch watershed encompasses multiple neighborhoods, including Deanwood, Eastland Gardens, Kenilworth, Northeast Boundary, Mayfair, Parkside, and River Terrace. There is also a significant risk to dozens of public and community-serving facilities, as well as public and affordable housing units. This area is currently at risk of flooding and is projected to be at increased risk as early as 2020.

1709.2 Policy FNS-1.2.1: Watts Branch and Pope Branch

Conserve and improve Alger Park, Watts Branch, and Pope Branch as safe, healthy natural resource areas. Undertake capital improvements to acquire land, improve trails, provide recreational features, improve stormwater management, restore water quality and natural habitat, and maintain riparian zones to minimize flood hazards. Promote District maintenance, enforcement, and community stewardship projects to keep the stream bed and parklands clean, reduce crime and illegal dumping, and ensure that the parks remain resources that the whole community can enjoy.

1709.3 Policy FNS-1.2.2: Connecting to the River

Link the neighborhoods of Far Northeast and Southeast to the Anacostia River through trail, path, transit, sidewalk, pedestrian crossing, pedestrian safety, and road improvements. Provide new amenities and facilities and support programming and events in the waterfront parks that meet the needs of Far Northeast and Southeast residents. Also, preserve and enhance the existing waterfront open space. Support the NPS in its effort to plan for Anacostia Park and to focus on improving park amenities and access points to better serve the community.

1709.4 Policy FNS-1.2.3: Neighborhood Climate Resilience

Encourage neighborhood-scale and site-specific projects that decrease the vulnerability of people, places, and systems in Far Northeast and Southeast to climate crises.

1709.5 Policy FNS-1.2.4: Flood Mitigation

Identify and prioritize flood-prone properties along Watts Branch for flood hazard mitigation projects. Project prioritization should be based on determinations of flood prevention and the extent to which other neighborhood benefits are realized, including improvements to parklands and trails, recreational features, water quality, and natural habitat. Partner with other federal, local, and private entities to include flood mitigation programs into key flood zones.

1709.6 Policy FNS-R.1.2.5: Critical Community Facilities Preservation

Preserve critical community facilities that provide human services and other resources in the Planning Area and that are determined to be at risk for current and future flooding conditions. Support vulnerability assessments for those facilities near Watts Branch that have already been identified as high risk and prepare flood-proofing strategies that can be incorporated into capital improvement plans and future hazard mitigation grant applications. Promote improvement, of and public access to, amenities including recreation centers, schools, urban farms, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.

1709.7 Policy FNS-1.2.6: Fort Dupont Park

Work with the NPS to continue to improve access to Fort Dupont Park by providing shared parking, bicycle, and pedestrian access and public transit service. Expand outdoor recreational activities and community events at the park to better meet community needs.

1709.8 Policy FNS-1.2.7: Soil Erosion

Reduce soil erosion and stabilize slopes at Far Northeast and Southeast erosion hot spots, particularly the Skyland/Alabama Avenue area, Blaine Street NE (in Capitol View), O Street SE, and along Watts Branch and Pope Branch.

1709.9 Policy FNS-1.2.8: View Protection

Preserve and enhance important views and vistas between Far Northeast/Southeast and Central Washington, such as the vistas of the U.S. Capitol and Washington Monument from East Capitol Street. Such views are rare in the District and should be cherished and maintained.

1709.10 Policy FNS-1.2.9: Historic Resources

Protect and restore buildings and places of historic significance in Far Northeast and Southeast, including historic landmarks, such as the Nannie Helen Burroughs School, Sousa Junior High School, Mayfair Mansions, Strand Theater, Woodlawn Cemetery, Queens Stroll Road, Payne Cemetery, Southeast Boundary Stone (SE1), National Capitol Hebrew Cemetery, and the Shrimp Boat. Identify and increase awareness of other places of potential significance and consider appropriate preservation. Increase public awareness of these historic assets by incorporating the community’s recommendations as part of the process.

1709.11 Policy FNS-1.2.10: Health Care Facilities

Encourage and support additional facilities to meet the behavioral and physical health needs of Far Northeast and Southeast residents, including primary and urgent care facilities, youth development centers, nutrition and chronic disease treatment, family counseling, and drug abuse and alcohol treatment facilities. Such facilities are vital to provide residents access to health care and maintain good health. Specific plans for new social service and health facilities should be developed through needs assessments, agency master plans, strategic plans, and the District’s public facility planning process. All plans should be prepared in collaboration with the community, with input from local Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and civic associations, residents and businesses, and local community development corporations and nonprofit service providers. Facilities should be easily accessible and meet the needs of the community.

1709.12 Policy FNS-1.2.11: Facilities for Children, Youth, and Older Adults

Continue to develop additional parks, recreation centers, playgrounds, waterfront access, and other facilities and programs that meet the needs of children, youth, and older adults in the Far Northeast/Southeast community. Use the Age-Friendly DC Strategic Plan to help implement specific strategies for facilities that serve residents of all ages.

1709.13 Policy FNS-1.2.12: Kingman and Heritage Islands

Retain Kingman and Heritage Islands, located in the Anacostia River, as natural sanctuaries and urban wildlife refuges. Uses should be limited to an interpretive nature center, trails, public art, small vessel boating access (docks or launches), outdoor classrooms, passive open spaces, concerts and festivals, fishing, and pedestrian accessways. Coordinate efforts with federal agencies to improve pedestrian access to Kingman Island from both sides of the Anacostia River and continue high-quality public space design.

1709.14 Policy FNS-1.2.13: Improve Park and Recreation Services

Improve safety, security, and maintenance levels at all parks located along and around the Planning Area, recognizing that most of the parkland in and around the Planning Area is owned and operated by the NPS. A high level of coordination will be required between the District and federal governments to ensure that this land is managed in the best interest of the residents.

1709.15 Policy FNS-1.2.14: River Facilities for Children and Youth

Develop additional docks, educational centers, boat rentals, and other facilities that expand access to the Anacostia River for children and youth in the Far Northeast/Southeast community.

1709.16 Action FNS-1.2.A: Historic Resource Recognition

Document places of potential historic significance in Far Northeast and Southeast, such as the Antioch Baptist Church, the Shrimp Boat Restaurant, the Pennsylvania Avenue Commercial District between Minnesota and Alabama Avenues, the Minnesota/Benning Commercial District, and the Deanwood and Burrville neighborhoods. Identify appropriate preservation efforts for these places using community recommendations and the Ward 7 Heritage Guide prepared by the DC Historic Preservation Office as part of the process.

1709.17 Action FNS-1.2.B: Clean Up the Anacostia River Toxic Sediments

In collaboration with the NPS, implement hazardous material remediation in the Anacostia River to include Anacostia and Kenilworth Park and other contaminated adjacent land areas, such as Poplar Point and Kenilworth Landfill. The Anacostia River is a valuable District natural resource and priority should be given to restore years of damage.

1709.18 Action FNS-1.2.C: Marvin Gaye Park

Continually maintain and upgrade Marvin Gaye Park along Watts Branch, including the restored habitat and natural features, trails and bridges, meadows, and nature sanctuaries. Lighting, mowing, and other safety improvements for park visitors are crucial for the enjoyment of the park area. The continued coordination among agencies, such as the District Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and the NPS should continue to be strengthened.

1709.19 Action FNS-1.2.D: Fort Dupont Park Improvements

In collaboration with NPS, explore the feasibility of developing additional community-serving recreational facilities at Fort Dupont Park, including indoor swimming and tennis facilities, equestrian facilities, and an upgraded outdoor theater.

1709.20 Action FNS-1.2.E: Anacostia Park and Fort Circle Parks

Enhance existing pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle access to Anacostia Park and the Fort Circle Parks through community signage along adjacent commercial corridors. Create Anacostia Park workout/walking trails similar to those in Rock Creek Park.

1709.21 Action FNS-1.2.F: John Philip Sousa Bridge

Enhance the beauty of the John Philip Sousa Bridge, continuing along Pennsylvania Avenue across the Anacostia River through lighting, artwork, and other strategies befitting one of the great streets in America. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle traffic between the Capitol Hill and Pennsylvania Avenue Southeast communities to use retail and community attractions for the mutual benefit of both communities.

1709.22 Action FNS-1.2.G: Connect to the Anacostia River

Connect the neighborhoods of the Far Northeast and Southeast Area to the Anacostia River, particularly through the redevelopment of Anacostia Park, implementation of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI), and trail improvements. Climate Ready DC has identified areas along the Anacostia River, such as Mayfair, Kenilworth, Eastland Gardens, and Parkside, as Priority Planning Areas. An interdisciplinary approach will showcase how resilience to climate crises can be achieved.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1710** FNS-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a1710 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1710}

1710.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified eight areas in Far Northeast and Southeast as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements. These eight areas are as follows:

Minnesota/Benning Business District;

Deanwood;

Capitol View/Capitol Gateway/Northeast Boundary;

Benning Road Metro Station Area;

Marshall Heights/Benning Ridge;

Pennsylvania Avenue SE;

Skyland; and

Kenilworth-Parkside.

1710.2 Figure 17.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Far Northeast and Southeast

Within Far Northeast and Southeast

2.1

Minnesota/Benning Business District;

2.2

Deanwood;

2.3

Capitol View/Capitol Gateway/Northeast Boundary;

2.4

Benning Road Metro Station Area;

2.5

Marshall Heights/Benning Ridge;

2.6

Pennsylvania Avenue SE;

2.7

Skyland; and

2.8

Kenilworth-Parkside. 1710.1

Adjacent to Far Northeast and Southeast

Reservation 13/RFK Stadium Area

Pennsylvania Avenue Corridor

Barry Farm/Hillsdale/Fort Stanton

1710.3 Map 17.1: Far Northeast and Southeast Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 1711** FNS-2.1 MINNESOTA/BENNING BUSINESS DISTRICT {#sec-10-a1711 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1711}

1711.1 The Minnesota/Benning Business District includes the Minnesota Avenue Metro station and the shopping district to the south, extending along both sides of Minnesota Avenue to East Capitol Street. Sometimes referred to as Downtown Ward 7, it includes the 150,000 square foot East River Park Shopping Center, the Senator Square Shopping Center (anchored by the former Senator Theater) where redevelopment plans are being vetted, and a variety of small retail and service businesses serving Far Northeast and Southeast. While this area functions as an important community shopping district, some of its properties are underused and consist of empty parking lots, open storage, and undeveloped land. The shopping district itself lacks the variety of retail stores needed to serve the community. Another challenge the shopping district faces is the lack of high-quality design, confusing access and parking, and—with the exception of the historic Senator Theater—a lack of distinctive facades and storefronts. A Small Area Plan for the Benning Road corridor was completed in early 2008 and approved by the D.C. Council in July 2008. The Benning Road corridor Redevelopment Framework Plan gives a clear outline for how development can and should happen on Benning Road and in Downtown Ward 7. The study area begins at the starburst intersection, where Florida Avenue, Bladensburg Road Maryland Avenue, H Street and Benning Road meet, and continues along Benning Road to the Maryland border at Southern Avenue. The Planning Area passes through Wards 5, 6, and 7. Opportunity Redevelopment Sites, totaling 1,492,506 square feet along the corridor, have been identified within four subareas.

1711.2 The Small Area Plan includes an implementation matrix, which contains recommendations, agency leads, funding needs, and potential time frames for each subarea. Additionally, the Small Area Plan provides a development framework for the Benning Road corridor and strategies to leverage community assets and public investment to bring desired housing, retail, and transit choices. The Small Area Plan recommends strategies for how District government agencies working in cooperation with community stakeholders can begin to address a variety of themes, such as housing, shopping, business parks, open space, cultural assets, community health and safety, transportation and infrastructure, urban design, and the public realm.

1711.3 A complex of office buildings, including a four-story Metro parking garage and a new headquarters for DOES and the Department of Human Services, was completed in 2009. The development also includes new commercial office and retail space. Additionally, the Park 7 Apartment complex, now open and thriving, is a six story, mixed-use development with 376 apartment units and 20,000 square feet of ground-level retail space. These developments have been a catalyst for revitalization in Downtown Ward 7, bringing new revenue and a larger customer base to the adjacent shopping area. Complementary uses, such as a civic space/urban plaza, public art, and cultural facilities, should be strongly encouraged, and additional infill development should be supported on vacant lots and underused land to the south and east.

1711.4 The Park 7 Apartments project is a newly constructed apartment building. The completed project is a six-story, mixed-use development with 376 apartment units and 20,000 square feet of ground-level retail space. Any additional development in this area should maximize Metro access while taking care to provide appropriate buffers and transitions to adjacent uses.

1711.5 Policy FNS-2.1.1: Minnesota/Benning Revitalization

Support revitalization and further development of the area around the Minnesota Avenue Metro station, including the adjacent business district to the south along Minnesota Avenue. Upgrade and expand existing businesses in this area and encourage new small business development, educational facilities, healthy food retail, green spaces, and community-based human services, such as job training, health care, and child-care facilities. Any new public facility or private development in this area should contribute to its image as an attractive and vibrant community hub and should be responsive to the needs of surrounding neighborhoods.

1711.6 Policy FNS-2.1.2: Shopping Center Improvements

Improve the East River Park and Senator Square shopping areas at Minnesota Avenue and Benning Road as vibrant shopping areas. This area should function as a single, cohesive, walkable business and mixed-use district rather than a series of disconnected, auto-centric shopping centers.

1711.7 Policy FNS-2.1.3: Minnesota Avenue Station Area Mixed-Use Development

Encourage additional mixed-use, mixed-income development, including medium-density, multi-family housing around the Minnesota Avenue Metro station, recognizing the opportunity for transit-oriented development that boosts neighborhood businesses, reduces the need for auto commuting, and enhances the quality of the pedestrian environment along Minnesota Avenue.

1711.8 Action FNS-2.1.A: Financial Assistance for Small Businesses

Target the Senator Square and East River Park Shopping centers for District financial assistance, grants, and loans for façade improvements and small business development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1712** FNS-2.2 DEANWOOD {#sec-10-a1712 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1712}

1712.1 Deanwood is one of Far Northeast and Southeast’s oldest communities; much of its housing stock dates from the early 20th century. Several well-known Black architects, including W. Sidney Pittman and Howard D. Woodson, and many skilled local craftsmen designed and built many of its homes. The neighborhood was once home to Nannie Helen Burroughs, an early civil rights leader and the founder of the National Training School for Women and Girls, an independent boarding school for educated Black women founded in 1909 and located on 50th Street NE. From 1921 to 1940, Deanwood was also home to Suburban Gardens (50th and Hayes Streets NE), a Black-owned amusement park that served thousands of Black residents during a time of racial segregation.

1712.2 Deanwood’s relatively low-density, small wood-frame and brick homes, and dense tree cover give it a small-town character that is unique in Washington, DC. At the same time, there are hundreds of vacant single-family lots in the community, creating the potential for future infill housing on many blocks. Some of the vacant properties were underused and caused problems in the past, attracting crime and dumping. Non-conforming uses further challenge neighborhood integrity and environmental quality. Progress is being made though: an illegal trash transfer station was decommissioned and has since been redeveloped into a residential development. Deanwood is a focal neighborhood in the District’s Vacant to Vibrant Program, whereby vacant properties are auctioned off to provide moderate-income housing; participants in the District’s Certified Business Enterprise (CBE) Program bid on contracts to turn-key vacant sites into moderate-income housing, and a tiny home demonstration project was launched.

1712.3 While new housing is encouraged in the Deanwood and adjacent Burrville neighborhoods, density and design should complement prevailing community character. Rehabilitation of existing housing is also strongly encouraged, as much of Deanwood has experienced disinvestment. The neighborhood’s main commercial streets—Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue, Sherriff Road, and Division Avenue—have strong potential for infill and revitalization. The intersection of these two streets in particular should be strengthened as a neighborhood hub, with new retail and service businesses strongly encouraged.

1712.4 Deanwood also experiences land use and transportation conflicts, particularly on its western edge along Kenilworth Avenue. An industrial area along the CSX line provides jobs and services but also creates noise and truck traffic and has contributed to building vacancies. Improved buffering of this area from the adjacent neighborhood and additional development around the Deanwood Metro station can reduce future conflicts while improving overall community appearance.

1712.5 In November 2005, the District, in collaboration with the residents of the Lincoln Heights neighborhood, initiated a process to plan for and implement the revitalization of the DC Housing Authority’s (DCHA) Lincoln Heights property and the surrounding neighborhood. Compatible with the New Communities Initiative (NCI), the goal of this effort was to transform the affordable housing development and its neighborhood into a mixed-income, mixed-use community. In this new community, residents will have access to high-quality housing options, affordable at all income levels, and human services necessary to help prepare them to take advantage of the upcoming economic opportunities and changes. NCI’s goal is to strengthen both the physical and social infrastructure of neighborhoods experiencing violent crime, poverty, and other social challenges.

1712.6 In early 2006, OP, in conjunction with the office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) and the District Department of Transportation (DDOT), initiated a planning process to create the Deanwood/Great Streets—Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue and Minnesota Avenue Strategic Development Plan. The primary purpose of the Strategic Development Plan was to provide clear policy direction for land use and development within Deanwood and along its major corridors. The study area is bounded by Eastern Avenue to the northeast, 55th Street NE to the east, Marvin Gaye Park to the south, and Kenilworth Avenue/CSX railway to the west.

1712.7 The Deanwood Strategic Development Plan was created as a complementary piece to the District’s Comprehensive Plan and approved by D.C. Council in July 2008. The Strategic Development Plan combines community aspirations with professional research and analysis to set a framework for how Deanwood could improve over 10 years. The Strategic Development Plan provides an implementation framework for public and private investment in targeted areas resulting in neighborhood stabilization and revitalization. A robust community engagement process, which was an integral part of the planning process, led to a vision for Deanwood. This vision called for strengthening the Deanwood neighborhood as a historically established, self-reliant, self-sufficient, and close-knit community. The Strategic Development Plan identifies the future of Deanwood as the greenest neighborhood in the District with a better, safer, and responsible future.

1712.8 Five Focus Nodes were identified in the Strategic Development Plan, including three gateways. The Focus Nodes are Minnesota Avenue/Downtown Ward 7, Nannie Helen Burroughs Gateway, Deanwood Metro station, Sheriff Road/Eastern Avenue Gateway, and Dix/Seat Pleasant Gateway.

1712.9 After formulating the overall vision for the Comprehensive Plan, six goals were established to direct future growth in Deanwood. These goals are to live, worship, shop, work, learn, and play, all within a revitalized Planning Area. Maximizing neighborhood connectivity and providing multimodal transportation options was also set as an additional goal.

1712.10 Policy FNS-2.2.1: Deanwood’s Residential Character

Strongly encourage infill development on vacant lots in the Deanwood community. Where designated on the Future Land Use Map, development should respect and perpetuate the low-density, single-family character of the neighborhood, with new one-, two-, three-, and four-bedroom family homes that complement existing architectural traditions and community character.

1712.11 Policy FNS-2.2.2: Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue

Focus on neighborhood-serving commercial development, such as the comprehensively planned Deanwood Town Center in Deanwood along the Nannie Helen Burroughs Corridor, with the intersection of Division and Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenues restored as a community hub. Convert low-density mixed-use zones into higher density zones.

1712.12 Policy FNS-2.2.3: Kenilworth Industrial Area at Deanwood’s Western Border

Upgrade and expand the commercial and industrial area along Kenilworth Avenue, particularly the Kenilworth Industrial Park, and provide for additional employment in this industrial corridor. Improve the appearance of this area through design standards, building maintenance, public space, code enforcement, and street improvements. Encourage local businesses and entrepreneurs to use the business incubator in this corridor to create increased job opportunities for area residents. Encourage collaboration between local businesses, DOES, and other vocational training organizations to create effective job training programs.

1712.13 Policy FNS-2.2.4: Deanwood Metro Station

Provide for additional mixed-use development consisting of medium-density housing and low-density neighborhood commercial uses in the vicinity of the Deanwood Metro station and along Kenilworth Avenue NE. Appropriate transitions should be provided between new development and the adjacent residential areas.

1712.14 Policy FNS-2.2.5: Neighborhood-Serving Commercial Uses

Encourage the development of a variety of neighborhood-serving commercial uses along Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue, Sherriff Road, and Minnesota Avenue to create and invest into community-owned small businesses, adding and creating jobs for District residents and establish retail and service uses that support the surrounding residential community. Commercial uses in these locations should provide infrastructure that is attractive to drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists; supply adequate on-site parking and access to public transit, and especially busses; and create an active street environment that helps to reinvigorate the commercial corridors. Medium-density development is appropriate, particularly near the intersection of Nannie Helen Burroughs and Minnesota Avenues.

1712.15 Action FNS-2.2.A: Division and Nannie Helen Burroughs Commercial Development

Explore the option of acquiring underused land for commercial development at the intersection of Division and Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenues NE.

1712.16 Action FNS-2.2.B: Minnesota Avenue Extension

Extend Minnesota Avenue from Sheriff Road to Meade Street NE to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to the Deanwood Metro station and surrounding public space.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1713** FNS-2.3 CAPITOL VIEW/CAPITOL GATEWAY ESTATES/NORTHEAST BOUNDARY {#sec-10-a1713 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1713}

1713.1 Capitol View and Northeast Boundary are the easternmost neighborhoods in Washington, DC. At the heart of the community, Capitol Gateway Estates has been constructed on a 40-acre site that formerly housed the 1,100-unit East Capitol Dwellings affordable housing project. Working through the federal HOPE VI Program, East Capitol Dwellings was demolished in the early 2000s. The first phase of the revitalized project consisted of 151 units of housing for older adults and opened in 2005. An additional 550 units of market rate and affordable housing will be completed in the coming years. The complex also includes a new shopping district along East Capitol Street. East Capitol Street is an important transportation corridor for commuters between Maryland and the District. The neighborhood today is primarily residential, with a combination of semi-detached and single-family homes. The area has commercial activity along East Capitol Street at 53rd Street SE, on Dix Street NE, and at the corner of Central Avenue SE and Southern Avenue.

1713.2 The Capitol Gateway development project can help drive economic growth, improve residents’ access to basic amenities, and attract visitors and commuters traveling along East Capitol Street. Vacant sites in the immediate vicinity can support infill housing, with moderate densities on the blocks closest to the Capitol Heights Metro station (across the state line in Maryland) and lower densities elsewhere. A few blocks to the north, the commercial area along Division Avenue, as well as Dix Street, can support infill commercial and residential development, providing needed services to the adjacent Northeast Boundary neighborhood.

1713.3 Improvements to Marvin Gaye Park (Watts Branch) and public facilities, such as Woodson High School, are an important part of revitalizing the Capitol View community. The park, in particular, can become a stronger source of community pride and an important link to new recreational areas along the Anacostia River. The DC Silver Jackets is a cross-disciplinary, interagency team consisting of federal, District, and regional agencies. By targeting neighborhoods along the Watts Branch Tributary, including Deanwood, strategies are being created and tested by the Silver Jackets to improve the resilience of those areas in the aftermath of flooding.

1713.4 Policy FNS-2.3.1: Northeast Boundary Neighborhood

Leverage the development of Capitol Gateway Estates to achieve additional reinvestment in the Northeast Boundary neighborhood, particularly the rehabilitation of existing housing and the development of new mixed-income family housing on vacant lots.

1713.5 Policy FNS-2.3.2: 61st and Dix Streets NE

Improve the commercial area along Dix Street NE between 61st Street and Eastern Avenue NE, encouraging new retail businesses and services that benefit the adjacent community.

1713.6 Policy FNS-2.3.3: Development as a Catalyst for Marvin Gaye Park

Design development along Marvin Gaye Park (Watts Branch) in a manner that improves park visibility, access, appearance, and security. The park should be treated as the front door to the adjacent neighborhood and a valued amenity for development along its perimeter.

1713.7 Policy FNS-2.3.4: Public Access to Amenities

Promote the improvement of and public access to amenities including recreation centers, schools, urban farms, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.

1713.8 Policy FNS-2.3.5: Improved Access to Amenities

Promote improvement of and public access to amenities including recreation centers, schools, urban farms, and pedestrian and bicycle trails.

1713.9 Action FNS-2.3.A: Land Acquisition at 61st and Dix Streets NE

Continue to work with community development organizations in the acquisition of vacant lots at 61st and Dix Streets NE and their work with locals in providing housing and commercial uses and services.

1713.10 Action FNS-2.3.B: Lincoln Heights New Community

Continue to pursue redevelopment of Lincoln Heights as a new community, replacing the existing public housing development with new mixed-income housing, including an equivalent number of affordable units and additional market rate units.

1713.11 Action FNS-2.3.C: Neighborhood-Serving Retail

Promote a wider variety of neighborhood-serving retail in this area. Focus on targeted growth and diversity of retail in new and existing commercial areas on East Capitol Street, Central Avenue, Dix Street NE, and Eastern Avenue.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1714** FNS-2.4 BENNING ROAD METRO STATION AREA {#sec-10-a1714 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1714}

1714.1 In 2008, OP, in conjunction with residents and stakeholders along the Benning Road corridor, completed a Small Area Plan for Benning Road in the form of the Benning Road Corridor Redevelopment Framework. Adopted by the D.C. Council in July 2008, this framework gives a clear and concise outline for how development can and should happen on Benning Road. The Benning Road Metro station is located at the corner of Benning Road and East Capitol Street and was included in this plan. The station, which is served by Metro’s Blue Line, opened in 1980 and is among the least used rail stations based on the volume of passenger traffic in the Metro system. Surrounding land uses include auto-oriented commercial businesses, including the Benco Shopping Center and the newly renovated Shrimp Boat restaurant, single-family homes and duplexes, and small two- and three-story apartment buildings. In 2018, the nonprofit organization So Others Might Eat (SOME) completed construction of a 320,000 square foot, mixed-use building adjacent to the Metro station, which provides housing for 200 low-income families, a medical center, office space for SOME’s after-school programs, and job training.

1714.2 The Benning Road Metro station area should become a much more attractive community hub in the future that consists of pedestrian-oriented housing, retail, and recreational uses. Large-scale office buildings and surface parking lots should be discouraged here; rather, the site is most appropriate as a walkable neighborhood center with low-scale, moderate-density residential buildings containing ground floor retail, service, and similar uses. Amenities, such as plazas, public art, attractive facades, and pocket parks, should be provided as the area develops, and safe street crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists should be ensured. Special care should be taken to preserve the adjacent neighborhoods, improve the hazardous and confusing street intersections in the vicinity, and emphasize land uses and activities that benefit area residents.

1714.3 Policy FNS-2.4.1: Benning Road Station Area Development

Support development of the Benning Road Metro station area as a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use area, including moderate-density housing, retail, service uses, and public spaces and amenities that serve adjacent neighborhoods. Future development should recognize and provide appropriate, well-designed transitions to the low-density residential character of the adjacent neighborhoods.

1714.4 Action FNS-2.4.A: Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Extension

Coordinate with the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) on reconstruction to Benning Road. The Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Project will focus on two miles of Benning Road NE between Oklahoma Avenue NE and East Capitol Street, addressing critical needs for infrastructure improvements, bridge rehabilitation, safety enhancements, and an eastward extension of DC Streetcar transit service.

1714.5 Action FNS-2.4.B: Supportive Studies Along the Benning Road Corridor

Prepare appropriate planning and development studies to build upon and update the 2008 Small Area Plan for the Benning Road corridor to support enhanced physical connections and improved economic and community development conditions at the Minnesota and Benning Road Metro stations and sites proposed for more intense mixed-use development along Benning Road, including Fletcher Johnson. Conduct a community-based planning study for the redevelopment of Fletcher Johnson that reinforces existing planning efforts by the Fletcher Johnson Task Force.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1715** FNS-2.5 MARSHALL HEIGHTS/BENNING RIDGE {#sec-10-a1715 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1715}

1715.1 The Marshall Heights/Benning Ridge area is located south of East Capitol Street and east of the Fort Dupont Park. The area includes a mix of single-family and semi-detached homes and apartments and has a few hundred scattered vacant lots. Throughout the area, there are opportunities for infill development. Although Marshall Heights and Benning Ridge faced disinvestment and economic challenges during the late 20th century, both neighborhoods are rebounding. To accommodate this growth, neighborhood-serving amenities and retail, mixed-income housing, opportunities for arts and culture, and open space should be encouraged.

1715.2 Several developments have recently been completed or are planned. Hilltop Terrace, Carver Terrace Apartments, and JW King Senior Center have added more than 200 new homes along Benning Road and East Capitol Street. Just to the north, the former Eastgate Gardens affordable housing complex, now known as Glenncrest, has been redeveloped into 269 new homes—including housing for older adults, public housing, and market-rate family housing. As opportunities arise, adaptive reuse, compatible design, and interpretive signage or public art should be incorporated into future infill development. Continued residential infill and rehabilitation is strongly encouraged, taking care to develop at densities that are appropriate to neighborhood character. Improvement of retail centers, including the small shopping centers at Benning Road and H Street NE and Benning Road between F and G Streets NE will also be pursued in order to upgrade existing businesses and provide needed services to the surrounding communities.

1715.3 Policy FNS-2.5.1: Marshall Heights Infill

Support the development of the many scattered vacant lots in the Marshall Heights community with new low-density residential development, especially single- and two-family homes. This will provide ownership opportunities for area residents and housing stock needed to attract families with children back to the Far Northeast and Southeast Area. Improve schools, parks, and other public services in Marshall Heights to meet the needs created by additional growth and attract families to the area.

1715.4 Action FNS-2.5.A: Eastgate Gardens

Develop Eastgate Gardens as a mixed-income community containing housing for older adults, affordable housing, homeownership opportunities, and a community arts center. As population increases here and elsewhere in Marshall Heights, pursue the refurbishing of shopping areas along Benning Road to better serve the surrounding community. The revitalization of neighborhood-serving retail and shopping districts along the Benning Road corridor should be encouraged.

1715.4a Text box: Fletcher-Johnson Campus

The Fletcher-Johnson Campus is positioned several blocks north of the Marshall Heights neighborhood, south of the Kipp DC Benning Campus, west of the DMV and Benco Shopping Center and east of the Maryland state line. Fletcher-Johnson closed in 2008, though portions of the building were previously leased to public charter schools, and the facility was last used as a swing space for HD Woodson High School during its modernization. The building has been vacant since 2011.

1715.4b The Deputy Mayor of Education (DME) previously released a request for offers (RFO) and evaluated offers for the school in 2014; however, no award was made. Prior to restarting the RFO process in 2017, DME confirmed that the Department of General Services (DGS) could not immediately identify other government use for Fletcher-Johnson in the near term. DGS officially surplused the property in 2019, making it available for disposition by DMPED.

1715.4c The site offers a unique opportunity for the District to reshape a long-languishing property into a benefit for residents and the District as a whole. Previous public input into the redevelopment plan has been extensive and widespread, resulting in various community preferences for the site.

1715.4d DMPED issued a request for proposals (RFP) for Fletcher-Johnson.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1716** FNS-2.6 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR {#sec-10-a1716 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1716}

1716.1 Pennsylvania Avenue SE is one of the busiest arterials in Washington, DC, carrying more than 96,000 vehicles a day across the Sousa Bridge and 53,000 vehicles per day between I-295 and Minnesota and Branch Avenues. Established neighborhoods, such as Fairlawn, Randle Highlands, and Twining surround this mixed-use corridor. The population density here provides an attractive market for the types of amenities that residents are looking for, including hotels, restaurants, and national retailers. In addition, mixed-income housing units that combine residential and retail space would be valuable commodities to residents moving to the area.

1716.2 In January 2008, OP completed the Pennsylvania Avenue SE Corridor Land Development Plan, which was approved by the DC in July 2008. As a result of this planning process, which included extensive community engagement, development options were articulated to guide future decisions for key sites along the corridor determined to have potential to serve as catalysts for corridor-wide revitalization.

1716.3 The 2.3-mile Planning Area included all properties fronting Pennsylvania Avenue SE from Independence Avenue SE eastward to Southern Avenue. The District designated Pennsylvania Avenue SE a major corridor as part of the Great Streets Initiative in 2006, with the intent of spurring redevelopment and enhancing neighborhood livability.

1716.4 Pennsylvania Avenue SE is an important transportation corridor in the District, classified by DDOT as a principal arterial road. It is crossed by collector, local, and minor arterial roads and the Anacostia Freeway on the east side of the Anacostia River and the Southeast Freeway on the west side of the river. The Pennsylvania Avenue Advisory Committee was established to include councilmembers, ANC commissioners, civic associations, residents, property owners, and business owners. An analysis of existing conditions related to land use and zoning, urban design, the real estate market, and public participation resulted in the identification of key redevelopment opportunity sites. Through the study process, eight sites were identified as having the highest potential for redevelopment and revitalization; five of these are underserved communities in the Far Northeast Southeast Area Element. The final plan activated a detailed implementation strategy and includes polices to guide redevelopment along the corridor.

1716.5 The Avenue is one of America’s Main Streets and is bordered by moderate-income neighborhoods with residents who are civically engaged. It provides amenities to a community of rolling hills, manicured lawns, red-brick colonials, ramblers, American Craftsman bungalows, Mid-Atlantic Colonial Revival, and Tudor Revival homes. The area is convenient to the Southeast-Southwest Freeway and is also notable for its streets lined with oak, maple, and dogwood trees. The area has an altitude higher than most of Washington, DC. The surrounding communities—Penn Branch, Hillcrest, Dupont Park, Fort Dupont Park, Fairlawn, Twining, Randle Highlands, Fort Davis, and Fairfax Village—once considered suburbs, are conveniently located close to Capitol Hill and about 15 minutes from the U.S. Capitol. The combination of numerous mature trees, parks, green spaces, and large lots makes these neighborhoods desirable. Metrobus service provides direct transportation to and from downtown, as well as the Potomac Avenue and Naylor Road Metro Stations.

1716.6 The future of Pennsylvania Avenue has profound effects on the adjacent neighborhoods of Fairlawn, Twining, Dupont Park, Penn Branch, Hillcrest, Fort Davis, and Fairfax Village. Its designation by the District as an official Great Street speaks both to its historic reputation as America’s Main Street and its capacity to shape the appearance and impression of the surrounding community. Particular emphasis should be placed on upgrading the shopping area between Fairlawn Avenue and 28th Street SE. This corridor, initially developed as a walkable shopping street, experiences a lack of continuity, a lack of retail choices, many vacant storefronts, parking management issues, and traffic patterns that are dangerous for pedestrians.

1716.7 Policy FNS-2.6.1: Pennsylvania Avenue SE Great Street

Plan the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor in a manner that reduces traffic effects on adjacent neighborhoods, transforms its role as a Far Northeast and Southeast commercial center, and restores its ceremonial importance as a principal gateway to and from the nation’s capital.

1716.8 Policy FNS-2.6.2: Neighborhood Shopping Improvements

Promote a wider variety and better mix of neighborhood-serving retail shops. Focus on providing targeted growth to the small pockets of new and existing commercial properties along the Pennsylvania Avenue SE Corridor.

1716.9 Policy FNS-2.6.3: Transportation and Infrastructure

Implement the Great Streets roadwork and streetscaping on Pennsylvania Avenue in Wards 7 and 8. Encourage community groups in Wards 7 and 8 to request from DDOT similar streetscape improvements. Explore rapid bus service along the corridor.

1716.10 Policy FNS-2.6.4: Economic Development

Create a marketing strategy to attract new retailers to vacant spaces. Conduct analysis of technical assistance needs of existing businesses. Use commercial façade improvement grant programs to invest in more attractive storefronts where buildings are not expected to be redeveloped.

1716.11 Policy FNS-2.6.6: Land Use

Zoning along Pennsylvania Avenue SE should support the types of redevelopment outlined in the Pennsylvania Avenue SE Corridor Land Development Plan.

1716.12 Policy FNS-2.6.7: Mixed-Use and Affordable Housing

Use District and federal resources to support a variety of mixed-income housing opportunities near key redevelopment sites in Wards 7 and 8. Create attractive, mixed-use, retail-anchored residential sites and affordable housing options along the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor. Some neighborhoods with great potential include Fairlawn, Randle Highlands, and Twining, which surround the mixed-use corridor identified along Pennsylvania and Minnesota Avenues SE. In addition, mixed-income housing units that combine residential and retail space would be valuable commodities to residents. Invest in the development of mixed-use housing and retail at these locations: 2300-3100 block of Pennsylvania Avenue SE, 2200-2300 block of Minnesota Avenue SE, and 2900 block of Minnesota Avenue SE.

1716.13 Policy FNS-2.6.8: Physical Improvements

Continue to improve the infrastructure and physical appearance of the Pennsylvania Avenue Southeast corridor as a way to enhance its market perception and attract investors, visitors, shoppers, residents, and new retail businesses and services that benefit the adjacent community and attract pass-through consumer shoppers traveling to and from I-295.

1716.14 Action FNS-2.6.A: Pennsylvania Avenue SE Transportation Study

Implement the remaining recommendations of the Pennsylvania Avenue SE Transportation Study at the Twining roundabout to improve community access and circulation. These recommendations include streetscape, signage, and parking improvements, speed controls, signal timing changes, pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements, travel lane and pavement marking adjustments, traffic calming measures to avoid cut-through traffic on local side streets, and changes to the I-295/Pennsylvania Avenue interchange.

1716.15 Action FNS-2.6.B: Great Street Improvements

Implement the Great Street Plan to beautify Pennsylvania Avenue SE, maintaining the width of the street, landscaping the avenue from the Sousa Bridge to the Maryland border, and taking other steps to manage traffic flow and avoid negative effects on and cut-through traffic in adjacent neighborhoods.

1716.16 Action FNS-2.6.C: Directing Growth

Direct the growth along the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor. Mixed-use development combining ground floor retail and upper-story residential uses should be supported in this area, along with streetscape improvements that enhance visual and urban design qualities and pedestrian, bus, and automobile circulation. As in all parts of the District, the scale of development should be sensitive to adjacent uses and reflect the capacity of roads, infrastructure, and services to absorb additional growth. In addition, improvements should contribute to and maintain the historic character of the neighborhood. Make use of historic setbacks to bring retail frontage closer to Pennsylvania Avenue and maximize opportunities for rear parking and access (thus easing traffic congestion and flow).

1716.17 Action FNS-2.6.D: Physical Improvements

Improve the infrastructure and physical appearance of the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor as a way to enhance its market perception and attract investors, visitors, shoppers, residents, new retail businesses, and services that benefit the adjacent community and attract pass-through consumer shoppers traveling to/from the District on I-295.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1717** FNS-2.7 SKYLAND {#sec-10-a1717 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1717}

1717.1 The Skyland Shopping Center site covers 16 acres at the intersection of Naylor Road, Good Hope Road, and Alabama Avenue SE. When it was initially developed in the 1940s, the 170,000-square-foot complex of free-standing retail buildings was one of the first auto-oriented shopping centers in Washington, DC. Along with the adjacent 95,000-square-foot Good Hope Marketplace, it was the principal commercial center serving the southern part of Far Northeast and Southeast. Plans to renovate and modernize Skyland have been evolving for many years. Phase 1 of the highly anticipated mixed-use redevelopment of the center is underway. This phase will include 240 units of residential housing, as well as a medium-scale grocery store. The site will ultimately be redeveloped as a Town Center, with more than 275,000 square feet of leasable space being pursued by DMPED. An additional anchor is being sought to secure the retail portion of the site.

1717.2 Reinvestment in Skyland is an important part of the District’s efforts to provide better shopping options for underserved communities, reduce the loss of retail dollars to the suburbs, and make Wards 7 and 8 more attractive to existing and future residents. To be most effective, planned improvements should be a part of a broader strategy to enhance the Alabama/Good Hope area as a focal point for surrounding neighborhoods, such as Hillcrest and Fairlawn, and to upgrade the Naylor Road corridor as a gateway to Far Northeast and Southeast and Historic Anacostia.

1717.3 Action FNS-2.7.A: Skyland Redevelopment

Revitalize Skyland Shopping Center as an essential, dynamic community-scale retail center. Together with the Good Hope Marketplace, these two centers should function as the primary business and employment district for adjacent neighborhoods, providing a diverse array of quality goods and services for area residents.

1717.4 Action FNS-2.7.B: Skyland Small Business Assistance

Continue to work with the District Department for Local and Small Business Development (DSLBD) to assist small business and private enterprise in the Skyland area.

1717.5 Action FNS-2.7.C: Fort Baker Drive Buffering

Work with property owners to develop and maintain a suitable visual, sound, and security buffer between Skyland Shopping Center and the adjacent residential areas along Fort Baker Drive.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1718** FNS-2.8 KENILWORTH-PARKSIDE {#sec-10-a1718 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1718}

1718.1 The upper reaches of the Anacostia River’s eastern shore include the communities of Kenilworth-Parkside, Mayfair Mansions, and Eastland Gardens. This area also includes Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens Park, the Kenilworth-Parkside Recreation Area, and wetlands and open spaces managed by NPS. The Pepco Benning Service Center and the Benning Road Waste Transfer Station are located adjacent to this area on the north side of Benning Road NE.

1718.2 Kenilworth-Parkside was initially developed as low-income housing in the 1940s. During the 1980s, the 464-unit public housing complex was touted by the federal government as a success story after property management responsibilities were transferred to the local tenant organization. Crime dropped dramatically, and the quality of life visibly improved. The area’s reputation for innovative housing policy continued through the 1990s. The public housing was sold and renovated and a neotraditional town was conceived on a 26-acre vacant site between Kenilworth and the Pepco Benning Service Center. In addition to the Grove at Parkside, which yielded 186 residential units, about 226 affordable townhomes were constructed between 2010 and 2017. More development is expected to include up to 1,500 mixed-income multi-family units, 750,000 square feet of office space, and 50,000 square feet of retail.

1718.3 Over the next decade, build-out of the remaining areas in Kenilworth- Parkside is expected. Master plans call for some 1,500 units of new medium- to high-density housing, 250,000 to 500,000 square feet of office space, and 30,000 square feet of retail space in Parkside. Kenilworth Courts, as a planned community, is expected to yield 530 residential units of affordable housing, including 110 replacement units and approximately 4,500 square feet of commercial space. A reconstructed pedestrian bridge will connect this area to the Minnesota Avenue Metro station, making the area transit accessible for new residents and employees. The Anacostia Riverwalk Trail serves as the backbone of the Anacostia waterfront, connecting residents, visitors, and communities to the river. The trail provides scenic travel for pedestrians, bicyclists, and 16 communities, including Kenilworth, Eastland Gardens, Mayfair, and Parkside, providing much-needed access to the waterfront. Currently, just over 17 miles of the trail have been completed, providing access from Bladensburg, Maryland, to historic Navy Yard, RFK Stadium, Anacostia, and the Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens. Once completed, the 20-mile trail will traverse multiple jurisdictions, linking Colmar Manor in Maryland to the north, through Washington, DC to its southern terminus at Mount Vernon in Virginia.

1718.4 In addition to the Kenilworth-Parkside pedestrian bridge, the creation of the two-mile-long Marvin Gaye Park along Watts Branch, development of the Minnesota Avenue government center, and designation of Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue as a Great Street should all help to unite the community on both sides of the I-295 freeway. The meadows and woodland garden of Marvin Gaye Park advance resilience by providing for natural water filters and mitigating runoff, and dozens of youths are trained through the Summer Youth Employment Program in upkeep and beautification. To further improve the connectivity between the Kenilworth-Parkside communities, DDOT is finalizing a Livability Study, which will provide recommendations for improvements to public space, safety, and access for all users of the transportation system.

1718.5 Policy FNS-2.8.1: Kenilworth-Parkside Open Space Improvements

Support federal efforts to improve and restore the Kenilworth Park and the Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens. Engage with federal efforts to remediate contamination in Kenilworth Park and coordinate with federal agencies to guide the construction of future District-managed park amenities in Kenilworth Park. Additionally, implement Resilient DC strategies here that will strengthen the infrastructure and educate the community on the effects of climate change. Design improvements to Kenilworth Park that enhance ecology and increase walking and biking access to Kenilworth Park from adjacent neighborhoods. Connect Kenilworth Park to nearby parkland, including the U.S. National Arboretum, through riverfront trail and bridge projects. Establish state-of-the-art recreation facilities that promote both land-based and water-based recreation.

1718.6 Policy FNS-2.8.2: Kenilworth-Parkside Transit-Oriented Development

Support mixed-use, mixed-income residential, retail, and office development on the remaining vacant properties in the Kenilworth-Parkside neighborhood. Take advantage of this area’s proximity to the Minnesota Avenue Metro station and its relative distance from the low-density, single-family neighborhoods to the east to accommodate medium to high-density housing that is well connected to transit and the adjacent waterfront open space.

1718.7 Policy FNS-2.8.3: Density Transitions at Parkside

Provide appropriate height and scale transitions between new higher-density development in the Kenilworth-Parkside neighborhood and the established moderate-density townhomes and apartments in the vicinity. Buildings with greater heights should generally be sited along Kenilworth Avenue and Foote Street and step down in intensity moving west toward the river.

1718.8 Policy FNS-2.8.4: Buffering Around Parkside

Maintain sufficient buffering, screening, and separation between new development at Kenilworth-Parkside and the adjacent Pepco Benning Service Center and waste transfer station.

1718.9 Policy FNS-2.8.5: Parkside Access Improvements

Full bidirectional, multimodal connectivity should be established between Kenilworth-Parkside and Benning Road. Multimodal access, both pedestrian and vehicular, should be provided to the Parkside neighborhood from Benning Road, especially in case of evacuation and for emergency vehicles. A Livability Study is being conducted by DDOT to assess issues related to multimodal connectivity, directional signage, vehicular circulation, and pedestrian safety.

1718.10 Policy FNS-2.8.6: Kenilworth Park Resilience Strategy

The District, through its membership in a worldwide initiative has identified Kenilworth Park as one of two pilot locations in Washington, DC, for a place-based effort to showcase an interdisciplinary approach designed to mitigate the challenging effects of climate change and growth. Kenilworth Park and its surrounding neighborhoods are some of the most at-risk areas for flooding in the District. Designation as a pilot location will create a community-centered strategy, resulting in lowering the risk and negative effects of flooding.

1718.11 Action FNS-2.8.A: Buffer the Interface Between the I-295 Freeway

Buffer the effect of the I-295 Freeway/rail corridor upon adjacent residential uses, especially in the Deanwood, Eastland Gardens, Fairlawn, Kenilworth, Greenway, Parkside, River Terrace, and Twining neighborhoods. These improvements should buffer the neighborhoods from noise, odor, vibration, and other freeway impacts while also providing a more positive visual impression of the community from the highway itself.

1718.12 Action FNS-2.8.B: Improve Vehicular, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Access to the Kenilworth-Parkside Area

This should include improved horizontal clearance at the railroad crossings, safer pedestrian access ways, better signage, and enhancements to the Kenilworth Avenue interchanges. Full bidirectional, multimodal connectivity should be established between Kenilworth-Parkside and Benning Road.

1718.13 Action FNS-2.8.C: Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan

Implement the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan recommendations for Kenilworth-Parkside, including new gateways and or access points at the intersection of Benning Road and Kenilworth Avenue and at Watts Branch.

1718.14 Action FNS-2.8.D: Kenilworth Parkside Small Area Plan

Explore a Small Area Plan for the neighborhood between Kenilworth Avenue and the Anacostia River. The Small Area Plan would address key issues, such as economic development opportunities, community access, and anticipated resilience challenges.

### **10-A18** FAR SOUTHEAST/ SOUTHWEST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1800** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1800}

1800.1 The Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area encompasses 10.1 square miles east of the Anacostia Freeway and south of Good Hope Road SE/Naylor Road SE. The Planning Area includes neighborhoods such as Historic Anacostia, Congress Heights, Hillsdale, Woodland, Fort Stanton, Barry Farm, Bellevue, Washington Highlands, Douglas/Shipley Terrace, Garfield Heights, and Knox Hill/Buena Vista. Most of this area has historically been in Ward 8, but, prior to redistricting in 2002, the northern portion was in Ward 6. Planning Area boundaries are shown in the map to the left.

1800.2 Far Southeast/Southwest is a diverse community. It includes the 19th century row houses of Historic Anacostia and brand new communities like Henson Ridge and Wheeler Creek. Its housing ranges from single-family homes in neighborhoods like Congress Heights, to garden apartments in neighborhoods like Washington Highlands and Fort Stanton, to high-rise apartments such as the Vista at Wingate and Capitol Plaza II.

1800.3 The Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area is home to seven designated historic landmarks and districts. A designated landmark means the property is listed on the DC Inventory of Historic Sites and on the National Register of Historic Places. The Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) is the mayoral-appointed commission that designates District landmarks and historic districts, while the National Register is administered by the National Park Service (NPS) and lends a federal level of protection to historic sites. A couple of the historic landmarks in this Planning Area are the Frederick Douglass House at Cedar Hill, which was the residence of abolitionist champion Frederick Douglass, and the St. Elizabeths Hospital Campus, which is one of the country’s most renowned institutions for its treatment of behavioral health issues for more than 150 years. The Planning Area’s commercial areas range from a shopping center at Camp Simms to more traditional neighborhood centers along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, Good Hope Road SE, and South Capitol Street SE. The Planning Area also includes open spaces and natural areas like Oxon Run and Oxon Cove.

1800.4 Anacostia and the Far Southeast/Southwest neighborhoods that surround it have stayed strong through difficult times. Many moderate-income residents left the area in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, affecting the stability of the area’s neighborhoods. Between the 2000 Census and the 2013-2017 American Community Survey (ACS), population in this Planning Area increased by 16.3 percent, and the poverty rate declined from 38 percent to 37 percent. The crime and unemployment rates remain chronically high and are well above the District and regional averages. Residents must go outside their neighborhood to shop, enjoy a restaurant, and even find basic services like groceries.

1800.5 Today, the priorities laid out in 2006 are still relevant: safer streets, better schools, more jobs, and improved housing choices. The Comprehensive Plan reflects these priorities in its policies and maps. Poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, crime, and other issues must be addressed to improve the quality of life for residents in the Far Southeast/Southwest neighborhoods. While the Planning Area has experienced a significant amount of public and private investment over the last decade, social equity gaps in the District still need to be addressed to ensure that the benefits of the District’s economic and population resurgence are broadly shared. For revitalization to truly succeed, all residents must be given opportunities to advance.

1800.6 Additional planning efforts, such as the CHASE Action Agenda, have reinforced these priorities. The Congress Heights, Anacostia, and St. Elizabeths area— collectively called CHASE—is expected to see new housing, major redevelopment projects, and jobs and transportation infrastructure investments in the next five to 10 years. The CHASE Action Agenda takes steps to ensure that these changes bring meaningful economic opportunity to Ward 8 and its residents and businesses. It builds on unique assets in the area, such as historic neighborhood districts, new jobs at St. Elizabeths (East and West Campuses), and increased transportation options, and it prioritizes ways to develop community resources.

1800.7 The area’s social and economic needs affect its physical environment in many ways. They translate to a need for more facilities for workforce development and job placement like the American Job Center located on Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and the Infrastructure Academy on Pomeroy Road SE. Many government and nonprofit efforts have focused on employment, including workforce programs to prepare residents for opportunities that come with new development, such as construction jobs at St. Elizabeths Campus or jobs with new commercial and institutional tenants. New opportunities for local entrepreneurs are also needed – providing a chance to start a business, hire local residents, and provide needed services to the community.

1800.8 The strength of the District’s real estate market is already bringing a wave of change to Far Southeast/Southwest. Thousands of affordable housing units have been constructed or rehabilitated since 2000. The HOPE VI projects have created many first-time homeowners, including former public housing residents. Developments such as Monterrey Park, Livingston Apartments, Danbury Station, Royal Court, and Congress Park are just a few examples of the improved housing choices in the area.

1800.9 Investment in public facilities has been a catalyst for housing development in the area. To highlight just a sampling:

Bald Eagle Recreation Center received major upgrades in 2011;

Fort Greble Recreation Center is being transformed into a state-of-the-art, green, net-zero facility just as the new Ballou High School was in 2015;

Fort Stanton Recreation Center is the first LEED Silver Building in Ward 8; and

The former Ron Brown Middle School was transformed with the creation of the Ron Brown College Preparatory High School.

1800.10 Additionally, portions of the Planning Area have also been identified as a priority area for resilience planning because of their vulnerabilities to climate change and flood risk as identified in the Climate Ready DC Plan published in 2016. In particular, the areas near the Potomac River are at increased risk and contain some significant public infrastructure facilities, like Blue Plains. Both flooding and precautionary efforts to advance resilience would also affect nearby communities.

1800.11 The future of Far Southeast/Southwest depends on active community engagement. The continued involvement of groups such as Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Anacostia Economic Development Corporation, Far SW/SE Community Development Corporation, the United Planning Organization, and the Far SE Family Strengthening Collaborative can help revitalize the community. Moreover, groups such as the Congress Heights and Fort Stanton Civic Associations, the Frederick Douglass Community Improvement Council, the Anacostia Coordinating Council, the Ward 8 Business Council, along with emerging groups, such as the Anacostia Business Improvement District (BID) and Building Bridges Across the River, provide a community resource and are important voices in neighborhood and District-wide affairs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1801** HISTORY {#sec-10-a1801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1801}

1801.1 In 1662, the first land grant in the Washington area was made to George Thompson on land along the east bank of the Potomac River, extending from Blue Plains to what is now the St. Elizabeths Campus. The land was farmed as a tobacco plantation until 1862. In 1863, a portion of the tract was leased by the government as an army post called Camp Stoneman. The post became a resort after the Civil War, until it burned down in 1888. Other late 19th century uses in Far Southeast/Southwest included a racecourse, a one-room schoolhouse on what is now Congress Heights School, and dairy farms. St. Elizabeths Hospital was founded in 1852, growing into the largest federal behavioral health facility in the country by 1940; more than 7,000 residents lived there at its peak.

1801.2 Present-day Anacostia was established as Uniontown in 1854 as a bedroom community for Navy Yard workers. The neighborhood was a Whites-only community until abolitionist Fredrick Douglass purchased his home on Cedar Hill in 1877. Many of the original wood frame and brick homes, along with some of the original commercial structures along Good Hope Road SE and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE still remain today and are protected through their designation as a 25-block historic district.

1801.3 By the turn of the century, the expanding national capital began to spread east of the Anacostia River. A seawall was constructed to protect the Anacostia shoreline, and storm sewers were installed. In 1908, Washington Steel and Ordnance Company—best remembered as the steel plant—arrived at the foot of what is now Portland Street SE. The Army developed an airfield on the still rural land near the shoreline in 1917, with a ferry connection to Hains Point established a year later. The compound would eventually become Joint Base Anacostia- Bolling.

1801.4 Large farms still persisted through the 1920s and 30s. Winding roads follow the natural contours of the land and reflect the area’s development during a time when great suburban growth was occurring beyond District limits. The grid and diagonal road system that characterizes much of the rest of Washington, DC was not followed, resulting in a more organic pattern of development.

1801.5 The Second World War was a period of great change in Far Southeast/ Southwest. The population grew by over 200 percent during the 1940s, as neighborhoods like Bellevue and Washington Highlands were developed. The wartime growth of Bolling Field and the Naval Research Laboratory fueled demand for housing, with thousands of garden apartments constructed. One of the complexes developed during this period was Barry Farm. Once literally a farm, the site was part of a 375-acre tract established in 1867 to provide freed slaves with an opportunity to become homeowners.

1801.6 After the Second World War, apartments continued to be constructed. The arriving residents included many households displaced from urban renewal activities west of the Anacostia River. The influx of new residents was coupled with the closure of wartime industrial uses, such as the Navy armaments factory in Congress Heights. The combined effects resulted in a long period of economic and population decline, which started in the late 1950s and continued for four decades. By 2000, nearly one in six housing units in the Planning Area were vacant, and more than one in three residents lived in poverty.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1802** LAND USE {#sec-10-a1802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1802}

1802.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, and water bodies. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not to actual changes in land use.

1802.2 Excluding water, the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area comprises 6,481 acres, which represents about 6.8 percent of the District’s land area. Figure 18.1 indicates the land use mix in the area.

1802.3 Figure 18.1: Land Use Composition in Far Southeast/Southwest

1802.4 A large portion of the land within the Planning Area is publicly owned. Federal properties such as Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling make up about 12 percent of the total, and parks—most of which are also under federal control—constitute 13 percent of the total. Local public facilities, consisting primarily of Blue Plains, DC Village, and school campuses, make up 13 percent. Roads make up 16 percent of the total area, slightly less than they do in the nine other Planning Areas.

1802.5 Residential uses make up 16 percent of the total area, or about 1,057 acres. Of this amount, more than half consists of garden apartments, and about one-quarter consists of row houses and townhomes. Garden apartments predominate in Washington Highlands, Hillsdale, Barry Farm, Fort Stanton, Shipley Terrace, Douglass, and Knox Hill. Only about 137 acres in the Planning Area consist of single-family detached homes, mostly located in Bellevue and Congress Heights.

1802.6 The area has very little commercial and mixed uses. These uses make up one percent of the total area and consist primarily of a commercial spine extending along Good Hope Road SE, Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, and South Capitol Street SE. Good Hope Road SE/Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE form a traditional Main Street through Historic Anacostia, with many small storefronts and neighborhood businesses. Further south along this spine are neighborhood commercial centers at Malcolm X Avenue SE, Atlantic Avenue SE, and Southern Avenue SE. Small shopping centers and convenience stores are scattered elsewhere in the Planning Area.

1802.7 Far Southeast/Southwest includes about 121 acres of vacant land. This represents just under three percent of the Planning Area total. The Planning Area contains nearly eight percent of the vacant land in the entire District. Most of this acreage is residentially zoned and is privately owned, suggesting the potential for continued change during the coming years.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1803** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a1803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1803}

1803.1 Figure 18.2 shows basic demographic data for Far Southeast/Southwest. According to the U.S. Census ACS data from 2017, the Planning Area had a population of 76,047, or 11 percent of the District-wide total. The area lost five to 10 percent of its population in each decennial census between 1960 and 2000. However, the population increased by about 8,500 people between 2000 and 2015 and is estimated to increase to 112,477 people by 2045.

1803.2 As of 2017, 31.6 percent of the area’s residents were under 18, compared to 17.6 percent in the District, while only 7.9 percent are over 65, compared to the District-wide total of 11.9 percent. Since 2000, the percentage of youth has decreased (from 36.8 to 31.6 percent), while those over age 65 has increased (from 6.1 to 7.9 percent).

1803.3 Approximately 91 percent of the area’s population is Black, which is significantly higher than the District-wide total of 47.7 percent. Only 1.8 percent of the area’s residents are of Hispanic/Latino origin, and 2.1 percent are foreign born. These percentages have stayed relatively stable since 2000.

1803.4 Figure 18.2 Far Southeast/Southwest at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

65,368

65,667

76,047

84,071

100,323

112,477

Households

22,807

24,641

26,187

28,694

33,930

36,681

Household Population

62,942

62,900

72,260

81,086

97,113

109,124

Persons Per Household

2.76

2.55

2.76

2.83

2.86

2.97

Jobs

21,374

12,605

19,819

29,429

34,795

37,158

Density (persons per sq mile)

8,955

8,995

10,417

11,517

13,743

15,408

Land Area (square miles)

7.3

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

20,038

37,343

16,943

20,400

3,987

36.8%

57.1%

25.9%

31.2%

6.1%

24,00

46,063

21,366

24,697

5,983

31.6%

60.6%

28.1%

32.5%

7.9%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

24,419

37.8%

27,187

36.9%

17.4%

Race Ethnicity

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

2,979

59,959

165

399

311

668

4.6%

92.%

0.2%

0.6%

0.7%

1.0%

4,016

69,532

227

1,333

908

5.3%

91.4%

0.0%

0.3%

1.8%

1.2%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

773

1.1%

2,184

2.9%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

---

2,375

3.1%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

4,499

18,137

19.9%

80.1%

5,114

21,073

19.5%

80.5%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

22,636

4,272

84.1%

15.9%

26,187

4,079

86.5%

13.5%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

1,601

6,114

4,003

5,299

7,819

2,071

5.9%

22.7%

14.9%

19.7%

29.1%

7.6%

1,929

7,652

4,081

4,448

9,313

2,843

6.4%

25.3%

13.5%

14.7%

30.8%

9.4%

0.0%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1804** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a1804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1804}

1804.1 As of 2017, Far Southeast/Southwest had about 30,266 housing units. About 14 percent of these units were vacant, which is higher than the District-wide total of 9.9 percent. Compared to the rest of Washington, DC, the Planning Area has an abundance of small apartment buildings—31 percent of the housing units were in 5-9 unit buildings, and 9.4 percent were in 10-19 unit buildings. Combined, these percentages are nearly on par with the District-wide figure of 46 percent. There were no housing units in buildings of 20 units or more; yet, District-wide that figure was 34.2 percent. Only 6.8 percent of the housing units were single-family detached homes, less than half the District-wide figure.

1804.2 As one might expect given the high percentage of rental multi-family buildings, the homeownership rate in the Planning Area is low: 19 percent in 2017 compared to 41.7 percent District-wide.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1805** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a1805 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1805}

1805.1 Information provided by the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) shows that there were 19,819 jobs in Far Southeast/Southwest in 2017. Most are in the educational services and health care fields. As of the 2017 Census, the median household income for the area was $30,734 per year, less than one-half of the District’s median income of $77,649. Given the low incomes, the Planning Area also had the highest percentage of residents below the poverty level at 36.9 percent, more than double the District-wide total of 17.4 percent.

1805.2 In the fourth quarter of 2005, the unemployment rate in Far Southeast/Southwest was 13 percent. This was four times higher than the rate in Rock Creek West neighborhoods and more than three times the average for the Washington region. Data on commuting patterns indicate that 31 percent of the employed residents in the Planning Area commuted to jobs in Central Washington, DC. Some eight percent worked within the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area itself, and 34 percent commuted to jobs elsewhere in Washington, DC. The remaining 26 percent commuted to Maryland or Virginia.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1806** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a1806 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1806}

1806.1 Based on land availability, recent development activity, planning policies, and regional growth trends, significant growth is expected during the next 20 years. The Planning Area is expected to grow from about 26,616 households in 2015 to 36,774 households in 2045, an increase of about 38 percent. By 2045, the area is expected to have a population of almost 112,477. While this is still fewer residents than the area had during the peak years of the 1950s, it marks a major turnaround after five decades of population decline. The projections assume that vacant and abandoned housing units in the Planning Area will be refurbished or replaced, and that new units will be developed on vacant and underused sites.

1806.2 A period of sustained growth in the Planning Area has already started. From 2006 to the present, an astonishing 8,000 units of housing have been constructed or rehabilitated, including more than 1,000 new units in HOPE VI projects at the former Stanton Dwellings, Frederick Douglass Homes, and Valley Green public housing developments. Infill development is also expected along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, South Capitol Street SE, and on scattered vacant sites.

1806.3 In 2017, 23,996 jobs were in the Planning Area. Additional jobs are forecast in the Planning Area by 2045. Future job centers include St. Elizabeths, DC Village, and the Anacostia Metro station and Gateway areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1807** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES. {#sec-10-a1807 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1807}

1807.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

1807.2 Three Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in Far Southeast/Southwest during 2005 and 2006. Many residents, Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners (ANCs), and civic association leaders provided input at these meetings, where they discussed local planning issues and priorities. There have also been many meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan, but focusing on other long-range planning issues. Topics such as the rebuilding of the 11th Street and South Capitol Street Bridges, development of Poplar Point, the redevelopment of Camp Simms and St. Elizabeths, and streetscape improvements for Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE were addressed at public meetings.

1807.3 Several important messages came across in these meetings, including:

An improved educational system, job and vocational training system, and social service safety net are essential to the area’s future. A 40 percent high school dropout rate is unacceptable—and the double-digit unemployment that results in part from inadequate education also is unacceptable. Improved job training and adult education are essential to alleviate unemployment, under-employment, and poverty, and additional facilities to house these services are needed. As noted elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan, establishing a community college or branch campus of the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) east of the Anacostia River could go a long way toward preparing youth and adults for good, quality jobs in the District’s economy. Ample access to transit is essential to connecting residents with jobs in the District and elsewhere in the region.

Concerns about drug use and violence were voiced, including the impacts caused that were felt by the community. While the root causes of this issue are complex, greater investment in schools, libraries, child care centers, recreation centers, parks, and health clinics would provide an important start toward improved public safety. Many residents advocated for improved public facilities and services; the development that is planned for this area over the next 20years should be leveraged to make this a reality. The Anacostia and Washington Highlands Libraries should be reconstructed. Anacostia High, Ketcham, Birney, Savoy, Ballou, and other schools should be modernized. Public facility improvements should be the cornerstone of any revitalization or neighborhood economic development program in this area.

Far Southeast/Southwest needs more high-quality housing options that are suitable for families and younger homeowners. Poorly maintained rental apartments and public housing units do not provide enough opportunities for home ownership. The established single-family, row house, and duplex neighborhoods should be preserved and enhanced. Additional low- to moderate-density housing should be encouraged as sites such as St. Elizabeths (East Campus) and Sheridan Terrace as they are redeveloped. In some areas, rezoning may be needed to promote the desired housing types—currently, much of the area is zoned R-5-A, which perpetuates the garden apartment pattern.

The community recognized that there are opportunities for increased density within the Planning Area, especially around the Metro stations at Anacostia and Congress Heights, at St. Elizabeths, and in neighborhood centers along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and South Capitol Street SE. Transit-oriented development in these areas could provide opportunities for older adults, households without cars, younger renters, and others. Residents would like an array of housing choices, but believe that higher-density housing should be limited to the areas listed above. Beyond these areas, many residents expressed the opinion that deteriorating apartment complexes should be replaced with less dense housing over time. This is what has happened at Frederick Douglass, Stanton Dwellings, and Valley Green, with public housing replaced by mixed-income townhomes and detached units. Many residents asked that the remaining vacant sites in the community be planned and zoned for single-family homes rather than more garden apartments.

Housing maintenance is an issue in the Planning Area and affects the lives of residents in many ways. Residents are concerned about rising costs—especially rising rents and property taxes. The demolition of much of the area’s public housing has displaced some long-time residents and created concerns about future redevelopment. There is an interest in preserving the affordability of some of the area’s rental housing through rehabilitation and renovation. There are also concerns about lax code enforcement, unpermitted construction, and a continued need to clean up vacant and abandoned properties.

More retail services are needed in the community, especially supermarkets and sit-down restaurants. The community also needs basic services like full-service gas stations and hardware stores, so residents do not have to travel to Prince George’s County to shop. The Camp Simms Shopping Center is an important step in the right direction; additional investment should be made in the existing retail centers along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, Good Hope Road SE, Alabama Road SE, and South Capitol Street SE. Façade improvements, streetscape improvements, and upgraded public transit along these streets can help existing businesses and promote new businesses— with the added benefit of creating new jobs for area residents.

Traffic congestion is an issue, with much of the traffic generated by non-residents passing through the area or using local streets as shortcuts when I-295 is congested. Traffic calming measures are needed to reduce cut-through traffic, and to slow down speeding traffic and reduce unsafe driving. Public transit improvements also are needed. Approximately half of the area’s households do not own a car and rely on the Metrobus or Metrorail to get around. Residents are concerned that projects like the Anacostia streetcar will reduce bus service, especially across the Anacostia River.

Despite its proximity to the waterfront, much of Far Southeast/ Southwest is cut off from the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. Access to the Potomac River is limited due to the uses along the shoreline (Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and the Blue Plains treatment plant). Anacostia River access is difficult due to the I-295 freeway, railroad tracks, and other barriers. Crossing the river on the South Capitol Street or 11th/12th Street bridges is difficult, if not impossible, for pedestrians and bicyclists. Better access to Poplar Point and Anacostia Park on the north, and to Oxon Cove on the south, should be achieved in the future. Historic Anacostia was born as a waterfront community and its identity as a waterfront community should be restored in the future.

Far Southeast/Southwest contains hilly topography. A prominent ridgeline crosses the area, affording picturesque views of Washington, DC and abundant natural scenery. In some cases, development has been insensitive to topography, not only missing an opportunity for better design, but also causing soil erosion and unnecessary grading and tree removal. The disregard for the natural environment also manifests itself in illegal dumping, which is an issue along Oxon Run, in other streambeds, and on vacant land throughout the area. A cleaner environment, and preservation of the area’s natural beauty, are both high priorities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1808** FSS-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a1808 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1808}

1808.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Far Southeast/Southwest. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

1808.2 Policy FSS-1.1.1: Directing Growth

The presence of the Anacostia Metro station and the upcoming redevelopment of the St. Elizabeths Hospital site, including the consolidation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the west campus, continue to provide an unprecedented opportunity to catalyze economic development in the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area. The Great Streets corridor along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE from the Anacostia River on the north to just past Malcolm X Avenue SE on the south, including the St. Elizabeths Hospital site, should be developed with medium- to high-density mixed uses, offering supportive retail services to office workers and residents alike, and providing housing opportunities to people who want to live and work in the area. Strongly promote mixed-use development, including retail, service, and residential uses, as well as office uses, on the portions of the St. Elizabeths Hospital site along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE. Such mixed-use development should face the street and be open to the public, outside security barriers that may otherwise be required. Additional opportunities for future housing development and employment growth in Far Southeast/Southwest should be directed to the area around the Congress Heights Metro station, along the Great Streets corridors of Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and South Capitol Street SE, and on the DC Circulator routes to provide improved transit and automobile access to these areas and improve their visual and urban design qualities. The DC Circulator is a key element for affordably moving people around to jobs and amenities in an environmentally friendly way. Any increase in zoning or density around the Metro Station shall only be available through a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Approvals of zoning variations for height or density through PUDs shall include commensurate benefits for the neighborhood in terms of education and job opportunities, new and affordable housing for homeownership, improved urban design, and public infrastructure improvements. The PUD should include civic and cultural amenities, promote quality in design of buildings and public spaces, support local schools, create opportunities for cultural events and public art, and enhance the public realm by addressing safety and cleanliness issues.

1808.3 Policy FSS-1.1.2: Preservation of Lower-Density Neighborhoods

Preserve existing single-family housing within Far Southeast/Southwest by appropriately designating such areas as Low-Density Residential (LDR) on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and by zoning such areas for single-family, rather than multi-family, housing.

1808.4 Policy FSS-1.1.3: Rehabilitation of Multi-Family Housing

Support rehabilitation and stronger and more consistent code enforcement for the many garden apartments in the Planning Area, particularly in Shipley Terrace, Knox Hill, and Washington Highlands. Support District programs that provide financial assistance to renovate such complexes, with the condition that a significant portion of the units are preserved as affordable after renovation.

1808.5 Policy FSS-1.1.4: Infill Housing Development

Support infill housing development on vacant sites within Far Southeast/Southwest, especially in Historic Anacostia and in the Hillsdale, Fort Stanton, Bellevue, Congress Heights, and Washington Highlands neighborhoods. Infill with affordable housing options can help meet the demand of low-income families currently living in the Planning Area, reduce the rates of families living without housing, and decrease the affordable housing waitlist. Infill with housing for persons of low and moderate income can help provide homes for persons and families who might otherwise be displaced from Washington, DC due to high housing costs.

1808.6 Policy FSS-1.1.5: Transportation Improvements

Undertake transportation improvements and design changes that reduce the amount of cut-through commuter traffic on local streets. These changes should include new bridges over the Anacostia River, redesigned ramps, and better connections between downtown, I-295, and Suitland Parkway.

1808.7 Policy FSS-1.1.6: Retail Development

Support additional retail development within Far Southeast/Southwest, especially in Historic Anacostia and in the neighborhood centers at Malcolm X Avenue SE /Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and South Capitol Street SE/Atlantic Avenue SE. Projects that combine upper story housing or offices and ground floor retail are particularly encouraged in these three locations.

1808.8 Policy FSS-1.1.7: Grocery Stores and Services

Attract additional supermarkets; a variety of food retail; sit-down, family-style restaurants; full-service gas stations; and general merchandise stores to Far Southeast/Southwest. The area’s larger commercial sites should be marketed to potential investors, and economic and regulatory incentives should be used to attract business, especially grocery retail, farms, and other fresh food producers to provide for equitable opportunities to access food options. The upgrading and renovation of the area’s existing auto-oriented shopping centers is strongly encouraged to reflect Washington, DC’s community development and sustainability goals.

1808.9 Policy FSS-1.1.8: Parking

Support additional dedicated off-street parking and loading areas in the business districts at Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE/Malcolm X Avenue SE, Alabama Avenue SE/23rd Street SE, and Historic Anacostia. Work with local merchants in each area to identify potential sites.

1808.10 Policy FSS-1.1.9: Minority/Small Disadvantaged Business Development

Provide technical assistance to minority-owned and small businesses in Far Southeast/Southwest to improve the range of goods and services available to the community. Joint venture opportunities, minority business set-asides, business incubator centers, and assistance to community-based development organizations should all be used to jumpstart local business and provide jobs in the community.

1808.11 Policy FSS-1.1.10: Workforce Development Centers

Support the development of additional job training facilities and workforce development centers, including the Infrastructure Academy. Encourage the retention of existing job training centers and the development of new centers on sites such as the St. Elizabeths Campus and DC Village to increase employment opportunities for local residents.

1808.12 Policy FSS-1.1.11: Increasing Homeownership

Address the low rate of homeownership in Far Southeast/Southwest by providing more owner-occupied housing in new construction, encouraging the construction of single-family homes, and supporting the conversion of rental apartments to owner-occupied housing, with an emphasis on units that are affordable to current tenants.

See the Housing Element for additional information, policies, and actions on

increasing homeownership opportunities.

1808.13 Policy FSS-1.1.12: School Modernization

Strongly support the modernization of schools in the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area. Plans for additional housing should be accompanied by a commitment to improving educational facilities to meet current and future needs and recognizing that education is among the community’s highest priorities.

1808.14 Policy FSS-1.1.13: District Government Incentives for Economic Development

Use the full range of incentives and tools available to the District government, including tax abatements, tax increment financing, payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs), eminent domain, and PUDs to promote and leverage economic development in the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area.

1808.15 Policy FSS-1.1.14: Sustainable Development

Provide innovative solutions for sustaining economic growth without harming the environment or exhausting its resources while improving the quality of life for current and future residents.

1808.16 Policy FSS-1.1.15: Neighborhood Resilience

Leverage the District’s ongoing climate preparedness and adaptation work to encourage the implementation of neighborhood-scale and site-specific solutions for a more resilient District. This includes the development of actionable policies and projects that decrease the vulnerability of people, places, and systems in the Planning Area to climate risks despite changing or uncertain future conditions.

1808.17 Policy FSS-R.1.1.16: Resilient Housing

Encourage the use of climate-resilient and energy-efficient design practices for new residential developments, especially in the construction of affordable housing units. These practices include cool and living roofs, solar shading, natural ventilation, and other passive cooling techniques that will reduce the impacts of extreme heat events on the area’s most vulnerable residents. They also include the use of green infrastructure methods that can reduce the urban heat island effect and potential flooding risks by preserving or expanding green space, tree cover, and other natural features.

1808.18 Action FSS-R.1.1.A: Resilient Public Facilities

Identify and support greater investments to make the existing public facilities in the Far Southeast/Southwest Planning Area more resilient to the anticipated effects of extreme heat, floods, severe weather, and health events. This includes incorporating necessary upgrades or retrofits to the improvement or reconstruction of schools, libraries, child care centers, recreation centers, health clinics, and other facilities that provide services to residents at a higher health risk and vulnerable to climate risks and social inequities.

1808.19 Action FSS-1.1.B: Sustainable Congress Heights (EcoDistricts)

Identify goals and priority projects to achieve them. Topics should include: access and mobility, healthy and active living, housing affordability and stability, economic and workforce development, materials management, watershed and habitat, and energy.

1808.20 Action FSS-1.1.C: Pilot Displacement-Free Strategies

Explore and develop pilot strategies to protect against displacement in a Ward 8 area facing the threat of resident and local business displacement from rapid economic development. Strategies could include an expanded version (to a greater number of low income residents) of the senior citizen real property tax deferral program, and the deployment of organizers to ensure that tenant associations are formed and to build capacity of existing tenant associations so that they are aware of their rights under District law. Strategies should address low-income homeowners and renters of private, public and subsidized housing. Use the results of the pilot to identify District-wide applications.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1809** FSS-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1809 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1809}

1809.1 Policy FSS-1.2.1: Health Care Facilities

Sustain and support capacity and equity in existing health care facilities in Far Southeast/Southwest and develop additional health care and social service facilities to respond to the urgent unmet need for primary and urgent care, pre- and post-natal care, child care, youth development, family counseling, and drug and alcohol treatment centers. Pursue co-location or consolidation of these facilities with other public facilities where possible and where the uses are compatible.

1809.2 Policy FSS-1.2.2: Historic Resources

Protect and preserve buildings and places of historic significance in the Far Southeast/Southwest community, such as the Anacostia and St. Elizabeths Hospital historic districts. Identify and increase public awareness of other places of potential significance, and consider appropriate protections, incorporating the community’s recommendations as part of the process. Support the designation of additional historic landmarks within the Far Southeast/Southwest neighborhoods.

1809.3 Policy FSS-1.2.3: Connecting to the River

Reconnect the neighborhoods of Far Southeast/Southwest to the Anacostia River, particularly through the redevelopment of Poplar Point, implementation of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) park and trail improvements, and reconstruction of the Anacostia River bridges. Support NPS in its efforts to improve Anacostia Park amenities and access points to better serve the community.

1809.4 Policy FSS-1.2.4: Designing with Nature

Protect and enhance the wooded ridges and slopes of Far Southeast/ Southwest, particularly views of Washington, DC’s monumental core from the major north-south ridge that crosses the area. Development should be particularly sensitive to environmental features along Oxon Run Parkway, Shepherd Parkway (along I- 295), and on the St. Elizabeths and DC Village sites.

1809.6 Policy FSS-1.2.5: Soil Erosion

Correct existing soil erosion problems in Far Southeast/Southwest, particularly in

Congress Heights, Buena Vista, and Washington Highlands, and ensure that new

development mitigates potential impacts on soil stability.

1809.7 Policy FSS-1.2.6: Far Southeast/Southwest Neighborhood Climate Resilience

Leverage Washington, DC’s climate adaptation and flood risk reduction efforts

and implement neighborhood-scale and site-specific solutions for flood resilience

in the Potomac River neighborhoods adjacent to Blue Plains and the Joint Base

Anacostia-Bolling.

1809.8 Action: FSS-1.2.A: Far Southeast/Southwest Climate Resilience

Develop actionable strategies and projects that decrease the vulnerability of

community members, housing and community facilities, and local businesses and

community-serving institutions from both current flooding risks and future risks

due to climate change.

1809.9 Action FSS-1.2.B: Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant

Work with DC Water to reduce foul odors at the Blue Plains Wastewater

Treatment Plant. Land uses on DC Village and elsewhere in the vicinity of the

plant should be regulated in a way that limits the exposure of future residents to

odors and other hazards associated with the plant.

1809.10 Action FSS-1.2.C: Shepherd Parkway

Coordinate with local and federal partners to enrich existing park conditions,

improve the health of the park system, and address safety and maintenance

concerns.

1809.11 Action FSS-1.2.D: Parks and Recreation

Coordinate with Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) to improve

community park and recreation facilities.

1809.12 Action FSS-1.2.E: Fort Circle Parks

Improve the Civil War Defenses of Washington, also known as the Fort Circle

Parks, within Far Southeast/Southwest, including upgrades to the Fort Circle Trail

and additional recreational facilities and amenities at Fort Stanton Park.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1810** FSS-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a1810 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1810}

1810.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified seven areas in Far Southeast/Southwest as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 18.1 and Figure 18.3). These areas are:

• Historic Anacostia

• St. Elizabeths Campus

• Barry Farm/Hillsdale/Fort Stanton

• Congress Heights Metro Station

• Congress Heights Commercial District

• Bellevue/Washington Highlands

• DC Village.

1810.2 Figure 18.3 Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Far Southeast/Southwest

Within Far Southeast/Southwest

2.1

Historic Anacostia

2.2

St. Elizabeths Campus

2.3

Barry Farm/Hillsdale/Fort Stanton

2.4

Congress Heights Metro Station

2.5

Congress Heights Commercial District

2.6

Bellevue/Washington Highlands

2.7

DC Village

Adjacent to Within Far Southeast/Southwest

Poplar Point

Skyland

1810.3 Map 18.1: Far Southeast/Southwest Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 1811** FSS-2.1 HISTORIC ANACOSTIA {#sec-10-a1811 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1811}

1811.1 Since the 1980s, much of the planning activity in Wards 7 and 8 has focused on Historic Anacostia. The area always has had symbolic importance because it is the oldest area of continuous settlement east of the river and the gateway to neighborhoods in Ward 8. Its narrow streets, wood frame row houses, well-defined business district, and hilly terrain create the ambiance of a small historic mill town, yet it is literally minutes away from the U.S. Capitol. The extension of the Metro Green Line in the early 1990s made the area more accessible and has created more economic opportunities.

1811.2 The business district was designated as a District Main Street in 2002, and commercial facade and streetscape improvements have been completed. The abandoned Nichols School has been beautifully refurbished and reopened as Thurgood Marshall Academy. Future development at Poplar Point and St. Elizabeths should also contribute to the vitality of Historic Anacostia.

1811.3 Much of the development and investment that has taken place in the past decade has been guided by the Anacostia Transit Area Strategic Investment and Development Plan, which was approved by the D.C. Council in 2006 to provide guidance on several key sites along the Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE corridor from the four-acre Metro station site on the south to the gateway at Good Hope Road SE on the north. This plan proposes mixed-use development on vacant sites, restoration of historic buildings, better ground floor retail, a return to two-way traffic on Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, and improved connections to parks and adjacent neighborhoods. The plan identified three distinct centers of activity, which are summarized in Policy FSS-2.1.2.

1811.4 Policy FSS-2.1.1: Historic Anacostia Revitalization

Encourage the continued revitalization of Historic Anacostia as a safe, walkable, and attractive neighborhood, with restored historic buildings and compatible well-designed mixed-use projects. New development should serve a variety of income groups and household types and restore needed retail services to the community.

1811.5 Policy FSS-2.1.2: Activity Concentrations

Concentrate development activity in Historic Anacostia at the following locations:

• The Metro station, including the station site and the adjacent Bethlehem Baptist Church site, which should be developed with a mix of single- and multi-family homes with ground floor retail, and strongly encourage the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to make its land available for joint development;

• The W Street SE /Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE area, where diverse new housing opportunities and ground floor retail should be encouraged on parking lots and underused sites; and

• The Gateway area (at Good Hope Road SE), where a government center has been developed and additional public properties are available for mixed-use development.

Other opportunities exist for residences, shops, offices, and arts uses that use medium- and high-density sites on the Metro station site and in its immediate vicinity. Any increase in zoning or density around the Metro station shall only be available through a PUD with the expectation that commensurate benefits shall accrue to the neighborhood. Those benefits could include providing affordable housing and homeownership opportunities, public infrastructure improvements, and civic and cultural amenities, promoting quality in design of buildings and public spaces, supporting local schools, creating opportunities for cultural events and public art, and enhancing the public realm by addressing safety and cleanliness issues.

1811.6 Policy FSS-2.1.3: Pedestrian Connectivity

Improve connections between the Anacostia Metro station, Poplar Point, Anacostia Park, Cedar Hill, the Good Hope Road SE area, and Hillsdale/Fort Stanton, especially for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users.

1811.7 Policy FSS-2.1.4: Historic Preservation

Encourage continued historic preservation efforts in Anacostia, including the restoration of commercial facades along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and Good Hope Road SE and the rehabilitation of older and historic residential and commercial buildings.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1812** FSS-2.2 ST. ELIZABETHS CAMPUS {#sec-10-a1812 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1812}

1812.1 The St. Elizabeths East Campus contains 336 acres and is one of the most historically significant and strategically located properties in all of Washington, DC. It is divided into a 154-acre East Campus, which is under District control, and a 183-acre West Campus, which is under federal control. The East Campus was transferred to the District by the federal government in 1987. A new behavioral health hospital was built on the East Campus in 2010 and is operated by the District Department of Behavioral Health.

1812.2 Where people live can have a major impact on their health. Issues with access to care, the prevalence of chronic disease, insurance coverage, and access to other resources vary by wards within the District. Residents of Wards 7 and 8 have higher rates of obesity, heart disease, and diabetes compared with other wards. For these reasons, Ward 8 needs an acute care hospital. This new hospital can help address these challenges by making access to a fully integrated health care system easier for thousands of Washingtonians, particularly those residing in Southeast Washington, DC.

1812.3 A Framework Plan for the East Campus was approved in 2006. The Framework Plan recommended a phased development program with up to 1,035 additional housing units, 540,000 square feet of office and retail space, new academic and cultural facilities, and new District parks and plazas. It proposed adaptive reuse of many of the existing buildings. The Framework Plan took particular care to integrate the East Campus into the adjacent Congress Heights neighborhood and to maximize access to the Congress Heights Metro station. Four development areas were identified, each defined by a unique mix of uses, density, scale, and character. An extensive network of public open space was also proposed, including formal plazas and quadrangles, linear parks, lawns, and forested land.

1812.4 The Framework Plan called for the completion of a Master Plan and Design Guidelines, which were completed in 2012. The St. Elizabeths East Master Plan and Design Guidelines is the result of a decade of assessment, outreach, analysis, and planning to address a historic campus that is one of Washington, DC’s largest underdeveloped sites and the future setting for sustainable development, historic revitalization, and open space. The District has allocated significant capital funding to St. Elizabeths East to design and build the public infrastructure improvements needed to support all planned future development, including roadways, water, gas, electric, telecommunications, streetscapes, and street lighting, in addition to the demolition of certain structures deemed to be non-contributing to the historic status of the campus.

1812.5 Additionally, the renovated chapel on the East Campus is now the R.I.S.E. Demonstration Center. The name was selected by the community and stands for Relate, Innovate, Stimulate, and Elevate. The center serves as a flexible meeting, technology, and demonstration space. It was designed to build interest in the redevelopment of the St. Elizabeths East Campus as an innovation hub by drawing in the surrounding community and creating bonds with Ward 8 residents.

1812.6 In 2018, a new state-of-the-art Entertainment and Sports Arena was completed at the St. Elizabeths East Campus in Ward 8. This effort aims to transform an underserved neighborhood by providing more amenities, leading to a new revitalized destination. This venue acts as home court for the District’s WNBA team, the Washington Mystics, and new G-League team, the Capital City Go-Go. It also serves as the official practice facility for the NBA’s Washington Wizards and additional entertainment, sports, and eSports programming. The 120,000 square-foot facility is projected to produce $90 million in new tax revenue over 20 years and attract more than 380,000 visitors per year.

1812.7 The fate of the West Campus has been in flux for more than a decade. Many of the site’s historic buildings are in disrepair and will require costly renovation. In 2005, the federal government announced its intent to develop the site as a secured office complex for the U.S. Coast Guard. Other divisions of the DHS also may relocate there; current estimates call for between 4,000 and 14,000 federal employees. Improvements to the road and transit network will be required as this area redevelops. Great care must be taken to retain the historic proportions of the site and its buildings and landscapes.

1812.8 The federal General Services Administration (GSA) is currently amending the 2009 DHS Consolidation Final Master Plan and the 2012 DHS Consolidation Final Master Plan Amendment to more efficiently house DHS and its operating components on the St. Elizabeths West Campus. The U.S. Coast Guard headquarters building has been completed and is located on the West Campus of St. Elizabeths. This 1.3 million square foot complex marks the first phase of the creation of a headquarters for the entire DHS.

1812.9 Policy FSS-2.2.1: St. Elizabeths East Campus

Redevelop the East Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital as a new community containing a mix of uses, including mixed-density housing, retail shops, offices, a comprehensive behavioral health care facility, a new hospital, entertainment uses, urban farms (including on rooftops), and parks and open space. Mixed-use development, including retail and service uses, should be promoted along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, facing the street and open to the public. Other uses such as satellite college campuses, civic uses, and local public facilities should be Incorporated.

1812.10 Policy FSS-2.2.2: Relationship to Nearby Uses

Ensure that future development on St. Elizabeths enhance the surrounding neighborhood. It is particularly important that the site’s reuse is coordinated with planning for the nearby Anacostia and Congress Heights Metro stations, Poplar Point, Barry Farm, and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE/Malcolm X shopping district.

1812.11 Policy FSS-2.2.3: Development Density

Provide development densities and intensities on the site that are compatible with adjacent residential neighborhoods and promote new economic development of the site, with moderate to medium-density residential and commercial on most of the site, and higher densities clustered in the area closest to Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and the Congress Heights Metro station. Areas for high density should include the North Campus subarea and the area surrounding the ravine, taking advantage of the steep topography to accommodate additional height and density without negatively impacting viewsheds.

1812.12 Action FSS-2.2.A: St. Elizabeths West Campus

Work collaboratively with the federal government on the reuse of the West Campus. Priority should be given to preserve historic resources-including not only the buildings but also the historic open spaces and massing of buildings on the site. To the greatest extent feasible, redevelopment of the West Campus should create new publicly accessible open space and be coordinated with redevelopment of the East Campus. Integrate DHS consolidation into the surrounding community to the greatest extent possible.

1812.13 Action FSS-2.2.B: Leveraging Neighborhood Economic Development

Coordinate with federal partners to leverage the location of DHS on the West Campus and a portion of the East Campus to bring needed economic development opportunities to Ward 8, especially retail opportunities to serve both existing and new residents, as well as workers and visitors generated by new uses.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1813** FSS-2.3 BARRY FARM, HILLSDALE, AND FORT STANTON {#sec-10-a1813 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1813}

1813.1 The neighborhoods of Barry Farm, Hillsdale, and Fort Stanton are sandwiched between Historic Anacostia on the north and the St. Elizabeths Campus and Suitland Parkway on the south. While these three neighborhoods are currently home to more than 8,000 residents, they also contain some of the largest vacant sites in Ward 8. For example, the nine-acre Sheridan Station site sat vacant between 1996 and 2007, after the apartment complex that once stood there was demolished. Sheridan Station joined Matthews Memorial Church as a development opportunity that has provided high-quality housing options for District residents and expanded mixed-income communities in Ward 8. Phase 1, completed in December 2011, consists of 144 units of multi-family and townhouse rentals. The project has provided 65 replacement housing units for Barry Farms residents, with 25 units delivered in 2011 and 40 units in 2014. This focus area includes one of Washington, DC’s largest public housing complexes at Barry Farm, the historic Fort Stanton Park, and the Smithsonian Institution Anacostia Museum. Topography in the area is hilly, affording panoramic views of Central Washington, DC.

1813.2 This area has been called out in the Area Element for three reasons. First, Barry Farm has been identified as a new community, and policies are in place through a Master Plan to guide future change. Second, policies are needed to encourage development to be sensitive to the hilly terrain and the area’s established moderate- to low- density character, although increased density is anticipated to accommodate redevelopment of a mixed-use, mixed-income community with the one-for-one replacement of existing public housing units. Third, policies should encourage a better connection of this area to the fast-changing areas on the north and south, with improved access to transit, parks, jobs, public facilities, and retail services. Barry Farm, Hillsdale, and Fort Stanton should not be left behind as the areas around them move forward. In 2006, the D.C. Council approved the Barry Farm Redevelopment Plan. Consistent with the New Communities Initiative (NCI), the goal of the redevelopment effort is to transform the affordable housing development into a mixed-income, mixed-use community. In 2020 the Historic Preservation Review Board designated a portion of Barry Farm Dwellings as a historic landmark. It is envisioned that one of the landmarks buildings would house a museum and cultural center to commemorate the legacy of Barry Farm.

1813.3 Policy FSS-2.3.1: Barry Farm New Community

Rebuild Barry Farm in a manner that:

• Ensures one for one replacement of any public housing unit that is removed at unit sizes needed by former residents and residents’ right to return to a replacement unit under the same tenancy qualifications. Provide family sized housing in a manner that meets tenants’ housing needs and the needs of households on the public housing unit waiting list.

• Incorporates measures to assist residents and avoid dislocation and displacement or personal hardship, such as provision of storage.

• Creates additional opportunities for affordable moderate-income and market rate housing on the site, consistent with the requirements of the District’s NCI, and homeownership opportunities for returning residents.

• Provides new amenities, such as community facilities, parks, early childhood development, incubation of resident-owned businesses, and improved access to the Anacostia River and Anacostia Metro station.

• The District of Columbia Housing Authority and site developers must continue to engage, inform and provide equitable community participation with the residents, neighborhood, and other stakeholders throughout the redevelopment of the Barry Farms property, and document site development and community agreements.

Honors the significant history of the Barry Farm community and its many residents who have contributed to DC’s culture through academic, sports, music and the struggle for the liberation of African Americans through the study of the commemorative reuse of the Barry Farm historic landmark site.

• Respects the self-governance and leadership of subsidized tenants by recognizing and supporting resident-led organizations and initiatives, respecting resident input and influence over decision making, and ensuring that no two-tiered system of residency rights and privileges is created whereby subsidized tenants are treated differently or have lesser access to amenities than their nonsubsidized counterparts.

While some increase in density will be required to meet the one-for-one replacement goal, consideration should be given to including nearby vacant land in the new community site so that densities may remain in the moderate to medium range with ample green and open space as anticipated by the 2006 Barry Farm Redevelopment Plan and as measured across the overall new community site. Building heights may exceed those heights typically used in medium-density zones, particularly near larger roads on the edge of the site, to accommodate the moderate to medium density over the entire site.

1813.4 Policy FSS-2.3.2: Housing Opportunities

Encourage compatible infill development on vacant and underused land within the Hillsdale and Fort Stanton neighborhoods, emphasizing low- to moderate-density housing designed for families while allowing higher densities where appropriate to increase housing opportunities near transit. Special care should be taken to respect the area’s topography, avoid erosion, improve the street and circulation system, and mitigate any traffic increases caused by new development.

1813.5 Action FSS-2.3.A: Connections to Adjacent Areas

Improve pedestrian, protected bicycle, and road connections between the Barry Farm, Hillsdale, and Fort Stanton communities, and between these communities and the future developments at Poplar Point and the St. Elizabeths Campus. Residents should be able to safely walk or bicycle to the Anacostia Metro station, Anacostia Park, and Fort Stanton Park.

1813.6 Action FSS-2.3.B: Barry Farm Historic Landmark

Work with nonprofit partners and residents to restore the Barry Farm Historic Landmark, a grouping of five buildings at the corner of Stevens Road SE and Firth Sterling Avenue SE, to create a public museum, archive and educational space dedicated to the study of Barry Farm neighborhood history, and the connections to the early post-Civil War community, civil rights, public housing, go-go music, and other themes connected to the history of the community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1814** FSS-2.4 CONGRESS HEIGHTS METRO STATION {#sec-10-a1814 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1814}

1814.1 The Congress Heights Metro station is the last station on the Metro Green Line before leaving Washington, DC. The station is about five acres in size and consists of a surface parking lot and subway entrance. Its location on the southeastern edge of the St. Elizabeths Campus made it a critical part of the hospital redevelopment and suggests it will become an increasingly important gateway to the area in the coming years. Land uses in the immediate vicinity include Malcolm X Elementary School, a police substation, apartment complexes, single-family homes, and a historic Jewish cemetery. Major projects within a half-mile of the station include the 600-unit Henson Ridge development and the Camp Simms shopping center and housing development.

1814.2 The station is one of the newest in the Metro system, having opened in 2001. Passenger volumes are currently among the lowest in Washington, DC. It presents an important joint development opportunity, with the potential for new housing, retail, public, and open space uses, as well as Metro parking and bus transfer points. Future development will need to establish appropriate transitions to nearby uses, which are generally low- to moderate-density. Additional community-based planning has identified the right mix of uses and has addressed a variety of land use, transportation, and urban design issues in the Congress Heights community.

1814.3 Congress Heights is a Ward 8 neighborhood with abundant community character and historic significance. Located on the hilltops that overlook the Anacostia River, Congress Heights takes its name from its undulating topography, which offers exceptional views of the U.S. Capitol and beyond. The neighborhood is a predominantly residential middle-income community developed primarily with a cohesive grouping of late 19th century through mid-20th century residential, commercial, and institutional buildings.

1814.4 Congress Heights is currently experiencing some of the most exciting redevelopment activity in Ward 8. In May 2014, OP completed the CHASE Action Agenda and the CHASE Pattern Book. The Action Agenda includes two key pieces. The first is the Implementation Blueprint, which helps identify and prioritize actions, such as job training, entrepreneurship and small business development, housing, retail amenities, preservation and redevelopment, arts and culture, and transportation connections. The second piece is the Resource Guides and tools to help connect residents and businesses to District resources.

1814.5 The CHASE Pattern Book provides design guidelines based on buildings in the Anacostia Historic District, but it has broad applicability in all the CHASE neighborhoods. It conforms to local zoning, which sets out the legal requirements for development, and it provides additional design guidance to encourage infill that respects existing neighborhood fabric. The combination of unique geographical assets and strong community involvement positions Congress Heights for inclusivity and vibrancy.

1814.6 Policy FSS-2.4.1: Congress Heights Metro Station Mixed-Use

Encourage reuse of the Congress Heights Metro station site and its vicinity with mixed-use, medium-density residential and commercial development using PUDs that promote new economic development. Development on the site should be cognizant of the adjacent lower-density neighborhood to the west and south, and provide a connection to the future development on the St. Elizabeths Campus.

1814.7 Action FSS-2.4.A: Congress Heights Gateway

Create a stronger sense of identity and a gateway for the Congress Heights neighborhood. Strongly encourage WMATA to make its land available for joint development around the Congress Heights Metro station.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1815** FSS-2.5 CONGRESS HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT {#sec-10-a1815 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1815}

1815.1 This Policy Focus Area extends along Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE from the edge of the St. Elizabeths Campus south to the intersection of South Capitol Street SE. Land uses are mostly commercial between St. Elizabeths and Alabama Avenue SE and residential between Alabama Avenue SE and South Capitol. A range of other uses along this mile-long corridor including churches, nonprofits, and health clinics. The heart of the area is the intersection of Malcolm X Avenue SE and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE, which is the main commercial center for the Congress Heights community.

1815.2 Previous Comprehensive Plans for Washington, DC have identified this business district for revitalization, and several District and nonprofit initiatives have been launched to assist in its renewal. In 2005, the corridor was named as part of Washington, DC’s Great Streets Program. Its proximity to the redeveloping St. Elizabeths Campus means that it will continue to be an important center of neighborhood commerce. Efforts to strengthen and revitalize the corridor should continue, with infill development creating opportunities for new business and housing.

1815.3 Policy FSS-2.5.1: Martin Luther King, Jr./Malcolm X Business District

Encourage a new major retail commercial node at medium-density in the shopping area at Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X Avenues SE. Strengthen this area as the commercial hub of the Congress Heights neighborhood, and upgrade the mix of uses to better meet neighborhood needs. Enhance the opportunities to grow existing businesses in the area, and offer incentives for new small and local businesses. Any increase in density should be achieved through a PUD, and approval should consider community benefits in terms of education and job opportunities, new and affordable housing for homeownership, improved urban design, and public infrastructure improvements. PUDs shall promote quality in the design of buildings and public spaces, support local schools, create opportunities for cultural events and public art provide civic and cultural amenities, and enhance the public realm by addressing safety and cleanliness issues.

1815.4 Policy FSS-2.5.2: Great Street Housing Opportunities

Pursue opportunities for additional multi-family housing, possibly with ground floor retail or office uses at medium density, along the Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE corridor between St. Elizabeths Hospital and Alabama Avenue SE.

1815.5 Policy FSS-2.5.3: Business Improvement

Support the continued efforts of the Anacostia BID and Congress Heights Main Street to manage and improve the Congress Heights and Anacostia shopping districts, provide adequate off-street parking and loading areas, manage on-street parking more effectively, and enhance building facades and storefronts.

1815.6 Action FSS-2.5.A: Congress Heights Small Area Plan

Work with residents and community stakeholders on an equitable development strategy for the Congress Heights neighborhood. The Congress Heights Small Area Plan should include more specific details on the market for different uses on the site; the desired scale, mix, and intensity of development; future circulation patterns; and provisions for open space and public facilities.

1815.7 Action: FSS-2.5.B: Pedestrian Safety and Vision Zero

Coordinate with the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) on pedestrian safety enhancements and work to address Vision Zero concerns.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1816** FSS-2.6 BELLEVUE/WASHINGTON HIGHLANDS {#sec-10-a1816 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1816}

1816.1 The Bellevue commercial district includes several blocks around the intersection of South Capitol and Atlantic Streets SE. The area is a traditional neighborhood center, including small retailers, a bank, food and liquor stores, a gas station, personal services, and a drugstore/training center for pharmacy technicians. It includes the former Atlantic Theater and the William O. Lockridge Library, constructed in 2012, and is adjacent to the new Patterson Elementary School campus.

1816.2 In 2017, Mayor Bowser broke ground on South Capitol Street Apartments, a new development project that will deliver 195 apartment units, ranging from efficiencies to three-bedrooms, and 5,000 square feet of community space to the Bellevue neighborhood in Ward 8. The $59 million development is being built on the site of the former South Capitol Street Shopping Center. Financing for the development includes $25 million in gap funding from the District Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) Housing Production Trust Fund, $23.19 million in private equity raised through the sale of federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and $30 million in bond financing issued by the DC Housing Finance Agency (DCHFA).

1816.3 The neighborhoods surrounding the commercial district include a large number of garden apartments, many in deteriorating condition. Some of these apartments were quickly constructed during the boom years of the 1940s and may need replacement or substantial renovation during the coming years. The policies below are intended to encourage the enhancement of neighborhood character will be enhanced and the retention of housing choices as these changes take place.

1816.4 Policy FSS-2.6.1: Neighborhood Shopping Improvements

Encourage new commercial development and adaptive reuse of existing commercial buildings in the South Capitol/Atlantic Streets SE commercial district. Development should provide improved commercial goods and services to the surrounding Bellevue and Washington Highlands neighborhoods.

1816.5 Policy FSS-2.6.2: Business Improvement

Support the continued efforts of local merchants to improve the Bellevue shopping district, provide adequate off-street parking and loading areas, and enhance building facades and storefronts.

1816.6 Policy FSS-2.6.3: Bellevue/Washington Highlands Infill

Encourage refurbishment or replacement of deteriorating apartment complexes within Bellevue and Washington Highlands. Where buildings are removed, encourage replacement with mixed-income housing, including owner-occupied, single-family homes and townhomes, as well as new apartments. Every effort shall be made to avoid resident displacement when such actions are taken and to provide existing residents with opportunities to purchase their units or find suitable housing in the community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1817** FSS-2.7 DC VILLAGE {#sec-10-a1817 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1817}

1817.1 The 167-acre DC Village tract lies between Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE and I-295, east of the Blue Plains Wastewater Plant, just south of Bellevue. The site houses an eclectic mix of District operations, including training facilities for the police and fire departments, an impound lot for towed cars, and an evidence warehouse. Other public uses, including the greenhouses of the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) and the Potomac Job Corps Center, are located on the site. The NPS controls the forested land on the perimeter of the site, including Oxon Cove to the south.

1817.2 DC Village, located in the Bellevue neighborhood, provides a vital resource for local government operations, but the site is poorly laid out. It is physically isolated from the rest of Washington, DC, and its internal street pattern is confusing and hard to navigate. Abandoned structures, weed-covered lots, winding streets, and semi-industrial uses create the impression of a forgotten backwater. The District and surrounding Ward 8 community have wrestled with the site’s future for years. It was designated a Development Zone in 1986 and a Special Treatment Are by the previous Comprehensive Plan. Various uses have been considered over the years, including a 700-unit housing development, an industrial park, and even a prison (on the land to the south near Oxon Cove).

1817.3 While there may be room for other uses on the site in the long term, the immediate priority is to reorganize existing uses and use the land more efficiently for District operations. DC Village is facing pressure to accommodate uses being displaced from the Anacostia Waterfront and other redeveloping areas. The site should be master planned and reorganized, with circulation improvements, higher design standards, and refurbishment or replacement of vacant buildings.

1817.4 Policy FSS-2.7.1: Retention of DC Village for Municipal Uses

Retain DC Village as a municipal facility that accommodates activities and functions that are vital to the operation of District government. The organization of uses on the site should be improved so that it is used more efficiently and can function more effectively.

1817.5 Policy FSS-2.7.2: Non-Government Activities at DC Village

As existing activities at DC Village are reorganized, consider the potential for other employment uses on the site, such as small business incubators and light industry. Such uses should not be accommodated at the expense of District government operations and only should be allowed if the land is not essential for municipal purposes. Any future private uses on the site should be compatible with the existing quasi-industrial municipal uses. Every effort should be made to link future jobs on the DC Village site to residents in Ward 8 neighborhoods to assist residents in gaining income and work experience.

1817.6 Policy FSS-2.7.3: Open Space around DC Village

Retain NPS land on the perimeter of DC Village as open space. The forested land

south of the site around Oxon Cove should not be developed.

1817.7 Policy FSS-2.7.4: Retention of Job Training Activities

Retain job training programs and facilities on the DC Village site, including the Potomac Job Corps Center, and promote participation in these programs by Far Southeast/Southwest residents.

### **10-A19** LOWER ANACOSTIA WATERFRONT/NEAR SOUTHWEST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 1900** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a1900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1900}

1900.1 The Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area encompasses three square miles of land located along both sides of the Anacostia River in the southwest and southeast quadrants of Washington, DC. The boundaries include the I-395 Freeway to the north, Anacostia Park and portions of South Capitol Street SE to the east and south, and the Washington Channel to the west. Its boundaries are shown in the map to the left. This Planning Area includes parts of Wards 6, 7, and 8.

1900.2 The Anacostia waterfront is home to many of Washington, DC’s vibrant neighborhoods. Much of its shoreline has been experiencing a transformation initiated by the 2003 Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan, which set a visionary and ambitious plan for the revitalization of the waterfront into a world-class destination. The former landscape of industrial, transportation, and government uses continues to transform into one of new mixed-use neighborhoods, workplaces, civic spaces, parks, and restored natural areas. Established waterfront neighborhoods stand to benefit greatly. This transformation is delivering improved access to the shoreline, new recreational amenities, new housing and transportation choices, and a cleaner natural environment, along with new opportunities to enhance the resilience of the Anacostia waterfront.

1900.3 The Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area includes a diverse mix of neighborhoods and architecture. New high-rise multi-family buildings dominate the Capitol Riverfront and the Wharf. The Southwest neighborhood is known for its mix of low- and high-density modernist buildings, and other areas closer to Capitol Hill maintain the historic row house blocks amid new construction. Throughout the area is a mix of high-rise and affordable housing.

1900.4 Residents of the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area have multiple transit options, including seven Metro stations, many bikeshare stations, and multiple bus lines. Land uses along the Anacostia waterfront are diverse. These uses currently include wetlands and large open spaces, Nationals Park, Audi Field (home to the DC United professional soccer team), marinas, a retired power plant, housing, commercial centers, and Fort McNair. The Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area includes the residential neighborhoods of Southwest and Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard, including the former Arthur Capper Carrollsburg public housing community that was redeveloped beginning in 2007. The Planning Area’s parks and open spaces include Anacostia Park, Poplar Point, Yards Park, Canal Park, Diamond Teague Park, the Wharf, East Potomac Park, and Hains Point, as well as historic squares and playgrounds in the residential areas. The Planning Area also includes federal military installations, such as Fort McNair and the Washington Navy Yard, and local public facilities, such as schools and recreation centers.

1900.5 Significant environmental improvements are coming to the Anacostia River after years of neglect as Washington’s second river, lagging behind the Potomac River in visibility, image, and public investment. The District is building, legislating, and educating for a cleaner Anacostia River that is fishable and swimmable over the coming decades. With the completion of the Clean Rivers tunnel in 2018, DC Water is on target to reduce untreated raw sewage going into the Anacostia River by 98 percent. Meanwhile, the 2016 Anacostia River Accord is a renewed commitment on the part of the District, Montgomery County, and Prince George’s County to work collaboratively toward removing trash from the Anacostia River, its tributaries, and watershed.

1900.6 The 2003 Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan lays out a strategy for improving water quality, restoring habitat, and improving shoreline parks so that the waterfront becomes the centerpiece for new and revitalized communities. A network of trails and paths, including part of the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail, and bridges, such as the completed 11th Street Bridge replacement (together with the future 11th Street Bridge Park) and future new Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, connect the east and west sides of the river. The objective is to connect not only the east and west shorelines but also the District itself through great parks, public places, and new neighborhoods along a restored river.

1900.7 A diverse coalition of public and private sector entities is leading the revitalization of lands along the river and coordinating environmental and programming initiatives that promote river cleanup, public awareness, and waterfront recreation. Restoring the river’s natural environment is a central part of the revitalization of the Anacostia waterfront neighborhoods.

1900.8 The waterfront area is experiencing substantial change. Since 2000, over four million square feet of office space has been constructed in the Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard area, and more than 6,000 new residential units have been built, with over 800 set aside as affordable units. Over 6,000 residents now live in the Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard area, with that number expected to grow to 16,000 by 2020, making this the fastest-growing neighborhood in the District. Former public housing at Arthur Capper Carrollsburg is being transformed into Capitol Quarter, a mixed-income community with planned one-for-one replacement of every public housing unit removed. Redevelopment includes a new community recreation center and affordable housing for older adults. The continued growth of families with young children in the area has necessitated the reopening and renovation of Van Ness Elementary school on M Street SE. One residential building is currently under construction, and two additional residential buildings are planned for the sites adjacent to Canal Park (Canal Park is a three-block park bounded by M Street, 2nd Street, 2nd Place, and I Street SE). All three buildings will include both new and replacement affordable housing units. The Nationals Park continues to draw crowds from across the Washington, DC region to games, concerts, and other events. Overall, the ballpark hosts about 2.5 million visitors annually. Audi Field, a professional soccer stadium with a seating capacity of 20,000, opened in July 2018 in Buzzard Point. Sellout games are bringing thousands of people to this area of the waterfront. The opening of Yards Park and Canal Park have added over eight acres of passive and active recreation space to the neighborhood. Phase 1 of the Wharf in Southwest opened in late 2017, with over 1,000 residential units, office space, and multiple recreation and cultural amenities, transforming the Southwest Waterfront Area into a regional draw. Projects on surrounding sites and at Buzzard Point will continue to transform this area into a waterfront destination for visitors and residents from all parts of the region, nation, and world.

1900.9 Other planned improvements include a 70-acre public park at Poplar Point, an Interpretive Nature Center at Kingman Island, and mixed-use development in Buzzard Point. Plans for these areas have been prepared in a broader context, taking into consideration upriver sites, such as Reservation 13 and Parkside. Throughout the Planning Area and in the adjacent areas of Capitol Hill, Upper Northeast, and Far Northeast/Southeast, neighborhoods will be better connected to the river by extending streets to the waterfront, adding waterfront promenades, and providing new forms of transportation, such as water taxis. The completion of the new 11th Street Bridge (and the future opening of the 11th Street Bridge Park) and the rebuilding of the South Capitol Street/Frederick Douglass Bridge will change the visual profile of the waterfront and make pedestrian and bicycle crossings safer and easier. As the Planning Area’s population and development continues to grow, including within flood zones near and along the waterfront, resilient design is critical to mitigating riverine and storm surge flooding and projected sea level rise.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1901** HISTORY {#sec-10-a1901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1901}

1901.1 The Anacostia watershed contains lush habitat and diverse ecosystems, which in pre- colonial times supported the Nacotchtank Native Americans, whose name, when Anglicized, eventually became Anacostia. In the early years of European settlement, the river was known as the Eastern Branch of the Potomac. It formed the edge of the Washington, DC and was the terminus of important radial avenues extending out from the U.S. Capitol in the 1791 L’Enfant Plan.

1901.2 In 1799, the Washington Navy Yard was established about a mile south of the U.S. Capitol. It became the main port for receiving materials to construct Washington, DC’s monumental buildings. Wharves and fisheries were established along the shoreline, and ocean-going vessels enjoyed a navigable channel up to the port of Bladensburg, Maryland. By the mid-1800s, development around the Navy Yard extended across the river via the 11th Street Bridge to Historic Anacostia (then called Uniontown). Moderate-income housing for Navy workers and others employed at the docks and nearby industrial areas was developed.

1901.3 By the time of the Civil War, tobacco farming, clear-cutting of forests, and industrial activities had silted and polluted the Anacostia River. The river shrank from depths of 40 feet to barely eight feet, making it too shallow for navigation by sea-bound vessels. The Navy Yard built its last large ship in 1876. After the war, the large tobacco plantations that had dominated the landscape along the Anacostia River were broken up into smaller farms or abandoned. The manufacturing and farming communities around the Navy Yard included a large population of newly emancipated residents, beginning a long history of African- American neighborhoods along the river.

1901.4 With the construction of Washington’s sewer system in the 1880s, water quality in the Anacostia River continued to deteriorate. The tidal wetlands were the source of mosquito-borne malaria outbreaks and prone to periodic flooding. In 1901, the Senate Parks Commission suggested (through the McMillan Plan) that riverfront open space be constructed to improve public health conditions and create parkland. Between 1902 and 1926, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) filled in wetlands and mudflats, and constructed seawalls along the riverbanks to create Anacostia Park. Tons of dredged river bottom were used to create Kingman and Heritage Islands. However, the McMillan Plan vision of a grand interconnected public park system was never realized.

1901.5 For most of the 20th century, the Anacostia waterfront continued to be the location for unwanted land uses and neglectful land management practices. Landfilling of the marshes and wetlands continued through the 1930s and 1940s. Most of the tributaries were rerouted into storm drains, further compromising the ecosystem and health of the river.

1901.6 After World War II, significant population growth in the watershed affected both the river and the waterfront neighborhoods. While direct dumping into the river was curbed, highway building and development in the 176-square mile watershed led to continued pollution from stormwater runoff. Neighborhoods near the Southwest waterfront deteriorated further and finally were declared obsolete by planning documents of the early 1950s. Plans to rehabilitate the housing in an incremental manner were passed over in favor of more dramatic plans to clear and rebuild the entire community. These plans ultimately resulted in the largest urban renewal project in the United States. Thousands of mostly lower-income Black families were displaced, and the new Southeast/Southwest Freeway further eroded connections to the waterfront.

1901.7 By the 1970s, a grass roots movement to save the Anacostia River was gaining momentum. This movement grew during the 1980s and 1990s, as groups like the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Anacostia Watershed Society advocated for the restoration of the District’s forgotten river and improvements to its watershed to reduce pollution. Initiatives and mandates to clean the Chesapeake Bay and implement federal water quality programs provided further impetus for action. In March 2000, Mayor Anthony Williams and 20 different agencies controlling land or having jurisdiction over the Anacostia shoreline signed the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU led to the production and completion of the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan in November 2003. The Framework Plan has guided the revitalization of the waterfront and its shoreline communities for well over a decade, with many actions already realized or underway, such as improvement to water and environmental quality and the ongoing development of Capitol Riverfront, the Wharf, Buzzard Point, and Hill East.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1902** LAND USE {#sec-10-a1902 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1902}

1902.1 Land use statistics for the Anacostia Waterfront Planning Area appear in Figure 19.1. The area includes 1,884 acres of land and 1,295 acres of water. The Planning Area represents about five percent of the District’s land area. Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, and water bodies. They are not comparable to the statistics originally included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not to actual changes in land use.

1902.2 About 25 percent of the Planning Area is in federal ownership. A little over 30 percent of the Planning Area consists of parks and open space. Much of this land is adjacent to the waterfront and is under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service (NPS). Non-park federal uses include Fort McNair and the Navy Yard.

1902.3 Figure 19.1: Land Use Composition in Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area.

1902.4 In 2015, residential uses accounted for just eight percent of the land area and were concentrated in Southwest Washington, DC and Capitol Riverfront. Commercial and mixed-uses constitute about 4.6 percent of the Planning Area. The industrial zones, primarily located at Buzzard Point, have begun to transition into higher-density, mixed-use neighborhood development, fulfilling the vision of the Anacostia Waterfront Framework. It is anticipated that residential land uses will continue to increase as more sites in Capitol Riverfront, Buzzard Point, and the Wharf are developed.

1902.5 Public facilities comprise three percent of the area. Institutional uses comprise about two percent of the area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1903** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a1903 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1903}

1903.1 Basic demographic data for the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area is shown in Figure 19.2. In 2017, the area had a population of 18,125. Between 2000 and 2017, the population increased by about 3,996.

1903.2 As of 2017, just under 52 percent of the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area’s residents were white, which is a significant increase from 24 percent in 2000. In 2017 just under 40 percent of the Planning Area’s residents were Black, which is a decrease from 67 percent in 2000. Some of this change in demographics can be attributed to the net gain in developable land and subsequent new construction of residential units attracting residents to the area. Additionally, most of the new residential buildings have primarily consisted of market rate one-bedroom units, attracting more young professionals to the area for the first time. Approximately six percent of the area’s residents are of Hispanic/Latino origin, and 10 percent are foreign-born.

1903.3 A notable demographic shift is the reduction in the percentage of the population under the age of 18. In 2017 10.4 percent of the population was under age 18, compared to 18.4 percent in 2000. These trends reflect the increase in the working-age population moving into the area. The area’s percentage of older adults over the age of 65 remained generally constant at about 13 percent between 2000 and 2015.

1903.4 Based on land availability, planning policies, and regional growth and development trends, the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area will experience significant growth in population, households, and jobs over the coming decades. The population, which was 18,125 in 2017, is expected to grow to 40,200 in 2025, 48,997 in 2035, and 58,789 in 2045. The number of households is expected to increase from 10,083 to 33,915 in 2045.

1903.5 Diversity is one of the strengths of the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area. The Southwest neighborhood, in particular, is one of the most racially and economically diverse areas in the District. The neighborhood is a microcosm of Washington, DC; this is one of the defining characteristics of the community and one that residents value highly.

1903.6 Figure 19.2 Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest at a Glance

##### **10-A DCMR § 1904** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a1904 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1904}

1904.1 A majority of the housing stock in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area is contained in multi-family buildings. In 2017, about 71 percent of the housing stock was located in buildings with 20 or more units, which is more than twice the District-wide proportion of 35.4 percent. The housing stock is a mix of buildings built in the 1960s and 1970s through urban renewal and buildings built in the last five years. About 25 percent of the area’s housing stock consists of row houses and townhomes, which is similar to the District-wide level of 26 percent. However, the proportion of single-family detached homes in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area is less than two percent, which is substantially less than the District-wide total of 11.9 percent.

1904.2 The Southwest Waterfront Gangplank Marina currently has 87 spaces for live-aboard vessels and houseboats. Once Phase 2 of the Wharf is completed, that number is expected to increase to 94 spaces.

1904.3 In 2017 7.5 percent of the residential units in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area were vacant, which is the same as the vacancy rate in 2000. The percentage of vacant units is slightly lower than the District as a whole. Between 2000 and 2017, homeownership rates in the area increased from 28.2 percent to 34.1 percent, while the portion of renter-occupied units decreased.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1905** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a1905 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1905}

1905.1 According to the U.S. Census Bureau 2017 data, the median household income in 2017 for the Planning Area was $72,904, a 117 percent increase from $35,516 in 2000. Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) indicates approximately 49,511 jobs were in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area in 2015. This represents 6.2 percent of the District’s job base. Job growth is expected to increase significantly to 65,698 jobs in 2025, 79,397 jobs in 2035, and 92,314 jobs in 2045.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1906** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a1906 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1906}

1906.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

1906.2 Planning issues along the Anacostia Waterfront were discussed at many of the Comprehensive Plan workshops held in 2005 and 2006, particularly at meetings conducted on Capitol Hill and in Southwest DC. Priorities for this area were more explicitly stated during the previous three-year process that led to the development of the Anacostia Waterfront Framework plan. Concurrent planning programs for the Southwest Waterfront, Reservation 13, and the Near Southeast in the early 2000s involved hundreds of District residents. Since 2000, several citizens advisory groups, focus groups, and design charrettes have been convened, providing additional opportunities to identify key issues and goals.

1906.3 The Comprehensive Plan responds to the key messages provided by the community at these meetings. These are summarized below:

The river has come to symbolize the social and economic divide in Washington, DC, separating east from west and presenting a challenge to the District’s goal of growing more inclusively. It should instead become a unifier and a source of economic opportunity for the neighborhoods on its shores. The waterfront should unite the District physically, economically, and socially. This will require redefining its image and identity, and fundamentally redirecting growth patterns in Washington, DC toward emerging waterfront areas.

Revitalizing the waterfront must not be done at the expense of the established communities that exist near its shoreline. Existing neighborhoods and important community institutions should be conserved and should be the focus of reinvestment during the coming years. Residents should have a say in the future of the waterfront and should be protected from displacement as change occurs. Within new neighborhoods, diverse housing choices should be provided so that a mix of household types and incomes are accommodated. Affordable housing for moderate-income families and for the District’s lowest-income residents should be part of this equation. Social and economic diversity should be respected.

The river provides a unique setting for monuments, memorials, and signature features that can potentially shape and redefine Washington, DC’s identity in the 21st century. This potential should not be squandered. The Potomac River is already a celebrated waterfront, but its character is distinctive in its own way. The Anacostia River should be unique, with activities that invigorate urban life. New destinations should celebrate the cultural heritage of the District and the nation. As cultural facilities are developed, the extraordinary and unheralded stories of the neighborhoods along the river should be told.

Many of the great open spaces and parks of the Anacostia waterfront are hard to find, underused, and neglected. These areas should be better connected to one another, and to the neighborhoods they adjoin. A variety of park environments should be created, from lively urban waterfront plazas to serene natural settings. Trails and promenades are needed to provide better access along the shoreline, and to make the waterfront more accessible to surrounding communities. New parks, recreational areas, and cultural facilities should be developed.

Urban development and natural resource conservation should not be mutually exclusive, but should go hand in hand. Development on the waterfront—and throughout the watershed—should be environmentally sustainable and designed to minimize negative effects on water quality and ecological resources. In some cases, plans to reduce sewage overflows into the river should be accompanied by restoration of wetlands and buried streams, and conservation of natural habitat. From a regional perspective, additional density along the waterfront is one of the best examples of smart growth. It can curb urban sprawl by channeling more housing demand back toward the District’s center. More density near the waterfront can also be used to leverage the creation of additional waterfront parks and open spaces.

Access between the east and west sides of the river should be improved. Human-scale crossings should be emphasized, rather than the existing freeway bridges that are almost exclusively oriented toward cars and trucks. The design of transportation infrastructure should be rethought to better serve waterfront neighborhoods, reduce barriers to waterfront access, and create gateways to waterfront parks. Bridges should be regarded as opportunities for great civic architecture. In general, transportation design should strive for a better balance between the needs of cars, and the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. The river itself should be seen as a transit opportunity, with water taxis and ferries providing easy access across the river and to riverfront designations like Georgetown and Alexandria, Virginia.

Development along the waterfront should be designed to respect the scale and integrity adjacent neighborhoods. As the District works to create distinct waterfront destinations, it should also restore and rehabilitate historic structures, protect views and sunlight, reinforce neighborhood commercial centers, and enhance the quality of life for existing residents. While densities in new waterfront communities are likely to be higher than those in adjacent communities, they should not be visually overwhelming. This is particularly true where new development sites abut fine-grained row house neighborhoods that have existed for more than a century. Planning for large-scale development should be responsive to local concerns about traffic, crowd-control, displacement, community service impacts, and changing neighborhood character.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1907** AW-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a1907 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1907}

1907.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

1907.2 Policy AW-1.1.1: Conservation of Established Waterfront Neighborhoods

Revitalize and preserve established neighborhoods in the Waterfront Planning Area while promoting infill development to provide new housing opportunities, including accessory dwelling units, to meet a range of affordability levels and housing needs. Continued investment in the existing housing stock and in established local commercial areas should be strongly encouraged.

1907.3 Policy AW-1.1.2: New Waterfront Neighborhoods

Create new mixed-use, mixed-income neighborhoods on vacant or underused waterfront lands, particularly on large contiguous publicly owned waterfront sites. Within the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area, new neighborhoods should continue to be developed at the Southwest Waterfront, Buzzard Point, Poplar Point, and Navy Yard/Capitol Riverfront. These neighborhoods should be linked to new neighborhoods upriver at Reservation 13, and Kenilworth-Parkside via trails, additional water recreation opportunities, and improved park access points along the Anacostia shoreline. A substantial amount of new housing and commercial space should be developed in these areas, reaching households of all incomes, types, sizes, and needs. Opportunities for grid interconnected neighborhood-scale energy utilities systems as part of the development of these areas should be evaluated, using renewable energy sources to provide greater environmental benefits for the community. The new waterfront neighborhoods should integrate new parks and amenities, enhance public access to the waterfront, and incorporate resilient design to mitigate flooding.

1907.4 Policy AW-1.1.3: Lower Anacostia Waterfront Infrastructure for Flood Mitigation

Identify locations of future development that are at risk of flooding to help prioritize infrastructure improvements to mitigate flooding. Encourage the inclusion of parks, open space, and other improvements around denser development that preserve or enhance the natural function of floodplains.

1907.5 Policy AW-1.1.4: Lower Anacostia Waterfront Flood Modeling

Prioritize the Lower Anacostia Waterfront area for comprehensive flood modeling of projected sea level rise and future flood hazard conditions because the area’s flooding potential s not accounted for in the current Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Local studies that are not currently accounted for in the District’s currently effective Flood Insurance Rate Maps should be used in tandem with Policy AW-R. 3 (below) for encouraging climate-adaptive development.

1907.6 Policy AW-1.1.5: Flood-Resilient and Climate-Adaptive Development

Provide guidelines and promote the planning, design, construction, and management of resilient buildings in flood hazard areas within the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area. Design and construct developments to be adaptive to future flood hazard conditions due to storm surge and sea level rise.

See the Urban Design Element for additional guidance on flood resilience.

1907.7 Policy AW-1.1.6: Resilient Affordable Housing

Incorporate climate resilience measures into the rehabilitation of existing and creation of new affordable housing located in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area to protect these units against current and projected future flood conditions.

1907.8 Policy AW-1.1.7: Waterfront Area Commercial Development

Encourage commercial development in the waterfront area in a manner that is consistent with the Future Land Use Map. Such development should bring more retail services and choices to the Anacostia waterfront, as well as space for government and private sector activities, such as offices and hotels. A mix of high-density commercial and residential development should be focused along key corridors, particularly along Maine Avenue and M Street SE and SW, along South Capitol Street, and near the Waterfront and Navy Yard Metro stations. Maritime activities, such as cruise ship operations, should be maintained and supported as the waterfront redevelops.

1907.9 Policy AW-1.1.8: Waterfront Development Amenities

Leverage new development in the Waterfront Planning Area to create amenities and benefits that serve existing and new residents. These amenities should include parks, job training and educational opportunities, new community services, and transportation and infrastructure improvements.

1907.10 Policy AW-1.1.9: River Basins as a Planning Guide

Recognize and be responsive to the distinct settings and environments created by varying conditions along the shoreline. Consistent with the Anacostia Framework Plan, the river should be viewed as a series of basins, each defined by its unique physical and visual characteristics. In general, there should be a progression from a more urban environment on the lower basins (Washington Channel and the river gateway) to a more natural environment on the upper basins, such as Kingman and Heritage Islands, and the Arboretum.

1907.11 Policy AW-1.1.10: Pedestrian Orientation of Waterfront Uses

Provide a high level of pedestrian and cyclist amenities along the shoreline, including informational and interpretive signs, benches and street furniture, and public art. Pedestrian and cyclist facilities should be designed to accommodate the greatest number of users with varying abilities. Where possible, trail design should support the safe use of the trail in the evenings. Continue to coordinate with federal agencies to ensure the continuity of character and wayfinding and explore additional opportunities for public access on federally owned waterfront properties.

1907.12 Policy AW-1.1.11: Multimodal Waterfront Streets

Design streets along the waterfront to be truly multimodal, meeting the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, as well as motor vehicles. Safe pedestrian crossings, including overpasses and underpasses, should be provided to improve waterfront access.

1907.13 Policy AW-1.1.12: Barriers to Shoreline Access

Minimize the visual and accessibility impacts of railroad and highway infrastructure, surface parking, access roads, and industrial uses along the Anacostia River shoreline. In particular, the impacts of freeways on waterfront access should be mitigated by supporting the redesign of these facilities as tunnels or landscaped boulevards. Explore ways to mitigate the impacts of highway infrastructure on shoreline access for neighborhoods in Wards 7 and 8. Continue to increase the number of boat slips, waterside amenities, and water recreation options, such as kayaking and paddle boarding along the Anacostia shoreline.

1907.14 Policy AW 1.1.13: Southwest Ecodistrict Plan Implementation

Explore ways to jointly fund the implementation of recommendations of the Southwest Ecodistrict Plan in coordination with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) to improve the aesthetic quality, identity, and pedestrian character of Near Southwest and strengthen connections between the Wharf and the National Mall. Identify and implement design guidelines for new or renovated buildings, streetscape and signage improvements, pedestrian circulation changes, and measures to mitigate the scale of the area’s monolithic buildings. Promote new residential, cultural and/or retail uses if federal properties transfer from federal use, or pursuant to any new arrangements with the NCPC, such as 99-year ground leases.

1907.15 Policy AW-1.1.14: Upgrading the Bridges

Upgrade the bridges across the Anacostia River to better manage transportation flows, ensure their safety for decades to come, facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel across the river, and provide attractive and distinctive civic landmarks.

1907.16 Action AW-1.1.A: Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan through coordination among District and federal agencies, community stakeholders, business improvement districts (BIDs), private property owners, and environmental, philanthropic, and community-based organizations.

1907.17 Action AW-1.1.B: River Crossing Improvements

Implement the recommendations of the Middle Anacostia River Transportation Crossings Study that seek to improve local and regional traffic mobility.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1908** AW-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a1908 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1908}

1908.1 Policy AW-1.2.1: Historic and Cultural Waterfront Assets

Capitalize on the historic and cultural assets located near the Lower Waterfront, such as the Washington Navy Yard and Fort McNair. Public education about these assets should be expanded, the physical trail connections and wayfinding signage between them should be enhanced, and greater recognition of their value and importance should be achieved.

1908.2 Policy AW-1.2.2: Waterfront Cultural and Commemorative Sites

Encourage the siting of new museums, memorials, civic gathering places, and cultural attractions on or near the Anacostia River as a way to catalyze revitalization and meet the demand for additional commemorative works without further crowding the National Mall and monumental core of the District. Such facilities should make the most of their waterfront locations and create an integrated system of gracious, beautiful, and vibrant places.

1908.3 Policy AW-1.2.3: Waterfront Sports and Recreation Destinations

Continue to develop new destinations for sports, recreation, and celebration on or near the Anacostia waterfront, including as part of future development at Buzzard Point, Poplar Point, and the 11th Street Bridge Park. These destinations should be served by adequate and efficient transportation systems and infrastructure.

1908.4 Policy AW-1.2.4: Anacostia River Parks

Create a connected network of waterfront parks from Hains Point to the Sousa Bridge, and continuing through adjacent upriver Planning Areas to the Maryland border. These parks should be easily accessible to surrounding neighborhoods and accommodate the need for more local and regional recreational activities in Washington, DC. New parks should be an integral part of any new waterfront neighborhood and should showcase the remarkably diverse landscape along the Anacostia River. A variety of active and passive recreational settings should be provided. Parks should be designed to enhance resilience to flooding and incorporate natural shorelines where feasible.

1908.5 Policy AW-1.2.5: African American Heritage

Recognize and highlight the role of Lower Anacostia Waterfront neighborhoods in the history of the District’s African-American community. Acknowledge the impact of the African American community through markers, heritage trails, and cultural facilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1909** AW-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a1909 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1909}

1909.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified six areas in the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Planning Area as Policy Focus Areas, meaning that they require a level of direction and guidance above that in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 19.1 and Figure 19.3). These six areas are:

Southwest Waterfront, home of the Wharf development and the historic Washington Fish Market; South Capitol Street, a major axis to the U.S. Capitol and Anacostia River; Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront, home of the Navy Yard, Nationals Park, acres of waterfront parks, and thousands of new residential units; Poplar Point, a large and prominent site adjacent to Anacostia Park on the river’s eastern edge that is currently under federal ownership;

Southwest neighborhood, an established and diverse residential community located in between the Wharf and Buzzard Point; and

Buzzard Point, a traditionally industrial area that is currently emerging as a mixed-use waterfront neighborhood and the home of the Audi Field soccer stadium.

1909.2 Figure 19.3 Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest

1909.3 Map 19.1: Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Policy Focus Areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1910** AW-2.1 SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT {#sec-10-a1910 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1910}

1910.1 The Southwest Waterfront is a 45-acre area along the Washington Channel, stretching three-quarters of a mile along Maine Avenue from the Tidal Basin to Fort McNair. The area includes the Washington Fish Market, portions of East Potomac Park, a boating/residential community at Gangplank Marina, and the Wharf, a mixed-use development on the Southwest Waterfront. Nearby uses include the Arena Stage, several churches, office buildings, and apartments. Major points of access include 4th, 6th, 7th, and 9th Streets SW, M Street SW, and the L’Enfant Plaza and Waterfront Metro stations.

1910.2 Although it is relatively accessible and familiar to residents of Southwest, the Southwest Waterfront had not been the active, public, civic space it could be. Historically, roads and parking lots accounted for over 40 percent of the area, with multiple lanes of traffic between the shoreline and adjacent residential areas. L’Enfant Plaza and the National Mall are just a few blocks away. Until recently, there were no clear means of pedestrian access from these heavily visited areas to the shoreline. With much of the Southwest Waterfront in public ownership, the District had a unique opportunity to create a place that served both as an extension of the adjacent neighborhood and a new regional destination.

1910.3 The District completed the Southwest Waterfront Development Plan in 2003, adopting short- and mid-term actions to transform the area. The Southwest Waterfront Development Plan called for eliminating Water Street and improving Maine Avenue as a pedestrian-friendly urban street. The elimination of Water Street and replacement of surface parking with structured parking has increased available public space and developable land and has allowed for the creation of new parks, plazas, and mixed-use development. Active ground floor uses, such as retail stores, restaurants, and performance venues, are now making this area an active and animated urban waterfront.

1910.4 Construction of the Wharf at the Southwest Waterfront began in 2014. The first phase of development was delivered in 2017 and includes a mix of housing, office, retail, hotel, and concert venues, as well as improved public waterfront access, recreational piers, and green space. Following the recommendations from the previous planning effort and extensive community input, the Wharf will include over three million square feet of mixed-use development at full build-out. The mix of market rate and affordable residential units and commercial development, with retail, restaurants, and entertainment offerings, has created a vibrant new waterfront destination and regional attraction.

1910.5 The existing fish market has been retained in its present location and refurbished, with its low-scale character maintained. In addition, the Wharf includes expanded piers, additional boat slips, and several acres of waterfront parks and a promenade.

1910.6 The District has worked with federal and local partners to improve pedestrian access to the waterfront via the Banneker Overlook at 10th Street SW. The area also has seen the development of new museums in this vicinity further north, close to L’Enfant Plaza, and is benefitting from new water taxi service, transit improvements, and landscaping.

1910.7 Ongoing plans for the Southwest Waterfront should be implemented in a way that continues to recognize the broader context of the Southwest neighborhood and its connection to the National Mall.

1910.8 Policy AW-2.1.1: Mixed-Use Development

Support the redevelopment of the Southwest Waterfront with medium- to high-density housing, commercial and cultural uses, and improved open space and parking. The development should be designed to make the most of the waterfront location, preserving views and enhancing access to and along the shoreline.

1910.9 Policy AW-2.1.2: New Public Spaces and Open Space

Continue to create additional public spaces and plazas at the Southwest Waterfront during the second phase of construction of the Wharf, including the continuation of the public promenade at the water’s edge and a new marina. Public piers should extend from each of the major terminating streets, providing views and public access to the water.

1910.10 Policy AW-2.1.3: Connecting to the Southwest Waterfront

Continue to enhance pedestrian connections from the Southwest neighborhood, Waterfront Metro station, and L’Enfant Plaza area to the Wharf by creating new public spaces and trails, and providing safer pedestrian crossings across Maine Avenue SW.

1910.11 Policy AW-2.1.4: Maine Avenue SW

Continue to transform Maine Avenue SW into a landscaped urban street that has direct access to waterfront uses, provides a pedestrian-friendly street environment, and accommodates multiple modes of travel (including bicycles). Future developments on the north side of Maine Avenue should be designed to support a pedestrian-friendly environment.

1910.12 Policy AW-2.1.5: Washington Channel Maritime Activities

Reorganize the Washington Channel’s maritime activities, including cruise ship berths and marinas, to provide more appropriate relationships to landside uses and opportunities for water taxis, ferries, and other forms of water transportation. In implementing this policy, cruise ship operations should be retained and supported, recognizing their economic benefits to the District and their recreational and cultural value for residents and visitors.

1910.13 Action AW-2.1.A: Southwest Waterfront Development Plan

Implement the 2003 Southwest Waterfront Development Plan.

1910.14 Action AW-2.1.B: Long-Term Improvements

Study the feasibility of the long-term improvements identified in the Southwest Waterfront Plan, such as a Hains Point Canal (in East Potomac Park), relocation of cruise lines and their infrastructure, a new Yellow Line Metro station at the waterfront, and construction of a pedestrian/bicycle bridge across the channel near the Case Bridge.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1911** AW-2.2 SOUTH CAPITOL STREET {#sec-10-a1911 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1911}

1911.1 South Capitol Street is one of the District’s four principal axes and marks the division between the District’s southeast and southwest quadrants. It is an important part of the regional highway system, with traffic volumes of approximately 52,000 cars per day. The street provides many residents and visitors with their first view of the U.S. Capitol building and is an important gateway into Central Washington, DC.

1911.2 This symbolic role contrasts with the current state of the corridor. Awkwardly shaped properties, some vacant and others barricaded from public access, front the street between the U.S. Capitol and I-395. Elevated railroad tracks and freeway ramps obstruct vistas and the Capitol Power Plant is an additional presence. South of I-395, the street enters into a mix of new residential high-rise buildings, historic single-family homes, commercial uses, Nationals Park, and parking lots. South of the Frederick Douglass Bridge, these give way to an eclectic mix of industrial and utility uses along the shoreline, including a power plant.

1911.3 The transportation infrastructure in the area also creates a significant barrier to connectivity to surrounding areas. Both South Capitol Street and the Frederick Douglass Bridge need repair. South Capitol Street has no bike lanes, and sidewalks are minimal and unshaded. High-speed traffic and the lack of signalized intersections have been a deterrent to increasing active and safe bike and pedestrian access These issues will be addressed as part of the South Capitol Street Corridor Project currently underway. This major capital project, extending across the Anacostia River, will make major streetscape improvements to South Capitol Street and create a new Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge. This project represents the largest capital project that the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) has ever undertaken.

1911.4 Since the mid-1990s, the District has been working with its federal partners to transform South Capitol Street into a grand urban boulevard with a mix of land uses and commemorative works that are more fitting of its role as a gateway to the national capital. Such a vision was first laid out in the 1997 NCPC Legacy Plan and later refined by the 2003 South Capitol Urban Design Study. A task force including federal and District representatives was convened in 2004 to develop design options and an open space framework for the corridor.

1911.5 Over the coming years, South Capitol Street will continue to be transformed into a waterfront gateway with new mixed-use development, green space, broad sidewalks, and a beautiful new and realigned Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge. High-density office, housing, and retail uses are envisioned along the corridor between I-395 and the shoreline. Nationals Park has become the centerpiece of a new entertainment district that includes cultural attractions, retail, restaurants, row houses and high-density housing in the Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard area. Near the foot of the reconstructed Frederick Douglass Bridge, an oval traffic rotary is planned to create a green commons for a future national memorial. Further south in Buzzard Point, the opening of Audi Field, the new stadium for the District’s professional soccer team, is leading the transformation of this formerly industrial land into a new waterfront neighborhood with multiple mixed-use residential and commercial development planned or under construction.

See the Buzzard Point Policy Focus Area for further guidance.

1911.6 As the design and construction of the South Capitol Street Corridor Project continues into the coming years, through additional agency coordination this major infrastructure investment can achieve other District goals for the Lower Anacostia Waterfront Area. Plans will need to focus on the Buzzard Point waterfront, addressing issues such as land use compatibility transportation and access, urban design, and opportunities for new park and open space amenities. The Buzzard Point Vision Framework and Design Review Guide, completed by OP in 2017, provides urban design-based guidance to shape future public investments and private mixed-use development as part of Buzzard Point’s transformation into a new waterfront community. The framework supports making South Capitol Street more pedestrian- and bike-friendly to and from Buzzard Point and includes recommendations to inform the design of the new Oval Park being created through the South Capitol Street Corridor Project. Plans for this area should improve connections between Southwest and the waterfront and retain and improve the established low-scale residential areas on the west side of South Capitol Street.

1911.7 Policy AW-2.2.1: South Capitol Street Urban Boulevard

Transform South Capitol Street into a great urban boulevard and walking street, befitting its role as a gateway to the U.S. Capitol and a major Anacostia River crossing. Development along the street should include a mix of federal, District, and private uses.

1911.8 Policy AW-2.2.2: Ballpark Entertainment District and Capitol Riverfront

Leverage the success of Nationals Park and Audi Field (the new professional soccer stadium), drawing residents, workers, and visitors to the Capitol Riverfront/Navy Yard area to catalyze additional development of the South Capitol Street corridor with retail, high-density residential, entertainment, and commercial uses.

1911.9 Policy AW-2.2.3: South Capitol Commemorative and Civic Uses

Incorporate ceremonial uses, such as memorials, plazas, monuments, museums, and other commemorative works, along the South Capitol Street corridor. The revitalized street provides a significant opportunity to expand civic and cultural facilities beyond the confines of the monumental core.

1911.10 Policy AW-2.2.4: South Capitol Street Transit Improvements

Promote multimodal transportation improvements along the South Capitol Corridor, including transit options like streetcar or bus rapid transit, and improve pedestrian connections to the Navy Yard and Waterfront Metro stations.

1911.11 Policy AW-2.2.5: South Capitol Open Space

Create additional open space in the South Capitol Street corridor, including an oval traffic rotary and South Capitol commons, as well as new waterfront parks and plazas along the Anacostia shoreline.

1911.12 Policy AW-2.2.6: South Capitol Neighborhood Buffers

The established communities adjacent to the South Capitol Street corridor, including the James Creek, Syphax Gardens, and Greenleaf Gardens housing developments and adjacent residential areas, shall be buffered from adverse impacts associated with increased development capacity and traffic relating to stadium area development. Avoid displacing these communities because they are an important part of Washington, DC’s fabric and provide affordable housing resources for the Southwest community.

1911.13 Action AW-2.2.A: Coordination with Federal Agencies

Continue to coordinate with the NCPC, the NPS, and other federal agencies on implementing the South Capitol Street Corridor Project.

1911.14 Action AW-2.2.B: South Capitol Gateway

Create a civic or commemorative feature of national significance at the north end of the Frederick Douglass Bridge to celebrate this location as a riverfront and District gateway.

1911.15 Action AW-2.2.C: South Capitol Transportation Improvements

Continue efforts to improve traffic flows and accommodate additional travel modes along South Capitol Street, including completion of the South Capitol Environmental Impact Statement and the reconstruction of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge and related access points.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1912** AW-2.3 NEAR SOUTHEAST/CAPITOL RIVERFRONT {#sec-10-a1912 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1912}

1912.1 Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront includes the triangular area between I-695 and the Southeast Boulevard SE, South Capitol Street, and the Anacostia River. This 350-acre area has played an important role in the history of Washington, DC; its initial settlement even predates the creation of the District. In the 19th century, this was a community where residential streets came down to the river’s edge, a place teeming with life and maritime activity. Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront experienced substantial disinvestment during the second half of the 20th century, which led to social and economic challenges.

1912.2 Over the last 15 years, District and federal initiatives have transformed Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront into a dynamic waterfront neighborhood and workplace. These initiatives have included the relocation of 5,000 federal employees back to the Washington Navy Yard, the redevelopment of the Arthur Capper Carrollsburg public housing development through the federal HOPE VI Program, construction of a new headquarters for the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), and the reconfiguration of the 55-acre Southeast Federal Center to allow new housing, offices, and waterfront parkland. Significant private and public investment has followed, including the construction of new office buildings, hotels, and housing, as well as Nationals Park. Signature new parks such as Yards Park, an award-winning four-acre waterfront park, are drawing thousands of visitors weekly.

1912.3 Revitalization of the Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront has been one of the cornerstones of the AWI. A 2003 AWI Urban Design Plan for the area provides a framework for its redevelopment. While many of the recommendations from the 2003 AWI Plan have been completed, future development should continue to create mixed-income housing opportunities, provide pedestrian-friendly streets, enhance neighborhood resilience to flooding and other climate threats, and establish great public spaces both on the waterfront and in the adjacent neighborhood. One of AWI’s most important principles is to preserve existing low-income housing units in the area while adding thousands of units of new market rate and affordable housing.

1912.4 The Near Southeast Urban Design Plan, as part of the AWI, envisioned M Street SE as a great urban boulevard with high-density offices and apartments activated by ground floor retail space, restaurants, and civic uses. It calls for the extension of New Jersey Avenue and other streets in the District grid to the waterfront, terminating at a new shoreline park and waterfront promenade, which has been completed as Yards Park. The Near Southeast Urban Design Plan calls for the preservation of important historic resources and the respectful integration of future developments with those of historic resources. These include the majority of the Navy Yard, which is now designated as historic, and the historic street grid and network of park reservations laid out by Pierre L’Enfant.

1912.5 Several subareas were identified by the Near Southeast Urban Design Plan, with land use and urban design goals set forth for each. These areas are South Capitol Gateway, Canal Blocks, Capper Carrollsburg, the Marine Barracks area, the 8th Street SE historic area, East M Street, the Navy Yard, the Southeast Federal Center, and the DC Water pump station area. Strategies to better connect and integrate these areas are provided. The Near Southeast Plan laid out a street and block plan for the entire area, as well as a trail system and open space framework. Guidelines for specific sites, such as Florida Rock (near the foot of South Capitol) and Maritime Plaza (the former Washington Gas site), were provided to ensure that planned development fit into the framework for the overall area.

1912.6 The Near Southeast Urban Design Plan envisioned a net increase of 4,200 housing units, 13.6 million square feet of office space, and 705,000 square feet of retail area within the area’s boundaries. The Near Southeast Urban Design Plan also identified more than 40 acres of new parks and open space. Since the launch of the AWI and completion of the Near Southeast Urban Design Plan, the Capitol Riverfront area largely fulfilled the vision of these plans. As of 2017, Capitol Riverfront is now home to over 6,000 new residential units, 6.2 million square feet of office space, and 34,000 daytime employees. Over 10 acres of parks and 400,000 square feet of retail space have also been developed. Additional residential buildings, retail, and other amenities are currently planned or under construction. Collaborative planning between the District, the federal government, and the private sector has been ongoing since the Near Southeast Plan was completed and will continue during the years ahead.

1912.7 Policy AW-2.3.1: Restoring the Urban Pattern of the Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront

Facilitate redevelopment of Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront by breaking down large contiguously owned government properties into individual development parcels in scale with the traditional urban street grid. Encourage high-density mixed-use development and open space on newly configured parcels, with new buildings designed and oriented to make the most of their waterfront or near-waterfront settings.

1912.8 Policy AW-2.3.2: Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront Shoreline Access

Improve shoreline access and movement to and through Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront by eliminating real and perceived barriers, improving public space and street corridors, reducing the amount of land occupied by surface parking and industrial uses, and encouraging new land uses that maximize public activity near the waterfront. Encourage resilient shoreline design that is adaptive to flooding from storm surge and sea level rise and implement natural shorelines where possible.

1912.9 Policy AW-2.3.3: Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront Housing Opportunities

Significantly increase residential land uses in Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront, particularly in the Southeast Federal Center, Capper Carrollsburg, Canal Blocks, and South Capitol Gateway areas. Consistent with the existing zoning for these areas, mixed-use development that includes housing and commercial uses should be strongly encouraged. The mix of housing should accommodate residents of all incomes and household types.

1912.10 Policy AW-2.3.4: M Street SE

Transform M Street SE into an attractive pedestrian-oriented thoroughfare, lined with retail shops and services, with upper-story office, hotels, and residential uses. The street itself should be designed as a multimodal boulevard, accommodating pedestrians, bicycles, and transit vehicles as well as cars. It should strengthen connections between Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront, Southwest, and Capitol Hill.

1912.11 Policy AW-2.3.5: Restoration of the L’Enfant Plan in Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront

Restore key elements of the original L’Enfant Plan within Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront, including the District street grid, the extension of New Jersey Avenue SE and 3rd and 4th Streets SE to the waterfront, and the possible replacement of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway with an at-grade boulevard (Virginia Avenue SE). Amend the L’Enfant Plan designation as needed to prevent further intrusion into the New Jersey Avenue vista of the Capitol Dome or other intended street views.

1912.12 Policy AW-2.3.6: Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront Urban Amenities

Leverage new and existing developments in the Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront area to create amenities, such as parks, trails, child-care facilities, civic uses, and retail space, that serve the area’s residents and workforce. Encourage the redesign of Virginia Avenue Park into a more inviting park and green space that supports a wide range of users of all ages and abilities.

1912.13 Policy AW-2.3.7: Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront Historic Identity

Celebrate the Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront’s history and integrate important historic and cultural resources. These resources include the Navy Yard; the future 11th Street Bridge Park; local educational, religious, and cultural institutions; and historic landmarks, including industrial and utility buildings like the District Pumping Station.

1912.14 Policy AW-2.3.8: Revitalization of Lower 8th Street SE

Support new development and active ground floor uses in the area around 8th Street SE, south of Virginia Avenue SE, to create greater retail and residential opportunities that reinvigorate the area. Increased development will improve linkages with areas north and west, benefit workers at the Navy Yard and existing businesses along Barracks Row and support the redesign of Virginia Avenue Park. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process should be used to allow for additional building heights on portions of the lower 8th Street SE corridor while not encroaching on the existing viewshed of the historic Latrobe Gate of the Navy Yard. Prioritize supporting ways to allow existing businesses to remain at potential ground floor uses in new developments.

1912.15 Policy AW-2.3.9: Development of Boathouse Row

Study ways to enhance Boathouse Row, a historic Black boating area located between the 11th Street Bridge and the CSX freight rail bridge per the guiding principles outlined in the 2009 Boathouse Row Planning Study. Increase access to water recreation and use resilient design features to mitigate flooding and sea level rise. This area has the potential to be further developed as a recreational area with facilities and amenities to support wider community use. Support direct pedestrian and bike connections between nearby neighborhoods and the waterfront, as included in the Southeast Boulevard Project plans.

1912.16 Action AW-2.3.A: Zoning Incentives

Continue to incentivize residential uses within Near Southeast areas, such as the Capitol Gateway, the former Southeast Federal Center, and downtown zones within the Lower Anacostia/Near Southeast Planning Area. Expand and intensify zoning incentives that promote affordable housing in these areas.

1912.17 Action AW-2.3.B: Boathouse Row Recreational Uses

Ensure that zoning and land use guidance are adopted to facilitate the use of Boathouse Row as a recreational and community resource. Recreational improvements also should include equipment or design features that are appropriate for persons of all ages and physical abilities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1913** AW-2.4 POPLAR POINT {#sec-10-a1913 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1913}

1913.1 Poplar Point encompasses the area on the east side of the Anacostia River bounded by South Capitol Street SW, I-295, and the 11th Street Bridge. The area contains U.S. Park Police and NPS facilities, the former Architect of the Capitol (AOC) nurseries, a 700-space Metro parking garage, private land along Howard Road, a DC Water pump station, and more than 60 acres of managed meadows. The point was created through the filling of tidal mudflats in the 1910s and has been used for tree nurseries and federal and District maintenance activities for almost a century. Construction of freeways in the 1950s and 1960s left Poplar Point disconnected from the neighborhoods around it.

1913.2 Poplar Point remains isolated today and is underused as a great waterfront open space. It is completely unknown to visitors and even most District residents. Nearly half the site is fenced off from public access, and much of the remainder is covered by freeway ramps and bridge approaches.

1913.3 In 2003, the AWI called for the site’s improvement as a green gateway to the Anacostia River Park network. Today, Poplar Point has the potential to be the future crown jewel in a necklace of great parks extending from Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens on the north to the mouth of the Anacostia River on the south. Key features of the vision for this park include restored wetlands, a daylighted Stickfoot Creek, and new cultural and entertainment facilities. Poplar Point has also been identified by the NCPC as a potential site for new monuments, commemorative works, and museums.

1913.4 The Poplar Point Target Area Plan recommended creating a new roadway and circulation pattern and developing a mixed-use neighborhood and a 70-acre waterfront park. Medium- to high-density housing should be provided within this neighborhood, with new development used to leverage the recreational and environmental improvements that will make this a great public place for all Washingtonians in the future. In the years since the AWI Plan, there has been increased understanding of the site’s flood risk. Anticipated sea level rise and floodplain effects will inform development alternatives and the ultimate design of Poplar Point.

1913.5 The new Poplar Point Park and neighborhood will be well connected to the nearby Anacostia Metro station, multiple Metrobus lines, and new modes of transit, including water taxis, shuttles, and the DC Circulators. Connections to the historic neighborhoods east of I-295 will be strengthened by upgrading Howard Road SE, W Street SE, and Good Hope Road SE and improving pedestrian and bicycle access along these gateways. Redevelopment of Poplar Point is intended to coincide with and bolster parallel initiatives to revitalize Historic Anacostia, redevelop the St. Elizabeths Hospital Campus, and rebuild Barry Farm.

1913.6 Notable skyline features such as the Washington Monument and U.S. Capitol are visible from much of Poplar Point. The site also affords views of the tree-lined ridge above Historic Anacostia. Future structures on the site should preserve these important views and make the most of the point’s spectacular physical setting. Development should include a mix of uses and densities that is compatible with and complementary to adjacent neighborhoods, breaking development into identifiable, distinctive parts rather than creating superblocks.

1913.7 Policy AW-2.4.1: Poplar Point Park

Create a great urban park at Poplar Point that serves neighborhoods across Washington, DC and includes a variety of active and passive recreation areas. The park should be designed to serve users of all abilities, including children, youth, families, and older adults.

1913.8 Policy AW-2.4.2: Environmental Restoration at Poplar Point

Restore portions of the natural environment at Poplar Point, especially the wetlands and Stickfoot Creek. The creek should be daylighted and restored as a natural habitat area.

1913.9 Policy AW-2.4.3: Poplar Point Mixed-Use Neighborhood

Create a new transit-oriented mixed-use neighborhood oriented around the Poplar Point Park and linked to the Anacostia and Congress Heights Metro stations. The neighborhood should include a significant component of affordable housing, as well as retail and civic uses that benefit the adjacent communities east of I-295. To minimize the loss of useable open space, development should use the land recovered after the realignment and reconstruction of the Frederick Douglass Bridge.

1913.10 Policy AW-2.4.4: Poplar Point Cultural Facilities

Support the development of regional cultural facilities at Poplar Point, such as museums, memorial sites, gardens, nature centers, amphitheaters, and public gathering places.

1913.11 Policy AW-2.4.5: Scale of Development at Poplar Point

Provide a scale and pattern of development at Poplar Point that recognizes the area’s proximity to a Metro station and other major surface arterials. The area is physically separated from surrounding neighborhoods and, therefore, may accommodate buildings and site plans that are unlike but compatible with the fine-grained pattern found in nearby Historic Anacostia. Development should be pedestrian-oriented and include active ground floor uses. The massing, height, and bulk of buildings and related features, such as parking, also should respect adjacent park uses and environmentally sensitive areas.

1913.12 Policy AW-2.4.6: Poplar Point Vista and View Preservation

Ensure that the design of Poplar Point capitalizes on significant views to the river and U.S. Capitol. The New Jersey Avenue SE axis is particularly important because it provides a clear line of sight to the Capitol dome from Poplar Point’s prominent river bend.

1913.13 Policy AW-2.4.7: Poplar Point as an Economic Catalyst

Use development at Poplar Point to bring economic development opportunities to adjacent neighborhoods, particularly Barry Farm and Historic Anacostia. Activities at Poplar Point should foster the success of existing businesses in Historic Anacostia, provide job opportunities, and create cultural, educational, and institutional uses that benefit communities in Wards 7 and 8.

1913.14 Policy AW-2.4.8: Access Improvements to Poplar Point

Improve access to Poplar Point by redesigning the road system on the site’s perimeter; rebuilding the Frederick Douglass (South Capitol) Bridge; converting the Anacostia Metro station to a multimodal terminal; adding provisions for pedestrians and bicycles along Howard Road SE, W Street SE, and Good Hope Road SE; and providing water taxi service on the Anacostia River.

1913.15 Action AW-2.4.A: Poplar Point Planning

Complete a future analysis for Poplar Point to define the site design, circulation, infrastructure, land use program, park, and urban design to guide future development and to facilitate the land transfer from the federal government to the District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1914** AW-2.5 SOUTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD {#sec-10-a1914 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1914}

1914.1 For nearly 50 years, the Southwest neighborhood has been a quiet, tucked away neighborhood of almost 12,000 residents. The product of urban renewal interventions of the 1950s and 1960s, the predominantly residential enclave is unlike any other in Washington, DC. Its modernist architecture, large swaths of green open space, and variety of residential development are sources of pride for many Southwest residents. Major changes have taken shape in Southwest, such as the removal of Waterside Mall to allow for the reopening of 4th Street SW between I and M Streets SW and the addition of new offices, retail, and residential developments to form a town center. As the surrounding waterfront areas around Southwest continue to grow, the established core of the Southwest neighborhood continues to experience mounting development pressure.

1914.2 Population projections for Southwest indicate that the population will increase by almost 3,000 residents, bringing the total closer to 15,000 residents in Southwest by 2023. Southwest residents have indicated a desire to maintain the area’s historic integrity of inclusion for all kinds of families and household incomes. The neighborhood contains an abundance of District and federally owned parcels, many of which are currently underused or underdeveloped with low-scale buildings and surface parking lots clustered on M Street near South Capitol Street. As technology changes and service needs grow and evolve, the District is interested in optimizing its properties, as well as finding opportunities to use these assets to best serve residents and contribute to the community through improved design and function. Additionally, the District of Columbia Housing Authority (DCHA) intends to redevelop the Greenleaf public housing complex, located on four large parcels straddling both sides of M Street SW near the Waterfront Metro station, into a mixed-income housing development.

1914.3 All of these changes and existing opportunity areas served as a catalyst for studying and analyzing the Southwest neighborhood through a Small Area Plan, which was initiated in 2013 and approved by the D.C. Council in 2015. The Southwest Neighborhood Plan supplements the Comprehensive Plan by providing more detailed planning and land use guidance at the block level. The Southwest Neighborhood Plan focused on a study area that extended from South Capitol Street to the east, Maine Avenue SW to the west, P Street SW to the south, and the I-395 Freeway to the north. The Southwest Neighborhood Plan is a community-based strategy developed for the purpose of creating an urban design, land use, and neighborhood preservation framework to enhance parks and pedestrian and street connections, integrate community amenities, enhance transportation choices, and guide the future growth of the Southwest neighborhood. In addition, the Southwest Neighborhood Plan provides land use guidance for the Future Land Use Map. The Southwest Neighborhood Plan aims to provide Southwest residents and property owners with assurances of what future development may look like, including recommendations to preserve and enhance existing assets and ensure that Southwest retains social, economic, and racial diversity. The following policies have been developed to reinforce the outcomes of the Southwest Neighborhood Plan.

1914.4 Policy AW-2.5.1: 4th Street SW as a Thriving Town Center

Develop 4th Street SW as a thriving town center and commercial heart of the community with a range of neighborhood-serving retail options, an active street atmosphere, high-quality public realm, new development, and accessible transit options. Support the redevelopment of the remaining parcels of land at the Waterfront Metro station (formally the Waterside Mall site) with residential, office, and local-serving retail uses. 4th Street SW should serve as a retail anchor for the surrounding Southwest community and improve aesthetics, circulation, and connectivity.

1914.5 Policy AW-2.5.2: Southwest Neighborhood Plan

Implement the policies and recommendations of the Southwest Neighborhood Plan. Use the Southwest Neighborhood Plan as a framework for guiding public investment and evaluating new development per plan recommendations and design guidelines.

1914.6 Policy AW-2.5.3: Greenleaf Public Housing Redevelopment

Promote the redevelopment of the Greenleaf public housing complex, composed of four sites on both the north and south sides of M Street SW between 3rd and Delaware Streets SW, to benefit existing Greenleaf residents and realize a well-designed mixed-income community. Explore the potential for District-controlled properties in the vicinity to support a build-first strategy to keep Greenleaf residents within the Southwest neighborhood. Support one-for-one replacement of all existing public housing units on site.

1914.7 Policy AW-2.5.4: An Equitable and Inclusive Southwest Neighborhood

Ensure that Southwest remains an exemplary model of equity and inclusion for all races, ages, abilities, and income levels and enhances all residents’ well-being. Support and encourage affordable and equitable access to housing with a range of housing types to support families, older adults, single persons, persons with disabilities, and artists. Encourage more inclusive options for transit and more accessible public realm design.

1914.8 Policy AW-2.5.5: Southwest Historic Preservation

Support and promote Southwest’s unique legacy of modernist mid-20th century architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design. Continue the community-led process to garner support for preserving modernist properties through a variety of ways, such as individual landmarks.

1914.9 Policy AW-2.5.6 Southwest Greenspaces and Parks

Strike a balance between nature and the built environment and retain the green character of Southwest as it continues to grow. Encourage additional capital investments, resilient design enhancements, and outstanding programming at Southwest parks: Lansburgh, Randall, King Greenleaf, Southwest Duck Pond, and Library Park. The needs of both school-age children and older adults aging in place should be considered in future designs for all parks, green spaces, and recreational programming. Parks and green spaces should be beautiful and functional while contributing to stormwater management and flood mitigation.

1914.10 Policy AW-2.5.7: Southwest Sustainability and Resilience

Encourage the adoption of sustainability measures to support outstanding environmental performance, energy efficiency, stormwater management, and healthy living. New developments in Southwest that are vulnerable to flooding and future sea level rise should incorporate flood protection in building and site designs.

1914.11 Policy AW-2.5.8: Southwest Arts and Culture

Grow and support Southwest as a premier arts and cultural destination, leveraging existing institutions, such as Arena Stage and the Anthem concert venue to attract new creative uses in both temporary and permanent locations and to reinforce I Street SW as a cultural corridor.

1914.12 Policy AW-2.5.9: Southwest District-Owned Parcels

Redevelop outdated public facilities and underused publicly owned land for development that delivers high-quality design and community benefits. These District properties include key sites adjacent to M Street SW and Half Street SW and are the current locations of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Fire and Emergency Medical Services (FEMS), and the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). Future developments at these sites should consider public-private opportunities for joint development and co-location of District government uses. Land use changes recommended in the Small Area Plan should be achieved through the PUD process and conform to the design guidelines, affordable housing goals, and broader recommendations of the Small Area Plan.

1914.13 Policy AW-2.5.10: Southwest Multimodal Transportation Options

Support an active and growing Southwest community by accommodating multiple transportation modes, increasing mobility and safety within the community, and providing ease of access to adjacent neighborhoods and the waterfront. Improve pedestrian and bike crossings through enhanced signage and redesigned crosswalks. Continue to expand and link bicycle routes. Where feasible (as detailed in the Small Area Plan), reinstate lost connections of the L’Enfant Plan.

1914.14 Policy AW-2.5.11: Affordable and Family-Sized Housing in Southwest

Promote a mix of affordable and market rate residential units that better serve community needs in Southwest. Prioritize the creation of a greater number of affordable units than the Inclusionary Zoning requirement or more family-sized units as part of a community benefits agreement for any PUDs and by targets on District-controlled sites that exceed overarching affordable housing requirements.

1914.15 Action AW-2.5.A: Greenleaf PUD

Support the redevelopment of DCHA-controlled Greenleaf public housing parcels consistent with the increased density of Future Land Use Map designations as outlined in the Southwest Neighborhood Plan if development is achieved through a PUD that meets the following criteria:

Conforms to the design guidelines for each parcel as outlined in the Small Area Plan;

Provides replacement housing for all the existing public units within the development or the immediate Southwest neighborhood;

Encourages a mixed-income community through the inclusion of market rate units and, to the extent practicable, moderate-income housing; and

Achieves a significant level of green design in terms of both site and building design to contribute to healthy living and improved environmental performance.

1914.16 Action AW- 2.5.B: Lansburgh Park

Redesign Lansburgh Park to become a safer, more accessible central park for the Southwest community. Create a signature design and beautiful park space that serves as a centerpiece for redevelopment of surrounding properties like the Greenleaf complex and the Southwest government cluster. Any future design also should enhance community resilience by helping to address and manage flooding issues.

1914.17 Action AW-2.5.C: Storage Facility at Jefferson Middle School Academy

Complete a feasibility study to determine the need for the existing storage facility located adjacent to the Jefferson Middle School Academy. Study the option of removing the storage facility to expand the recreation space or repurposing the building to better serve the community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 1915** AW-2.6 BUZZARD POINT {#sec-10-a1915 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A1915}

1915.1 Buzzard Point is located at the confluence of the Potomac and the Anacostia rivers, roughly one mile south of the U.S. Capitol building. Buzzard Point is bounded by the existing Southwest residential area to the north, the Anacostia River to the south and east, and Fort McNair to the west. Fort McNair, housing the National Defense University, is the oldest use on the Buzzard Point peninsula, with historic buildings dating to the 18th century. Buzzard Point is currently transitioning from primarily heavy industrial sites used for much of the 20th century to a new mixed-use neighborhood anchored by the D.C. United soccer stadium, Audi Field, which opened in 2018. The District’s South Capitol Street corridor and Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project will better connect the Buzzard Point neighborhood with Downtown Washington, DC and neighborhoods across the Anacostia River.

1915.2 Following the selection of the Buzzard Point site for a new D.C. United soccer stadium in July 2013, planning for the larger Buzzard Point neighborhood began. This planning effort built upon earlier planning through the AWI in 2002, Comprehensive Plan guidance, and previously adopted medium- to high-density zoning, with the goal of coordinating investments in public infrastructure and private redevelopment. OP completed the Buzzard Point Vision Framework and Design Review Guide in 2017, with the collaboration and input of multiple stakeholders, including area residents, private property owners, the Capitol Riverfront BID, Fort McNair, and NPS.

1915.3 This urban design-driven plan for Buzzard Point provides additional guidance for the transformation of a former industrial area into an environmentally sustainable, mixed-use waterfront neighborhood that leverages its location as a regional destination for spectator sports along the Anacostia River. The Vision Framework articulates a vision for Buzzard Point as a well-designed waterfront neighborhood with dynamic parks and public spaces and a well-connected transportation network. Given Buzzard Point’s location along the waterfront, multiple properties are within the current floodplain, and the area is vulnerable to future flooding from riverine flooding, storm surge, and sea level rise. Strategies for ensuring resilience against these climate hazards are central to the Vision Framework’s successful implementation and to Buzzard Point’s transformation into a new, vibrant waterfront neighborhood.

1915.4 Policy AW-2.6.1: Buzzard Point Vision Framework

Implement the policies and recommendations of the Buzzard Point Vision Framework and Design Guidance. Use the framework to guide public and private investment and evaluate new development.

1915.5 Policy AW-2.6.2: Buzzard Point Development

New residential development in Buzzard Point should be concentrated near the waterfront, between Potomac Avenue SW and P Street SW. Commercial, cultural, and retail uses should be concentrated around the traffic oval along Half Street SW, Audi Field, and the waterfront park and plaza. Support the long-term redevelopment of Buzzard Point with mixed-use medium- to high-density development.

1915.6 Policy AW-2.6.3: Buzzard Point Design and Architecture

Promote innovative design and architecture for new development in this area and for the creation of a unique urban waterfront. Encourage water-oriented uses near the river, and through site planning and design, facilitate public access to the water and marine transportation.

1915.7 Policy AW-2.6.4: Buzzard Point Resilience

Design public and private infrastructure, buildings, streets, and park spaces for climate adaptation and flood risk reduction. Buffer the Buzzard Point neighborhood against current and future climate threats through model resilient development.

1915.8 Policy AW-2.6.5: Buzzard Point Public Spaces

Following the guidance of the Buzzard Point Vision Framework, identify and implement a set of interconnected parks and playgrounds designed for a variety of

users. Develop Half Street SW with green features that link to the stadium plaza, other parks, and the Anacostia River.

1915.9 Policy AW-2.6.6: National Park Service Properties in Buzzard Point

Coordinate with NPS to plan and design their waterfront properties in Buzzard Point, including Buzzard Point Park and the James Creek Marina.

1915.10 Action AW-2.6.A: Buzzard Point Transportation/Riverwalk Connections

Implement a well-connected street grid for all transportation modes that supports future transit expansion and comfortable walking and biking. Reconnect streets, where possible, and redesign Second Street SW as the inland extension of the Anacostia Riverwalk. Complete new sections of the Anacostia Riverwalk as each new development in Buzzard Point is constructed, extending a 75-foot waterfront esplanade. Use aquatic vegetation along the shoreline as part of the riverwalk design to mitigate flooding, soften the river’s edge, and clean the water. Initiate a workshop with Fort McNair to explore extending the Anacostia Riverwalk around the point.

### **10-A20** MID-CITY AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 2000** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2000}

2000.1 The Mid-City Planning Area encompasses the 3.1 square miles located in the geographic center of Washington, DC. It extends from Rock Creek Park on the west to the CSX rail corridor on the east. Its southern edge is formed by Florida Avenue NW and U Street NW, and its northern edge is formed by Spring Road NW and Rock Creek Church Road NW. The boundaries are shown in the map at left. Most of this area has historically been in Ward 1, although the easternmost portion is currently part of Ward 5 and the southernmost portion is currently in Ward 2.

2000.2 Mid-City is one of the most diverse parts of Washington, DC. Although it is one of the smallest of the 10 planning areas geographically, it is the most populous and most dense. Much of the area was developed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, giving it a rich and historic urban character. The area includes row house neighborhoods, such as Adams Morgan, Bloomingdale, Columbia Heights, Eckington, LeDroit Park, Park View, Pleasant Plains, and Mount Pleasant. It includes large apartment communities along streets such as 14th Street NW, 16th Street NW, and Columbia Road NW. It is also home to several large institutions, such as Howard University, Howard University Hospital, and the McMillan Sand Filtration Site.

2000.3 The Mid-City Planning Area is a cultural hub, with a strong international flavor. It is the heart of District’s Latino business community and the home to one of the District’s historic Black business corridors. . It includes the vibrant nightlife and ethnic restaurants of 18th and U Streets NW and other walkable neighborhood centers that embody the best qualities of urban living. The area is well served by the District’s transportation system, including the Metro Green and Yellow Lines, numerous bus lines, several cross-town arterials, and bikeshares. The Metropolitan Branch Trail passes through the southeastern portion of the area. This shared-use trail provides new transportation and recreational opportunities for residents, as well as much-needed park space and lively cultural displays at key locations.

2000.4 Many Mid-City neighborhoods have a strong sense of identity, including the historic districts of U Street NW, Mount Pleasant, LeDroit Park, Bloomingdale, and Striver’s Section and their historic landmarks, such as the True Reformer Building, Meridian Hill/Malcolm X Park, the Lincoln and Howard Theaters, and the Prince Hall Masonic Temple. Activities like Adams Morgan Day and the DC Funk Parade on U Street NW celebrate local culture and build community pride.

2000.5 The area also has a tradition of neighborhood activism, embodied by groups such as the Kalorama Citizens Association and the Georgia Avenue Community Development Task Force. Nonprofits like the Latino Economic Development Corporation and the Columbia Heights Development Corporation are also active in community affairs, as are cultural organizations like the Gala Hispanic Theater and the African American Civil War Memorial Freedom Foundation.

2000.6 Parts of the Mid-City Planning Area have changed rapidly during the last 10 years. Already one of the densest areas in Washington, DC, Mid-City contains approximately 19 percent of the District’s new housing units, and almost 14 percent of the area’s housing units are affordable. Although Mid-City is close to having a fair amount of affordable housing, the distribution of that affordable housing has been concentrated in a few neighborhoods such as Columbia Heights, Reed-Cooke, and the U Street corridor. Additionally, many of these affordable units are at risk of expiring; thus, Mid-City will be a target-rich area for investments by the administrators of the Housing Preservation Trust Fund, which is to be used to preserve affordable housing units when their covenants of affordability are expiring.

2000.7 Mid-City includes many public and lower cost units that are at risk of conversion to market rate rents or condominiums. The District has also assisted tenants in their efforts to renovate and purchase apartment properties throughout the community, particularly in Columbia Heights. Millions of dollars have been invested to create new affordable housing opportunities for current and future Mid-City residents. This investment must be sustained, especially through the use of the District Opportunity to Purchase Act, which the Housing Preservation Strike Force recommended as an important strategy to preserve affordable housing.

Please see the Housing Element for additional information, policies, and actions.

2000.8 Some Mid-City neighborhoods are still facing challenging economic and social conditions. Despite the real estate boom, buildings continue to lie vacant along commercial corridors such as lower Georgia Avenue NW, Florida Avenue NW, and North Capitol Street NW. The Planning Area also has a severe shortage of parkland. As the densest part of the District, and one with many young children, recreational needs are among the highest in the District. Most of the Planning Area’s parks lack the land and amenities to meet these needs.

2000.9 The 14th Street NW and U Street NW corridors experienced remarkable change over the last 10 years. Reinvestments made by the District and the private sector reinvigorated the Logan Circle area. The vitality of these two corridors is demonstrated by a mix of dining, retail, residential, entertainment, and cultural offerings. Revitalization has increased the need to improve mobility, manage traffic and parking, and assist small businesses. In some instances, poorly designed alterations are diminishing an important part of Washington, DC’s architectural heritage. Some have benefitted from the tremendous rise in property values, but many others have either been unable to capitalize on that rise in values or have been displaced from their homes.

2000.10 Mid-City also has expanded opportunities to enhance the resilience of its neighborhoods. The area has experienced significant flooding, particularly in the neighborhoods of Bloomingdale and LeDroit Park, due to the limited capacity of the existing stormwater management systems. The projected increase in frequency and severity of rainfall events elevates the risk for these neighborhoods. Ongoing efforts to expand the capacity of the stormwater system in the area, including DC Water’s Northeast Boundary Tunnel and interim McMillan Stormwater Storage Project, will significantly reduce this risk, but not for the most extreme events.

Please see Infrastructure and Environmental Protection Elements for more information.

2000.11 In 2016, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) undertook the Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study to identify improvements along the east-west connections that traverse Wards 1 and 5, address safety concerns, optimize mobility and operations, and improve efficiency for all modes along the corridor. Recommended improvements in the study include transit priority treatments along Irving Street NW and Columbia Road NW and a new bicycle facility along Kenyon Street NW that would connect to a multiuse trail, Washington Hospital Center, and adjacent institutions. The study also recommends rationalizing the access ramps west of the hospitals into a grid of streets, which would eliminate redundant turning movements, improve pedestrian crossing visibility, create new sidewalk connections, and simplify movements for all modes. The reconfiguration of land created by this new street grid will require additional planning analysis in the years to come, as it presents an opportunity for both new housing and for new parks or other open space.

2000.12 The issues described above should be addressed to preserve the quality of life, balance growth and conservation, and provide economic opportunity and stability for all members of the community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2001** HISTORY {#sec-10-a2001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2001}

2001.1 Urban development in the Mid-City area began in the early 19th century. Some of Washington, DC’s first mansions were constructed on the high ground above the L’Enfant city, such as David Porter’s long-demolished Meridian Hill house, now the site of Meridian Hill/Malcolm X Park, and the similarly lost mansion belonging to Joseph Gales, whose land was later subdivided into the residential neighborhood of Eckington. Unlike these estates, others such as Ingleside and Howard Hall still survive and are integral to the neighborhoods that were built around them. Howard Hall, the home of General Oliver Otis Howard built after the Civil War, still survives as part of the Howard University campus, which Howard helped to establish in 1867. Howard University joined the already established Columbian College (later named George Washington University), which was founded on Meridian Hill in 1822. Still, much of the area remained rural until the late 19th century.

2001.2 The White-Meyer House was designed by renowned architect John Russell Pope, who designed the Jefferson Memorial, the National Gallery of Art (West Building), and the National Archives. An extensive renovation of the White-Meyer House, which was completed in 1988, won an American Institute of Architects award for excellence. The White-Meyer House, at 1624 Crescent Place NW, has been home to two of the most well-known Washington, DC families. The property was purchased in 1910 by distinguished American diplomat Henry White, who had been Ambassador to Italy and France. The red brick Georgian home was completed in 1912 at a total cost of $155,497.

2001.3 When Henry White died in 1927, the property passed to his son, John Campbell White. Eugene Meyer, who subsequently became owner of The Washington Post, rented the house for several years before purchasing it in 1934. The Meyers, including Katharine Graham, spent their teenage years in the house. Prominent guests included Eleanor Roosevelt, Adlai Stevenson, Thomas Mann, Earl Warren, and John and Robert Kennedy. After the Meyers’ deaths, the house became the property of the Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation and was leased for use by the Antioch Law School Library. In 1987, it was purchased by Meridian International Center.

2001.4 Urban development in the Mid-City area began in the early 19th century, with transportation infrastructure dating back to the Civil War. Horse-drawn streetcars, established during the Civil War, ran up and down 7th and 14th Streets NW, connecting the area’s small hamlets, estates, and farms to Washington, DC’s center. One streetcar line—the Metropolitan Railway, established in 1864—was deliberately built to entice residents to move to Mount Pleasant, one of the first suburbs carved out of the Ingleside estate.

2001.5 Mid-City’s development boom was tied to the growth of Washington, DC’s population and transportation system. In 1888, the introduction of the electric streetcar enabled several of the formerly horse-drawn streetcar lines to be extended north of Washington, DC’s center in the late 1880s and early 1890s, including the District’s first electric streetcar line—the Eckington and Soldiers Home streetcar—as well as lines along 7th Street NW and 14th Street NW. Commercial uses developed along these routes, a pattern that persists to this day. By the turn of the century, streetcars had been extended along Florida Avenue NW, U Street NW, 11th Street NW, 18th Street NW, Calvert Street NW, , and beyond to the District’s border with Montgomery County, Maryland. Formerly rural lands were subdivided and platted into residential neighborhoods, including Bloomingdale, Eckington, Columbia Heights, Washington Heights, Lanier Heights, and other subdivisions making up present-day Adams Morgan. These neighborhoods emerged as Washington, DC’s first suburbs, followed by Mount Pleasant and LeDroit Park.

2001.6 Many Mid-City neighborhoods were quite sought after. Located above the Potomac escarpment, places like Mount Pleasant and Columbia Heights had healthier climates and cooler summertime weather than the lower portions of the District. Elegant apartment buildings and embassies were developed along 16th Street NW, where commercial uses were not permitted in order to preserve the street’s character as the formal gateway to the White House. To the east, Pleasant Plains, LeDroit Park, and Columbia Heights became home to a growing community of higher-income Black residents. Howard University emerged as one of the country’s leading Black colleges and a seat of learning for Black scholars and professors. U Street NW thrived as Washington, DC’s Black Broadway, and a cultural legacy of music, art, and theater was born.

2001.7 By 1930, the area’s initial development was essentially complete. Population continued to grow, and the area continued to develop with apartment buildings and denser housing. Residents were encouraged to take in boarders during the war years, and some of the larger row houses were converted into multi-family buildings and rooming houses.

2001.8 With the end of World War II in 1945 and desegregation of schools in 1954, conditions in the Mid-City neighborhoods began to change. In the 1950s, urban renewal disrupted an already diversifying middle-class neighborhood. Moderate-income households began to leave the Mid-City area, leaving behind a growing population of lower income households. The area’s future was further jeopardized by the proposed Inner Loop Freeway in the 1950s. Had the freeway been built, much of the Adams Morgan and U Street neighborhoods would have been destroyed.

2001.9 Mid-City was particularly hard hit by the unrest in 1968 . Many buildings along 14th and U Streets NW were burned , which had a significant economic impact on the business community along these two corridors. Reinvestment and recovery were slow. Urban renewal plans for Shaw and 14th Street NW brought large numbers of public housing units in the 1970s, but many of the commercial businesses never reopened.

2001.10 During the 1980’s and 1990’s, parts of the community were experiencing economic challenges. However, by the 1990’s, Adams Morgan had gained a reputation as one of Washington, DC’s most unique neighborhoods, and many of its homes were restored and upgraded. Loft and condominium construction and residential rehabilitation continues in the neighborhood today.

2001.11 During the 1980s and 1990s, an influx of residents from Latin America began to transform communities like Columbia Heights and Mount Pleasant. The transformation continued during the early 2000s following the opening of the Columbia Heights Metro station. A 500,000-square-foot commercial center known as DC USA—the largest retail construction project in the District at the time— was developed at the station and became a centerpiece for the revitalization of Columbia Heights. Development projects like the Louis, the Shay, and The Ellington have brought hundreds of new residents to the U Street NW area. Elsewhere in the Mid-City, homes are being rehabbed throughout Shaw, LeDroit Park, Eckington, Bloomingdale, Park View, and Pleasant Plains.

2001.12 Unlike some changing neighborhoods in the District, Columbia Heights has not become homogeneous: White, Asian, Black, and Hispanic/Latino residents each make up at least 10 percent of the population—and no group constitutes a majority. Housing includes high-priced condominiums and townhouses, as well as public and middle-income housing and even multimillion-dollar homes. The neighborhood includes several public schools, including nine public charter schools. The neighborhood has dozens of new restaurants, shops, and nightlife.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2002** LAND USE {#sec-10-a2002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2002}

2002.1 Land use statistics for this Planning Area appear in Figure 20.1. Mid-City comprises about 1,970 acres, or about five percent, of the District’s land area. Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data and additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, and water bodies. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches and not actual changes in land use.

2002.2 The area is primarily residential, with row houses being the predominant house type. Only about two percent of the residential area contains single-family detached housing, whereas more than 70 percent contains row houses. The remainder of the residential land, totaling almost 200 acres, consists of apartments. Much of the Mid-City Planning Area contain row houses, flats, and high-rise apartments on the same block.

2002.3 The commercial areas of Mid-City tend to be laid out along neighborhood shopping streets and are frequently intermixed with housing. Major commercial areas include 18th Street NW, Columbia Road NW, 14th Street NW, Mount Pleasant Street NW, U Street NW, 7th Street NW/Georgia Avenue NW, and North Capitol Street NW. There is little space for parking or loading in these business districts, and residential neighborhoods often lie immediately adjacent. Commercial and mixed land uses amount to approximately five percent of the total land area, which is a larger percentage than is found in most of the District’s Planning Areas. About one percent of the land is used for industry, most on the area’s eastern edge along the CSX tracks. While the area is generally well served by commercial uses, neighborhoods on the east side lack the variety of services available on the west side.

2002.4 Figure 20.1 Land Use Composition in Mid-City

2002.5 Parks and open spaces occupy almost nine percent of the land area in Mid-City, and most of this acreage is associated with Rock Creek Park. The remaining parks in the area are small and heavily used. Other public uses in the Planning Area include schools, libraries, community centers, and fire stations. These represent about three percent of the total area. Institutional uses consist primarily of Howard University and Howard Hospital and comprise seven percent of the land area.

2002.6 About one percent of the Mid-City Planning Area, or about 36 acres, consists of vacant land. Much of this land is committed to future development projects, such as the McMillan Sand Filtration Site and the Howard Town Center. Although there are scattered vacant lots, the area is almost completely built out.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2003** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a2003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2003}

2003.1 Basic demographic data for Mid-City is shown in Figure 20.2. In 2017, the area had a population of 96,489, or about 14 percent of the District’s total population. Between 2000 and 2017, the area grew by over 15,000 residents, largely due to new housing construction of multi-family buildings throughout the area, particularly in the western part of the area.

2003.2 Between 2000 and 2017, the Mid-City Planning Area experienced a shift in population characteristics. In 2000, Black residents were Mid-City’s predominant racial group at 52 percent, and the Hispanic/Latino population was 22 percent. By 2017, the Black population decreased to 31 percent of the total population, the white population increased from 27 percent to 52 percent of the total population, and approximately 18 percent of the population was Hispanic/Latino.

2003.3 Figure 20.2 Mid-City at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

81,300

84,452

96,489

111,083

123,129

134,101

Households

33,979

38,286

40,497

47,313

50,142

52,466

Household Population

75,985

79,142

90,585

103,048

114,888

125,600

Persons Per Household

2.24

2.07

2.24

2.18

2.29

2.39

Jobs

28,012

29,164

30,562

32,656

35,204

37,517

Density (persons per sq mile)

26,226

27,243

31,125

35,833

39,719

43,258

Land Area (square miles)

3.1

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

15,125

59,426

30,604

28,821

6,749

18.6%

73.1%

37.6%

35.5%

8.3%

11,942

76,653

43,176

33,476

7,895

12.4%

79.4%

44.7%

34.7%

8.2%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

18,146

22.3%

11,533

12.6%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

22,224

42,385

402

2,358

9,891

4,115

27.3%

52.1%

0.5%

2.9%

12.2%

5.1%

50,291

30,109

109

4,393

8,316

3,272

52.1%

31.2%

0.1%

4.6%

8.6%

3.4%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

18,246

22.4%

17,717

18.4%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

21,166

26.0%

19,829

20.5%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

10,671

23,462

31.3%

68.7%

15,479

25,018

38.2%

61.8%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

34,132

3,929

89.7%

10.3%

40,497

3,576

91.9%

8.1%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

1,053

10,798

3,620

2,203

3,585

16,782

2.8%

28.4%

9.5%

5.8%

9.4%

44.1%

0.1%

1,266

10,694

5,193

2,376

4,446

20,047

2.9%

24.3%

11.8%

5.4%

10.1%

45.5%

0.1%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

2003.4 The age profile of Mid-City is different than the District, as there were fewer residents under the age of 18 and over the age of 65 in 2017. About 12 percent of the residents were under 18, compared to a District-wide total of 18 percent. Over eight percent were over 65, compared to the District-wide total of 12 percent. The majority of residents are between the ages of 18 and 64, with approximately 45 percent between 18 and 34 years of age.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2004** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a2004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2004}

2004.1 The 2017 Census reported that 24 percent of the area’s housing stock consisted of single-family attached homes (row houses and townhouses), while 45 percent consisted of apartments in multi-family buildings of 20 units or more. Less than three percent of the homes in Mid-City were single-family detached homes, significantly lower than the 12 percent for the District as a whole. In 2000, 10 percent of the housing units in Mid-City were vacant, compared to 8.1 percent in 2017, indicating a tight housing market. This characteristic is consistent with the increase in the number of housing units and the population growth during this time period.

2004.2 The 2000 Census reported that 31 percent of the households in the Planning Area were homeowners and 69 percent were renters. By 2017, the percentage of homeowners increased to 38 percent, while renters decreased to 62 percent. Despite this shift, the absolute number of both renter- and owner-occupied units increased since 2000, indicating growth in both sectors. The ownership rate is slightly lower than the 42 percent rate for the District as a whole.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2005** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a2005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2005}

2005.1 Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) indicates there were about 30,562 jobs in Mid-City in 2017. Major employers included Howard University and Howard Hospital, District government and public schools, and numerous retail businesses and services.

2005.2 As of the 2000 Census, median household income in the Planning Area was $36,777, compared to a District-wide median of $45,927. By 2017, the median household income increased greatly to $94,939, which is higher than the District-wide median income of $77,649.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2006** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a2006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2006}

2006.1 Based on approved development projects, local planning policies, and regional growth trends, Mid-City is projected to add nearly 12,000 households between 2017 and 2045. The population is expected to increase from 96,489 to 134,101 by 2045. Much of the growth in the Mid-City Planning Area is expected to consist of moderate- to medium-density housing, particularly along 14th Street NW and Georgia Avenue NW, on land west of Howard University, and around the Metro stations at Shaw and Columbia Heights. Growth is also expected on the far eastern edge of the Planning Area, along Florida Avenue NW and North Capitol Streets NW.

2006.2 The number of jobs is expected to increase by over 7,000 , from 30,562 jobs in 2017 to 37,517 jobs in 2045. Most of the increase is associated with development around the Columbia Heights Metro station, the Howard Town Center on Georgia Avenue NW, and the New York Avenue Metro station on the area’s southeastern edge.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2007** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a2007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2007}

2007.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

2007.2 Three Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in Mid-City during 2005 and 2006. These meetings provided an opportunity for residents to discuss both District-wide and neighborhood planning issues. The Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) provided an important voice in this discussion, particularly on the Future Land Use Map. There have also been many meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan, but relating to other planning topics. These meetings covered topics such as the public realm and transportation improvements in Columbia Heights, revitalization of Georgia Avenue NW, redevelopment of McMillan Reservoir, parking and traffic issues in Adams Morgan, and the arts districts along U Street NW and in the greater Shaw area.

2007.3 The community delivered several key messages during these meetings, summarized below:

The unique character that defines Mid-City neighborhoods should be preserved as infill development takes place. The communities of the Mid-City welcome community reinvestment, but are worried that the rapid pace of redevelopment may be changing the fabric of the community too quickly. The loss of neighborhood diversity was the greatest concern expressed at almost every Comprehensive Plan meeting in the Mid-City area, and was raised in many different contexts: from the need for affordable housing to concerns about the influx of chain stores and loss of neighborhood businesses.

Housing opportunities should be increased for people at all income levels so that Mid-City can remain a diverse neighborhood. The District-wide rise in housing prices has particularly impacted Mid-City, as costs have soared beyond what many local residents can afford. Moderate-income families and lower-income residents are being priced out of the area, and there are concerns that the community is becoming affordable only to persons with high-incomes . Preserving the existing stock of affordable units is important, either through rehabilitation or replacement of existing units with new affordable units. The type of new housing being built in the area should be more varied. In particular, more three- and four-bedroom units are needed to attract and retain families.

New condominiums, apartments, and commercial development should be directed to the areas that are best able to handle increased density, namely areas immediately adjacent to Metrorail stations or along high-volume transit corridors. These areas are generally located around 14th and Park Streets NW, along the 14th Street NW corridor, along U Street NW — especially around the Metro station, along 7th Street NW and Georgia Avenue NW —especially west of Howard University, and in the southeastern corner of the Planning Area near the New York Avenue Metro station. Mixed-use development, with multi-story housing above retail shops and services, is desirable in these locations and would reinforce the Mid-City’s character as a vital, pedestrian-oriented neighborhood.

The row house fabric that defines neighborhoods like Adams Morgan, Columbia Heights, Pleasant Plains, Eckington, and Bloomingdale should be conserved. Although Mid-City includes six historic districts (Greater U Street, LeDroit Park, Mount Pleasant, Strivers’ Section, Washington Heights, and Kalorama Triangle), most of the row houses in Mid-City are not protected by historic district designations. Some are even zoned for high-density apartments.

A variety of issues have arisen, including demolition and replacement with much larger buildings, the subdivision of row houses into multi-unit flats, and top story additions that disrupt architectural balance. Intact blocks of well-kept row houses should be zoned for row houses, and not for tall apartment buildings, and additional historic districts and/or conservation districts should be considered to protect architectural character.

The community is in need of additional parkland. Mid-City is the densest part of t Washington, DC, but the ratio of park acreage per resident is among the lowest in District. Rock Creek Park is a great resource, but is a long way from the eastern part of the Planning Area and is primarily a passive open space. The Planning Area has a shortage of active play fields and recreational facilities, especially east of 16th Street NW. In many cases, schools are the only open spaces in the neighborhood, but access to school grounds may be restricted, and the school facilities themselves are in need of improvement. Sites such as the McMillan Reservoir Sand Filtration site offer the promise for additional neighborhood open space. New development there and elsewhere should set aside land for parks, while development along the area’s commercial streets and around Metro stations should include pocket parks and plazas. Throughout the community, innovative approaches such as land trusts and easements should be considered to improve open space access.

Language barriers should be broken so that more foreign-born residents can get an education, find suitable housing, find a job, and participate in community life and civic affairs. With a growing population of English language learners, the Planning Area needs alternative education options and better access to literacy and language programs. If residents are to fill the quality jobs to be created in the new economy, better vocational training and bilingual services are needed. Local public schools, charter schools, universities, and nonprofits should be integral partners in these efforts.

The arts should be recognized as an essential part of community life. While this is true in all parts of Washington, DC, it is especially true in Mid-City’s multicultural neighborhoods. The Planning Area has been the home of many ethnic and racial groups for more than 100 years and has long been a center of creative expression and cultural diversity. The area should celebrate its past through heritage trails and historic exhibits, and celebrate its present through indoor and outdoor performance, art, and music. New cultural facilities should also be part of the area’s future.

Better economic balance should be achieved in the neighborhood. The neighborhood centers on the west side of the Mid-City Planning Area are generally vibrant, with strong demand for commercial space. Neighborhood business districts on the east side, particularly along Georgia Avenue NW and North Capitol Street NW, are still facing challenges. There are numerous vacant and boarded up properties, along with concerns about fire safety, underused and abandoned properties, and crime. Commercial change is also an issue. Small corner stores and other businesses that are unique to the neighborhood are having a harder time getting by. The area’s restaurants, ethnic establishments, and iconic neighborhood businesses are an important part of what defines this community. They should be strongly supported in the future.

Pedestrian safety, improved traffic operations, and parking management are all high priorities. Increased density within this already dense Planning Area creates busier streets—both for cars and for people. Despite its proximity to a Metro station, Columbia Heights will become more congested as 700 new housing units and 500,000 square feet of new retail space are opened. Parking demand will continue to exceed supply in Adams Morgan and Mount Pleasant. Commuter traffic along North Capitol Street NW and Florida Avenue NW will continue to burden side streets in Eckington and Bloomingdale. New solutions and strategies to traffic management are needed. Increasing transit service and improving pedestrian safety are important parts of the equation, but they should not be the only parts.

Public facilities in Mid-City need improvement. Many of the area’s schools, libraries, and recreation centers are outdated and do not meet the needs of the community. At the same time, residents are concerned about proposals to use private development to leverage public facility replacement. A key concern is that public facilities are not rebuilt at the expense of neighborhood open space, which is already in very short supply. While Mid-City has several new facilities, including the Girard Street Playground, the Columbia Heights Community Center, and Bell-Lincoln Multicultural Middle/High School, there are still unmet needs.

Mid-City needs greening. This Planning Area has a very high percentage of impervious surface coverage and lost much of its tree cover during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. Tree planting is needed to reduce urban runoff, create shade, remove air pollutants, and create beauty in the neighborhoods. Future development should incorporate green roofs and other methods to reduce resource consumption, conserve energy and water, and be more environmentally-friendly.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2008** MC-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a2008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2008}

2008.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in the Mid-City Planning Area. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Policies from existing Small Area Plans (Georgia Avenue, DUKE, Mid-City East, Mount Pleasant), Revitalization/Technical Studies (Columbia Heights, Uptown.), and Vision Frameworks (Adams Morgan) are referenced in Section MC-2.

2008.2 Policy MC-1.1.1: Neighborhood Conservation

Retain and reinforce the historic character of Mid-City neighborhoods, particularly its mix of row houses, apartment houses, as well as historic districts, and walkable neighborhood shopping districts. The Planning Area’s squares, alleyways, and historic alley lots offer opportunities for preservation and creative development. The area’s rich architectural heritage and cultural history should be preserved and enhanced.

2008.3 Policy MC-1.1.2: Directing Growth

Stimulate high-quality, transit-oriented development around the Columbia Heights, Shaw/Howard University, and U St./African American Civil War Memorial/Cardozo Metro station areas, as well as along the Georgia Avenue NW corridor and the North Capitol Street NW/Florida Avenue NW business district. Opportunities for new mixed-income housing developments that provide a greater mix of affordability as a result of a rezoning effort, neighborhood retail, local-serving offices, and community services should be supported in these areas, as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Policy Map and Future Land Use Map.

2008.4 Policy MC-1.1.3: Infill and Rehabilitation

Encourage redevelopment of vacant lots and the rehabilitation of abandoned structures within the community, particularly along Georgia Avenue NW, Florida Avenue NW, 11th Street NW, and North Capitol Street NW and in the Shaw, Bloomingdale, and Eckington communities. Similarly, encourage the redevelopment of vacant lots and the rehabilitation of vacant buildings located at the interiors of the Planning Area’s squares. Infill development should be compatible in scale and character with adjacent uses and encourage more housing opportunities.

2008.5 Policy MC-1.1.4: Local Services and Small Businesses

Support the small businesses and essential local services that serve Mid-City. Encourage the establishment of new businesses that provide these services in areas where they are lacking, especially on the east side of the Planning Area. Support local services, small businesses, and their surrounding corridors using Main Streets, business improvement districts (BIDs), and Department of Small and Local Business (DSLBD) clean teams.

2008.6 Policy MC-1.1.5: Conservation of Row House Neighborhoods

Recognize the value and importance of Mid-City’s row house neighborhoods as an essential part of the fabric of the local community. Ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations for these neighborhoods reflect the desire to retain the row house architectural pattern. Zoning and policy in Mid-City’s row house neighborhoods should seek to maintain and augment the mix of large and small unit sizes and opportunities for both homeownership and renting, as exemplified by the use of English basements as separate dwelling units. See Policy LU-2.1.7 and Policy LU-2.1.9 for more guidance on alterations to row houses.

2008.7 Policy MC-1.1.6: Mixed-Use Districts

Encourage preservation of the housing located within Mid-City’s commercially zoned areas. Within mixed-use areas, such as Mount Pleasant Street NW and Columbia Road NW, encourage commercial uses that do not adversely impact the established residential uses.

2008.8 Policy MC-1.1.7: Preservation of Affordable Housing

Strive to retain the character of Mid-City as a mixed-income community by preserving the area’s existing stock of affordable housing units and promoting the construction of new affordable units. Give attention to the most rapidly changing neighborhoods and encourage the use of historic preservation tax credits to rehabilitate older buildings for affordable housing.

2008.9 Policy MC-1.1.8: Multimodal Connections

Improve traffic circulation along major Mid-City arterial streets, with a priority on 14th Street NW, Georgia Avenue NW, U Street NW, 16th Street NW, Rhode Island Avenue NW, Columbia Road NW, North Capitol Street NW, Connecticut Avenue NW, North Capitol Street, New York Avenue NW, and Florida Avenue NW. Implement programs in these areas to improve bus service, improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety and ease of travel, and mitigate the effects of increased traffic on residential streets. Consistent with the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, provide alternatives to automobile use—including improved transit and innovative personal transportation options—for existing and new residents to reduce the need for auto ownership, particularly where parking and traffic problems exist.

2008.10 Policy MC-1.1.9: Metropolitan Branch Trail

Prioritize safety and access improvements along the trail, including east-west pedestrian and bicycle connections, to allow trail users to get to and from adjoining neighborhoods safely. Create shaded areas along the trail to implement sustainable practices and improve the user experience. In addition, some sites have the potential to foster trail-oriented development that could bring more users to the trail, provide desired amenities, and build community for new and existing residents. Encourage trail-oriented development to include makers, artists, and local entrepreneurs.

See the Transportation Element for additional policies on reducing auto dependence.

2008.11 Policy MC-1.1.10: Transit Improvements

Improve public transit throughout the Mid-City Planning Area, with improved efficiency and reliability on the north-south bus routes, additional east-west and cross-park bus routes, and more frequent and extended Metrorail service. Continue assistance programs for the area’s transit-dependent groups, including older adults, students, and persons with disabilities.

2008.12 Policy MC-1.1.11: Stormwater Management for Interior Flooding

Improve existing stormwater management systems to reduce the risk of interior flooding in Mid-City from extreme rainfall events. This should include gray and green infrastructure measures that improve drainage and reduce impervious surface coverage, especially for Bloomingdale and LeDroit Park. When feasible, stormwater projects should include expanding parks, green space, and recreational opportunities for the area.

Please see the Infrastructure and Environmental Protection Elements for additional information.

2008.13 Policy MC-1.1.12: Green Development Practices

Encourage capital improvement or development projects in Mid-City to eliminate surface water runoff from sites through green roofs, rain gardens, cisterns, pervious pavement, bioretention cells, and other reuse or filtration methods. Support could include financial or other incentives.

2008.14 Action MC-1.1.A: Multimodal Improvements

Support the development of a fully integrated transit, bicycle, and pedestrian system within the Planning Area by moving forward with plans for expanded service on the Metrorail Green Line, extension of the Metrorail Yellow Line, bus rapid transit on Georgia Avenue NW, and dedicated bus lanes along 16th Street, NW 14th Street, NW, U Street, NW, Columbia Street, NW, and Irving Street, NW.

2008.15 Action MC-1.1.B: Off-Street Parking

Support the management of parking capacity in Mid-City commercial districts, including the implementation of parking management programs that maximize the use of existing parking resources (such as the DC USA garage and Reeves Center garage), minimize traffic associated with circling for spaces, and reduce conflicts among users.

See the Transportation and Land Use Elements for additional policies on off-street parking standards.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2009** MC-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a2009 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2009}

2009.1 Policy MC-1.2.1: Cultural Diversity

Maintain the cultural diversity of Mid-City by encouraging housing and business opportunities for all residents, sustaining a strong network of social services for immigrant groups, and retaining affordable housing for families and other households within the Planning Area.

2009.2 Policy MC-1.2.2: English Language Programs and Vocational Training

Work with established institutions such as public schools, charter schools, and colleges and universities to support alternative education and vocational training options for residents who are English language learners.

2009.3 Policy MC-1.2.3: Rock Creek Park

Improve community access from the Mid-City area to Rock Creek Park by establishing clear, direct pedestrian and bicycle connections between Adams Morgan, surrounding neighborhoods, and the Smithsonian National Zoo. Work with the National Park Service (NPS) to explore opportunities for new recreational amenities in the park that increase the amount of open space and recreational facilities in Mid-City. Work with NPS to encourage continued open access to Rock Creek Park.

2009.4 Policy MC-1.2.4: New Parks

Explore the possibility for new neighborhood parks within the Mid-City area, particularly in the area around the proposed Howard Town Center, and on the McMillan Reservoir site, such as with new development like that proposed at the McMillan Sand Filtration Site. Additionally, pocket parks and plazas should be encouraged elsewhere in the Planning Area, particularly near higher density development. The anticipated population growth further compounds the need for high-quality open space—all recreation areas should be retained, and new recreation areas should be provided wherever possible.

2009.5 Policy MC-1.2.5: Public Art

Explore opportunities with local arts organizations, artists, and residents for public art throughout Mid-City. Focus efforts on identified gateways, parks, nodes, and opportunity sites; connections to Metrorail stations and underpasses; and other appropriate locations as determined by the community.

2009.6 Policy MC-1.2.6: Neighborhood Greening

Undertake neighborhood greening and planting projects throughout the Mid-City Planning Area, particularly on median strips, on public triangles, and along sidewalk planting strips.

2009.7 Policy MC-1.2.7: Mid-City Historic Resources

Protect the historic resources of the Mid-City Planning Area, with particular attention to neighborhoods that are currently not preserved by historic district designation and are at greater risk for demolition or inappropriate redevelopment.

2009.8 Action MC-1.2.A: Tailored Design Guidelines

Consider design guidelines for Lanier Heights, Reed-Cooke, Columbia Heights, Eckington, Park View, and other Mid-City neighborhoods Adopt comprehensive design guidelines for historic districts that tailor historic district review standards to the specific preservation concerns in each community and strive for compatible infill development and maintenance of historic building scale, mass, and height conditions.

2009.9 Action MC-1.2.B: Library Expansion

As funding allows, consider development of a new library in the eastern portion of Columbia Heights.

2009.10 Action MC-1.2.C: Recreation Center

Pursue development of a new recreation center in the eastern part of the Planning Area, serving the Bloomingdale/Eckington/LeDroit Park community. This area was recognized as needing indoor and outdoor recreation space in the Parks Master Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2010** MC-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a2010 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2010}

2010.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified seven areas in Mid-City as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that provided by the prior sections of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 20.1 and Figure 20.3). These areas are:

Georgia Avenue NW Corridor

14th Street NW Corridor/Columbia Heights

U Street NW/Uptown

Adams Morgan

Mount Pleasant Street NW

McMillan Sand Filtration Site

Mid-City East’s Major Corridors (North Capitol Street/Florida Avenue/New York Avenue).

2010.2 Figure 20.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Mid-City

Within Mid-City

2.1

Georgia Avenue NW Corridor

2.2

14th Street NW Corridor/Columbia Heights

2.3

U Street NW/Uptown

2.4

Adams Morgan

2.5

Mount Pleasant Street NW

2.6

McMillan Sand Filtration Site

2.7

Mid-City East’s Major Corridors (North Capitol Street/Florida Avenue/New York Avenue

Adjacent to Mid-City

Connecticut Avenue Corridor

Dupont Circle

14th Street/Logan Circle

Shaw/Convention Center Area

NoMa/Northwest One

Northeast Gateway

Armed Forces Retirement Home/Irving Street Hospital Campus

Georgia Avenue Petworth Metro Station

2010.3 Map 2.1: Mid-City Policy Focus Areas.

2010.4 The Rock Creek East Element (Chapter 22) should be consulted for policies and actions on the reuse of the Armed Forces Retirement Home. The site adjoins the Mid-City Planning Area, and its reuse will affect transportation, infrastructure, and services in the Mid-City Planning Area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2011** MC-2.1 GEORGIA AVENUE NW CORRIDOR {#sec-10-a2011 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2011}

2011.1 Georgia Avenue NW is one of the District’s most significant and historic avenues. As a major arterial, it carries thousands of commuters in, out, and through Washington, DC daily. As a commercial corridor, it provides goods and services to residents in neighborhoods like LeDroit Park, Pleasant Plains, and Park View. Yet today, the avenue still has not met its full potential. Despite its distinctive building stock, the strong housing market around it, and construction of new mixed-use buildings near Metro stations, the avenue still has pockets of crime, deteriorating commercial and residential properties, and underperforming public spaces. While important infrastructure upgrades have been made along the corridor, others remain necessary.

2011.2 Several planning initiatives have been launched for the Georgia Avenue NW corridor in the past decade or so. In 2005, OP completed a Revitalization Strategy for the portion of the corridor extending from Euclid Street NW on the south to Decatur Street NW on the north. Below Euclid Street NW, much of the street frontage is controlled by Howard University and is addressed in the Howard Campus Plan. The university’s plans include joint development of Howard Town Center, a large mixed-use project. The university also launched the LeDroit Park Initiative to spur improvement and reinvestment in the surrounding neighborhood. South of Barry Place NW, Georgia Avenue NW/7th Street NW is contained within the Strategic Development Plan for the Uptown Destination District. The entire corridor is also one of Washington, DC’s designated Great Streets.

2011.3 Although these initiatives cover different sections of the corridor, they share common goals: revitalizing the area through strategic growth and development, preserving historic assets and unique architecture, improving the streetscape and public space, creating new housing and job opportunities, and upgrading public transit. Such initiatives are bolstered through efforts by local faith-based institutions to provide family support and job training services in the community.

2011.4 Plans for Georgia Avenue NW seek to attract quality neighborhood-serving retail businesses and services, reduce vacancies, and explore shared parking strategies to meet parking demand. Specific actions have been recommended, including market incentives (such as tax increment financing), façade improvement programs, and targeted improvements on blocks with high vacancies. Parking management and pedestrian enhancements have also been proposed. The Georgia Avenue Revitalization Strategy includes an Action Plan to initiate and monitor these measures.

2011.5 Policy MC-2.1.1: Revitalization of Lower Georgia Avenue NW

Encourage continued revitalization of the Lower Georgia Avenue NW corridor. Lower Georgia Avenue NW should be an attractive, pedestrian-oriented “Main Street with retail uses, local-serving offices, mixed-income housing, civic and cultural facilities, and well-maintained public space. Increases in density on Georgia Avenue, NW should aim to create a diverse and pedestrian-oriented street by creating smaller and affordable retail spaces.

2011.6 Policy MC-2.1.2: Georgia Avenue NW Design Improvements

Upgrade the visual quality of the Georgia Avenue NW corridor through urban design and public space improvements, including tree planting, new parks and plazas, upgraded triangle parks, and façade improvements that establish a stronger identity and improved image.

2011.7 Policy MC-2.1.3: Howard University

Encourage and strongly support continued relationship-building between Howard University and adjacent residential neighborhoods. Work with Howard University in the abatement of any outstanding community issues, such as the redevelopment of vacant property, façade/building enhancements, and buffering issues associated with campus expansion. Stimulate joint development opportunities with the university that benefit students and surrounding residents.

2011.8 Policy MC-2.1.4: Cross-Town Connectivity

Strengthen cross-town connectivity through multimodal improvements as recommended in the Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study.

2011.9 Policy MC-2.1.5: Pocket Parks and Plazas

Pursue opportunities to create new publicly accessible open spaces along the Georgia Avenue NW corridor.

2011.10 Action MC-2.1.A: Corridor Identity

Develop distinct identities for different segments of the Georgia Avenue NW corridor. Within the Mid-City Planning Area, these should include a Park View section (New Hampshire Avenue NW to Columbia Road NW), a Pleasant Plains section (Irving Street NW to Euclid Street NW), a Howard University section (Euclid Street NW to Barry Place NW), and the Uptown Arts District (Barry Place NW southward).

2011.11 Action MC-2.1.B: Georgia Avenue NW Revitalization Strategy

Implement the recommendations of the 2004 Revitalization Strategy for the Georgia Avenue and Petworth Metro station area and corridor.

2011.12 Action MC-2.1.C: Howard Town Center

Develop a new mixed-use neighborhood center on land to the west of the Howard University campus. This should include not only the planned Howard Town Center site (with housing, retail, and structured parking) but also a medium- to high-density, mixed-income housing development that provides a mix of affordable housing as a result of a rezoning effort, civic space, cultural facilities, and public open space on surrounding sites. Historic structures within the area should be preserved. Appropriate transitions in scale should be established between this center and the lower density row house neighborhoods to the west.

2011.13 Action MC-2.1.D: Great Streets Improvements

Implement the Great Streets initiative recommendations for Georgia Avenue NW, including transit improvements, façade improvements, upgraded infrastructure, abatement of vacant or underused properties, and incentives for housing and business development along the avenue.

2011.14 Action MC-2.1.E: Park Morton New Community

Continue redevelopment of Park Morton as a new community, replacing the existing public housing development with an equivalent number of new public housing units, plus new market-rate and moderate-income housing units, to create a new mixed-income community. Ensure that every effort possible is made to avoid permanent displacement of residents. Provide opportunities for Park Morton residents to access ownership opportunities on redevelopment sites and within the community.

2011.15 Action MC-2.7.F: Celebrating Historic Character

Consider design guidelines specific to Park View and Pleasant Plains, tailored to specific neighborhood concerns about compatible alterations and infill development.

2011.16 Action MC-2.1.G Open Streets

Build on the success of the 2019 Georgia Avenue Open Streets day by creating a regular Open Streets event. Work with local communities to ensure any District-sponsored event respects and promotes the legacy of the corridor as a site for celebrations of culture such as Georgia Avenue Day and the Georgia Avenue Caribbean Festival.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2012** MC-2.2 14TH STREET NW CORRIDOR/COLUMBIA HEIGHTS {#sec-10-a2012 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2012}

2012.1 14th Street NW has been experiencing an urban renaissance, with hundreds of new housing units completed in the last decade, more under construction, and new ground floor retail businesses opening on almost every block between Rhode Island Avenue NW and Park Road NW. Once a major commercial thoroughfare, the corridor was heavily impacted by the 1968 unrest, and many of its buildings sat vacant for more than 30 years.

2012.2 The commercial district around 14th Street NW and Park Road NW was initially developed in the early 1900s as a transit-oriented commercial center, anchored by the historic Riggs Bank (now PNC) and Tivoli Theater on the northwest and northeast corners. In 1997, a series of community workshops was held to create a redevelopment strategy for the area, ultimately targeting several major parcels owned by the Redevelopment Land Agency around the Metro station.

2012.3 The 1997 effort led to another initiative several years later, which culminated in the 2004 Columbia Heights Public Realm Framework Plan. The Framework Plan was developed to enhance public space in the Metro station vicinity. The plan was coordinated with plans for private development on adjacent properties. All totaled, this resulted in over 600 new housing units, approximately 650,000 square feet of retail space, 30,000 square feet of office space, and 2,000 parking spaces. The Framework Plan also incorporated connections to the Columbia Heights Education Campus, as well as other cultural and civic uses nearby. While most of Columbia Heights has been developed, some development opportunities still exist around the Metro station.

2012.4 The goal of the Columbia Heights Public Realm Framework Plan is to make the neighborhood more pedestrian friendly, coordinate infrastructure improvements, and create a stronger civic identity for Columbia Heights. Its recommendations, which have been implemented, include a new civic plaza, paving and streetscape improvements, tree planting, public art, and reconfiguration of streets and intersections to improve pedestrian and vehicle safety.

2012.5 South of Columbia Heights, medium-density, mixed-use development has been constructed on many blocks extending south from Irving Street NW to U Street NW. Over the past 10 years, redevelopment has been reshaping the corridor from auto-oriented commercial uses, including several strip shopping centers and warehouses, to an attractive urban residential street. Special efforts should continue to be made to refurbish and preserve public housing along the corridor and to establish appropriate transitions in scale and density between the corridor and the less dense residential areas on the west and east. Strengthening of the 11th Street NW neighborhood commercial district, located several blocks east of Columbia Heights, also should continue to be encouraged. With the DC-USA project and other new large-scale retail development near the Columbia Heights Metrorail station, programs to assist the existing small businesses in this area may be needed.

2012.6 Over the past 10 years, DDOT has reconstructed and reconfigured streets and installed numerous bikeshare docking stations. Metro has improved bus service, and the carsharing economy has emerged, helping to balance mobility and access to new housing and retail. These improvements dramatically increased vibrancy and aim to create a variety of options for people to move throughout Washington, DC.

2012.7 Policy MC-2.2.1: Columbia Heights Metro Station Area Development

Maintain the Columbia Heights Metro station area as a thriving mixed-use community center, anchored by mixed-income housing, community-serving retail, offices, civic uses, and public plazas. Strive to retain the neighborhood’s extraordinary cultural diversity and place a priority on development and services that meet the needs of local residents, such as preserving existing housing and creating more affordable and mixed-income housing close to the Metrorail station and bus transit corridors.

2012.8 Policy MC-2.2.2: Public Realm Improvements

Improve the streets, sidewalks, and public rights-of-way in the 14th Street NW/Park Road NW vicinity to improve pedestrian safety and create a more attractive public environment.

2012.9 Policy MC-2.2.3: Park Capacity

Pursue opportunities to create new publicly accessible open space in Columbia Heights and to increase community access to public school open space during non-school hours. Continue to improve the quality of existing parkland and outdoor recreation facilities.

2012.10 Policy MC-2.2.4: Multimodal Management

Improve bus, pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular movement; parking management; and pedestrian safety along the 14th Street NW corridor while balancing the transportation and traffic needs of adjacent cross-streets. Undertake transportation improvement programs to sustain the additional residential, retail, and institutional development around the Columbia Heights Metro station. These improvements should achieve a balanced multimodal system that meets the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motorists.

2012.11 Policy MC-2.2.5: 11th Street NW Commercial District

Retain the 11th Street NW corridor between Kenyon and Monroe Streets NW as a neighborhood shopping district. Preserve the mixed-use character of the corridor and encourage local-serving retail businesses and housing.

2012.12 Policy MC-2.2.6: Mid-14th Street NW Commercial District

Support ongoing efforts to strengthen the small businesses on Park Road NW and businesses on 14th Street NW between Newton and Shepherd Streets NW. This segment is identified as a critical commercial node in the Central 14th Street Small Area Plan adopted in 2012. Build on the momentum of development in Columbia Heights by extending enhanced streetscape elements into this area. Improve the commercial district by supporting the recommendations of the Retail Action Strategy, including façade improvements, technical assistance, enhanced public infrastructure, and other measures, to sustain a thriving business community that serves the surrounding neighborhood.

2012.13 Policy MC-2.2.7: East-West Connections

Washington, DC has few east-west network connections north of the original L’Enfant Plan street grid. This makes east-west travel to and from neighborhoods and activity centers challenging, as a limited number of corridors carry the majority of the traffic. In 2016, DDOT undertook the Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study to identify improvements along the east-west connections that traverse Wards 1 and 5, address safety concerns, optimize mobility and operations, and improve efficiency for all modes along the corridor. Recommended improvements in the study specific to this policy focus area include transit priority treatments along Irving Street NW and Columbia Road NW, safety treatments at the intersections of Columbia Road NW and 14th and 16th Streets NW, and a new bicycle facility along Kenyon Street NW that would connect to a multiuse trail linking neighborhoods to the Washington Hospital Center and adjacent institutions.

2012.14 Action MC-2.2.A: Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study

Implement DDOT’s Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study recommendations.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2013** MC-2.3 U STREET NW/UPTOWN {#sec-10-a2013 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2013}

2013.1 U Street NW and the adjacent Cardozo and Shaw neighborhoods are an important part of Washington, DC’s Black cultural history. Black residents first settled in the neighborhood in the 1880s, capitalizing on new streetcar lines and the absence of residential segregation rules. By the 1920s, the neighborhood had become the center of Black life in Washington, DC. Black-owned theaters, restaurants, night clubs, billiard parlors, and dance halls extended along U Street NW from 7th Street NW to 14th Street NW. During its heyday, legendary jazz greats like Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Dizzy Gillespie, and Pearl Bailey performed at U Street NW venues. Today, the neighborhood is home to the African-American Civil War Memorial and Museum and a Black Heritage Trail that commemorates important historic landmarks in Black history.

2013.2 Some of the U Street NW area’s historic venues have been restored, and a new generation of restaurants and nightclubs is emerging. Thousands of new housing units have been added, particularly west of 12th Street NW. The neighborhood has become more socially, culturally, and economically diverse. The downside of U Street NW’s vibrancy is that many of the longtime businesses, including those providing basic services like barber shops and bookstores, have had difficulty paying the higher rents and taxes that have come with change. Efforts to retain the street’s character must do more than just preserve its buildings; measures to retain and foster diverse businesses and culture should continue.

2013.3 In 2004, the District completed a Strategic Development Plan for the Uptown Destination District, called DUKE, focusing on the area along U Street NW between 6th Street NW and 13th Street NW and along 7th Street NW/Georgia Avenue NW between Rhode Island Avenue NW and Barry Place NW. The plan proposed revival of these blocks as a cultural destination, anchored by a restored Howard Theater, new retail and entertainment uses along 7th and U Streets NW, outdoor performance space, and up to 800 new housing units on vacant and/or underused sites. Office and hotel uses also are discussed as possible uses, capitalizing on the proximity to Howard University.

2013.4 The confluence of a strong real estate market, a location near Metro stations and Howard University, and the desire of several government agencies to develop their vacant properties has catalyzed this area’s redevelopment during the last decade and will continue to shape its future. The DUKE Plan focuses on 16 publicly owned sites, including sites owned by the District, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, and the DC Housing Finance Agency (DCHFA). It also addresses sites owned by Howard University and the private sector within the study area. As development takes place, efforts to improve the streetscape and public space, provide affordable housing, preserve historic buildings, and mitigate development impacts (particularly those associated with the increased numbers of restaurants, nightclubs, and entertainment uses) should continue.

2013.5 Policy MC-2.3.1: Uptown Destination District

Encourage the growth and vibrancy of U Street NW between 6th Street NW and 12th Street NW and Georgia Avenue NW/7th Street NW between Rhode Island Avenue NW and Barry Place NW as a mixed-use center with restored theaters, arts and jazz establishments, restaurants, shops, and housing serving a range of incomes and household types.

2013.6 Policy MC-2.3.2: Uptown Subareas

Create a distinct and memorable identity for different subareas in the Uptown District based on existing assets such as the Lincoln Theater, Howard University, the African-American Civil War Memorial, and the Howard Theater.

2013.7 Policy MC-2.3.3: Uptown Design Considerations

Ensure that development in the Uptown District is designed to make the most of its proximity to the Metro stations at Shaw and 13th Street NW, respect the integrity of historic resources, provide new affordable and mixed-income housing opportunities, and transition as seamlessly as possible to the residential neighborhoods nearby.

2013.8 Policy MC-2.3.4: Cultural Tourism

Promote cultural tourism initiatives, public art, signage, and other improvements that recognize the Black historic and cultural heritage of the Uptown District. Such initiatives should bring economic development opportunities to local residents and businesses and establish a stronger identity for the area, both as a nationally significant Black landmark and a district with prominent Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning (LGBTQ) community sites.

2013.9 Policy MC-2.3.5: Multimodal Management

Encourage the development of shared parking facilities in the Uptown District, better management of existing parking resources, and improved surface transit to manage the increased trips to the area that will be generated by new development.

2013.10 Policy MC-2.3.6: Small Business Retention

Incorporate small business retention and assistance programs in the Uptown District’s revitalization, possibly including zoning regulations, tax relief, and other measures that assist small businesses as redevelopment along U Street NW, 9th Street NW, and 7th Street NW takes place.

2013.11 Policy MC-2.3.7 Use of Public Sites

Utilize public land at the Reeves Center, Housing Finance Agency, Garnet-Paterson, Engine 9, and MPD 3rd District Headquarters to create mixed-use neighborhood landmarks that acknowledge and continue the history of U Street as a Black business corridor. Added density at these public sites should be used to create a significant amount of new affordable housing, establish space for cultural uses, and provide for additional public facilities, such as a new public library. New construction should concentrate density towards U Street and use design strategies to visually reduce building height and bulk to provide appropriate transitions to adjacent lower density areas.

See the Near Northwest Area Element for further information about the Shaw/Convention Center Area Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2014** MC-2.4 ADAMS MORGAN {#sec-10-a2014 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2014}

2014.1 Adams Morgan is well known for its mix of housing types and historic architecture, community pride, civic activism, and cultural diversity. Among longtime residents and artists who preserved the neighborhood’s bohemian feel are newer residents, including young professionals attracted by the lively and progressive culture and amenity-rich neighborhood. The neighborhood’s walkability, strong commercial core, access to public transportation, proximity to downtown, and engaged residents continue making Adams Morgan an attractive place to live.

2014.2 In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Adams Morgan was a highly sought after suburb of row houses and apartments. During World War II, many of its homes were divided into apartments (or used as rooming houses), changing the character of the neighborhood. A large number of young adults and immigrants settled in the neighborhood in the post-war years. A new name for the community was coined by community activists, combining the names of two neighborhood schools—the predominantly white Adams and the predominantly Black Morgan.

2014.3 In the 1950s and early 1960s, the neighborhood saw an influx of Cubans and Puerto Ricans. Beginning in the 1980s, waves of immigrants from Central America arrived, many seeking refuge from political and economic turmoil. Today, Adams Morgan has the second-largest Salvadoran population in the United States. The neighborhood’s colorful street murals, first painted by Hispanic/Latino residents in the 1970s, are now a District tradition and are emulated throughout Washington, DC. The commercial district along 18th Street NW and Columbia Road NW has become a center of nightlife, with an array of ethnic restaurants, coffee houses, bars, and unique shops that attract people from across the region, as well as visitors to the District.

2014.4 The neighborhood continues to be in strong demand for housing and its popular entertainment scene. To the east of 18th Street NW, a zoning overlay was created for the Reed-Cooke area in 1989 to conserve existing housing and ensure compatible infill development on a number of large properties. Several large low-rise condominium projects were developed in the 1990s and early 2000s, and a new grocery store in the former Citadel skating rink has also been completed.

2014.5 Adams Morgan has long been a destination for residents and visitors. From the 1990s-2000s, Adams Morgan was one of the District’s de facto neighborhoods for nighttime entertainment. Among the many offerings in the neighborhood were international cuisine, unique bars, and independent shops selling goods not found anywhere else in Washington, DC. As the building boom in the District took off in the early 2000s, Adams Morgan, like other District neighborhoods, saw change. More young professionals began moving in, and buildings were renovated or constructed to accommodate demand. Customers also changed their retail patterns as more options emerged in other neighborhoods. Longtime restaurants and shops were impacted by the changing retail landscape and would benefit greatly from planning and technical assistance.

2014.6 The history, ethnic makeup, and bohemian characteristics that defined Adams Morgan’s past are still woven into the neighborhood fabric today. Residents continue to be highly engaged in their community, regardless of the neighborhood’s evolving demographic and socio-economic makeup.

2014.7 In the neighborhood, there remains a desire to provide housing for families, diversify eating and business establishments, maintain and grow the number of affordable housing units, and adequately buffer between residential and commercial uses. Renovation and modernization of the Marie Reed School campus and recreation center are complete, providing a new school and community facility for the neighborhood and contributing to the public life of Adams Morgan. New development has raised concerns about additional density, congestion, and the loss of open space. The continued strong involvement of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC), local community organizations, and individual residents will be important as these challenges are addressed.

2014.8 In 2014, OP launched the Adams Morgan Vision Framework (AMVF), a strategic planning initiative and engagement process that built upon previous planning studies to define key goals and action items for the neighborhood. Completed in 2016, AMVF identifies opportunity areas to preserve the neighborhood’s physical characteristics, enhance retail and amenities, support sustainability, and improve the quality of life for the community. AMVF includes 17 goals with corresponding implementable recommendations for the neighborhood. The goals are centered around five core categories important for Adams Morgan’s continued development and growth: (1) creating great places; (2) redefining retail; (3) embracing sustainability; (4) strengthening identity through arts, history, and culture; and (5) bolstering community. The policies and actions below reflect key goals and recommendations from AMVF.

2014.9 Policy MC-2.4.1: Creating an Inclusive Adams Morgan

Preserve the historic character of Adams Morgan through historic landmark and district designations, and by ensuring that new construction is compatible with the prevailing heights and densities in the neighborhood. Residential density added through the Future Land Use Map should be used to create additional affordable housing above and beyond existing legal requirements, in order to contribute to the neighborhood’s share of dedicated affordable units, which is currently one of the lowest in Mid-City.

2014.10 Policy MC-2.4.2: Preference for Local-Serving Businesses

Enhance the local-serving, multicultural character of the 18th Street NW/Columbia Road NW business district. Encourage small businesses that meet the needs of local residents, as well as an appropriate mix of establishments that both neighbors and visitors to the area can enjoy. Develop and implement strategies for support and retention of minority-owned businesses.

2014.11 Policy MC-2.4.3: Mixed-Use Character

Encourage retention of the older mixed-use buildings along 18th Street NW and Columbia Road NW and facilitate infill projects that complement them in height, scale, and design. Discourage conversion of existing apartment buildings in the commercial area to non-residential uses and ensure the stability of renter households, particularly for Black and Hispanic/Latino residents.

2014.12 Policy MC-2.4.4: Transportation Improvements

Improve accessibility, and the flow of people along key arterial streets, particularly along the multi-modal corridor of Columbia Road NW and residential connector streets such as Kalorama Road NW and Euclid Street NW. Enable highly trafficked areas of 18th Street NW to be transformed into a pedestrian plaza. Implement new measures to address parking problems on residential streets near the Adams Morgan business district. These measures could include extension of the residential permit parking program to a 24/7 time frame, with appropriate consideration given to the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors.

2014.13 Policy MC-2.4.5: Reed-Cooke Area

Support existing housing within the Reed-Cooke neighborhood, maintain heights and densities at appropriate levels, and encourage small-scale business development that does not adversely affect the residential community.

2014.14 Policy MC-2.4.6: Adams Morgan Public and Institutional Facilities

Encourage the retention and adaptive reuse of existing public facilities in Adams Morgan, including the use of schools for public purposes, such as education, clinics, libraries, and recreational facilities. In addition, encourage the constructive, adaptive, and suitable reuse of historic churches with new uses, such as housing in the event such facilities cease to operate as churches.

2014.15 Action MC-2.4.A: AMVF

Implement the recommendations in AMVF.

2014.16 Action MC-2.4.B: Lanier Heights and Reed-Cooke

Consider design guidelines specific to Lanier Heights and Reed-Cooke. Consider historic designation of Walter Pierce Community Park.

2014.17 Action MC-2.4.C: Local Business Assistance

Explore the feasibility of amending tax laws or developing tax abatement and credit programs to retain neighborhood services and encourage small local-serving businesses space along 18th Street NW and Columbia Road NW. Identify technical assistance needs and priorities of Hispanic/Latino-, Asian-, and Black-owned/operated businesses in the neighborhood and recognize the benefits that naturally arise from cultural variety among tenants.

2014.18 Action MC-2.4.D: Design Guidelines

Develop design guidelines for Adams Morgan, including commercial, residential, and open-space areas. Highlight and identify the principles of compatible design and neighborhood character preservation.

2014.19 Action MC-2.4.E: Commercial District Management

Approach commercial district management as a unified operation while developing targeted marketing and localized strategies that enhance and reinforce the unique identity and needs of each retail cluster.

2014.20 Action MC-2.4.F: Enhance the Neighborhood Retail Experience

Use existing Adams Morgan Partnership BID committees and the BID Board to develop joint retail objectives. Work with retailer and resident liaisons involved in the BID to carry out joint initiatives that enhance the neighborhood retail experience.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2015** MC-2.5 MOUNT PLEASANT STREET NW {#sec-10-a2015 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2015}

2015.1 The Mount Pleasant Street NW shopping district was developed around the end of a streetcar line and has served the surrounding community for more than a century. Mount Pleasant has been a designated National Register Historic District since 1987 and is one of the Washington, DC Main Streets. Today, the commercial district includes a variety of small businesses and services, many oriented toward the large Hispanic/Latino population in the area. The area between Mount Pleasant Street NW and 16th Street NW is one of the densest in the District, with numerous large apartment complexes.

2015.2 There is broad agreement that Mount Pleasant Street NW should remain a culturally diverse, pedestrian-oriented, local-serving shopping street in the future and that the local flavor of the business mix should be preserved . As in other Mid-City neighborhoods, there are concerns about rising rents and the loss of business diversity. There is strong interest in attracting new arts establishments and locally owned restaurants to the neighborhood and in promoting multiculturalism through outdoor fairs, public art, and street performances. There is also strong interest in preserving the architectural integrity and historic proportions of Mount Pleasant’s residential streets and in acquiring additional open space for public access and community use.

2015.3 In 2010, the D.C. Council approved the Mount Pleasant Street Commercial Revitalization Strategy. This Small Area Plan provides a framework to revitalize commercial activity along the historic corridor and set the stage for long-term future growth. The policies and actions below reflect key goals and recommendations from the plan.

2015.4 Policy MC-2.5.1: Mount Pleasant Street NW’s Character

Maintain and preserve Mount Pleasant Street NW’s local neighborhood shopping character to serve the surrounding neighborhood. Support creative cultural design while preserving historic landmarks.

2015.5 Policy MC-2.5.2: Involving the International Community

Promote bilingual outreach and communication with local merchants and residents to more effectively address business impacts and create a better match between neighborhood businesses and the needs of the community.

2015.6 Policy MC-2.5.3: Mount Pleasant as a Creative Economic Enclave

Support creative and multicultural expression in Mount Pleasant through display, performance, festivals, and economic development strategies. The neighborhood should be a creative economic enclave, where incubators and small businesses that combine cultural and small-scale technological initiatives are supported. Cultural arts should be more fully integrated into the landscape of Mount Pleasant Street NW and should be part of the experience of living or shopping there. Additional arts, crafts, galleries, licensed market vendors, and space for business incubators and consulting services in the creative professions should be encouraged.

2015.7 Policy MC-2.5.4: Open Space Access

Pursue improvements to existing open space in the Mount Pleasant community, including better connections to Rock Creek Park, enhancements to pocket parks and plazas, and encouraging the joint use of school facilities to meet local recreational needs.

2015.8 Policy MC-2.5.5: Promoting Affordable Housing in Mount Pleasant

Preserve existing affordable housing in Mount Pleasant and support opportunities for new affordable housing as a component of mixed-use infill development along Mount Pleasant Street NW and in the area between Mount Pleasant and 16th Streets NW.

2015.9 Policy MC-2.5.6: Strengthen Small Business

Implement technical assistance to strengthen existing small businesses and increase opportunities for new entrepreneurs to capture more of the neighborhood customer base.

2015.10 Policy MC-2.5.7: Promote and Market Mount Pleasant Street NW

Attract additional consumers to the corridor by promoting the unique character of Mount Pleasant Street NW.

2015.11 Policy MC-2.5.8: Enhance the Appearance of Mount Pleasant Street NW

Improve the Mount Pleasant Street NW streetscape and physical appearance by transforming it into a green street that can be used as a model for eco-friendly development practices.

2015.12 Policy MC-2.5.9: Increase Creative Uses on Mount Pleasant Street NW

Undertake temporary urbanism initiatives to transform vacant and underused sites and spaces into vibrant destinations and creative showcases.

2015.13 Action MC-2.5.A: Incentives for Mixed-Use Development and Affordable Housing

Consider planning and zoning tools in Mount Pleasant to create incentives for ground floor retail and upper story, mixed-income residential uses along Mount Pleasant Street NW, with performance standards that ensure the compatibility of adjacent uses. Provide the necessary flexibility to encourage innovation and creative economic development, possibly including ground floor small businesses on alleys and walkways in the area between 16th and 17th Streets NW.

2015.14 Action MC-2.5.B: Expanding Mount Pleasant Open Space

Maintain the space at 19th Street NW and Lamont Street NW– once planned to be a continuation of Lamont Street – as a public park. The intersection of Mount Pleasant Street NW and Kenyon Street NW has long been an important gathering space and should be improved to create an enhanced public plaza. Any future redevelopment of properties at this location should maintain or enhance accommodations for public space and ensure visual compatibility with the Mount Pleasant commercial corridor. Consideration should also be given to combining Asbury and Rabaut Parks (at 16th, Harvard, and Columbia Road) into a single park. Access for pedestrians, persons using wheelchairs, and bicyclists between Mount Pleasant and Columbia Heights should be provided through this area.

2015.15 Action MC-2.5.C: Mount Pleasant Street Façade Improvements

Encourage urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial district along Mount Pleasant Street NW.

2015.16 Action MC-2.5.D: Mount Pleasant Street NW Commercial Revitalization Strategy

Implement Mount Pleasant Street Small Area Plan recommendations.

2015.17 Action MC-2.5.E: Market the Unique Character of Mount Pleasant Street NW

Led by the Mount Pleasant Main Street, coordinate a marketing campaign to promote Mount Pleasant businesses to District residents outside the neighborhood.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2016** MC-2.6 MCMILLAN SAND FILTRATION {#sec-10-a2016 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2016}

2016.1 The McMillan Sand Filtration site occupies 25 acres at the corner of North Capitol Street NW and Michigan Avenue NW. Once used to filter drinking water from the Potomac River, the plant was closed and sold by the federal government to the District for community development purposes in 1987. The site currently appears as an open area of grass and trees with two rows of enigmatic concrete towers covered with ivy. Beneath the surface are 20 unreinforced concrete filter cells, each one acre in size and in various states of disrepair. When the filtration system was created in 1905, it was considered an engineering marvel and a model for other plants nationwide. The entire site is a designated historic landmark.

2016.2 The McMillan Sand Filtration site has been the subject of community forums for several decades. Many residents have advocated for a park on the site, noting its historic significance. In fact, the filtration site and the adjacent McMillan reservoir were part of the Emerald Necklace of parks conceived in the 1901 McMillan Plan, and the site itself was originally designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. Past proposals for the site have been the subject of lawsuits, and the former Comprehensive Plan designation of the site for mixed-use development was itself the subject of a lawsuit from 1989-1992.

2016.3 Several basic objectives should be pursued in the development and reuse of the McMillan Sand Filtration site. These are outlined in the policies below.

2016.4 Policy MC-2.6.1: Open Space on McMillan Reservoir and Sand Filtration

Site

Encourage development and reuse plans for the McMillan Reservoir Sand Filtration site to dedicate a substantial contiguous portion of the site for recreation and open space. The open space should allow for both active and passive recreational uses and should adhere to high standards of landscape design, accessibility, and security.

2016.5 Policy MC-2.6.2: Historic Preservation at McMillan Reservoir

Restore key above-ground elements of the site and explore the preservation or adaptive reuse of some of the underground cells as part of the historic record of the site. Preservation poses a challenge given the collapse of most cells. The cultural significance of this site and its importance to Washington, DC’s history should be recognized as it is developed, reopened to the public, and reused. Consideration should be given to interpretive features as part of the site design.

2016.6 Policy MC-2.6.3: Mitigating Reuse Impacts

Ensure that any development on the site is designed to reduce parking, traffic, and noise impacts on the community; be architecturally compatible with the surrounding community; and improve transportation options to the site and surrounding neighborhood. The new Planned Unit Development (PUD) calls for 290,650 square feet of medical use. Any change in use on the site should increase connectivity between northwest and northeast neighborhoods, as well as the Washington Hospital Center and Armed Forces Retirement Home to the north.

2016.7 Policy MC-2.6.4: Community Involvement in Development and Reuse Planning

Be responsive to community needs and concerns in development and reuse planning for the site. Amenities that are accessible to the community and respond to neighborhood needs should be included.

2016.8 Policy MC-2.6.5: Scale and Mix of New Uses

Recognize the substantial potential of the McMillan Sand Filtration site to address multiple planning and development priorities and that development of the site is necessary to stabilize the site and provide the desired open space and amenities. Development of the site should consist of residential, retail, office, and recreational uses. Residential development should include a mix of units and housing types for persons of various incomes; new buildings should be planned and designed in a manner that is informed by the height, mass, scale, and uses of existing and planned buildings in the surrounding area, as appropriate. Other uses may include health care facilities that provide connectivity to the Washington Hospital Center. Compatible with the rules governing PUDs, the density for the McMillan Sand Filtration Site shall be calculated for the site as a whole. Individual buildings may have greater height than is typically associated within a specific land use designation. New buildings should be planned and designed in a manner that is informed by the height, mass, scale, and uses of the surrounding context, as appropriate.

2016.9 Action MC-2.6.A: McMillan Reservoir Development

Continue working with adjacent communities in the development and implementation of reuse plans for the McMillan Reservoir site.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2017** MC-2.7 MID-CITY EAST’S MAJOR CORRIDORS (NORTH CAPITOL STREET/FLORIDA AVENUE/NEW YORK AVENUE {#sec-10-a2017 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2017}

2017.1 The Mid-City East area sits near the center of Washington, DC and showcases historic residential fabric and institutions, a rich diversity of residents, valued open spaces, and burgeoning retail amenities. The Mid-City East area is made up of neighborhoods flanking the major corridors of North Capitol Street, New York, Florida , New Jersey, and Rhode Island Avenues NE/NW, including: LeDroit Park, Bloomingdale, Eckington, Bates/Truxton Circle, and Hanover (the Bates/Truxton Circle and Hanover neighborhoods are located in the Near Northwest Area Element). The inviting character of these neighborhoods is juxtaposed by the major arterials that bisect them. Despite acting as real and formidable boundaries, the street corridors also create opportunities for retail enhancement, new development, and improved connectivity. The neighborhoods themselves are diverse in age, income, and ethnicity. They consist of a mix of row houses and small apartment buildings. Home prices in the neighborhood have significantly increased in the past 10 years, and many longtime residents are feeling the pressure of displacement. Washington, DC’s industrial heritage survives in Eckington’s important and increasingly rare industrial buildings.

2017.2 The commercial areas in Mid-City East are in need of revitalization. Although it was designated a DC Main Street in 2000 and reinvigorated in 2014, North Capitol Street corridor experiences a lack of neighborhood-serving businesses, high vacancies, crime, and inadequate access to parking. The North Capitol Street corridor is particularly challenged by a myriad of confusing and often congested intersections, and crisscrossing diagonal streets and triangles making pedestrian movement difficult. The Council approved the 2014 Mid-City East Small Area Plan and accompanying Livability Study to address these issues, with the goal of improving vehicle flow and improving safety. The Small Area Plan provided a framework for conservation, development, sustainability, and connectivity and identified specific short-term and long-term transportation, streetscape, and infrastructure improvements. The vision for the area is to improve quality of life and enhance neighborhood amenities and character while supporting a community of culturally, economically, and generationally diverse residents. The purpose of the Livability Study was to address the challenges that residents face in meeting their daily needs, enhance community access and circulation for residents of all ages and abilities, preserve local streets as the home of neighborhoods and communities, and provide opportunities in public rights-of-way to celebrate community identity and place.

2017.3 The North Capitol commercial district is just a few blocks west of the NoMa/Gallaudet Metro station and lies on the northern edge of the North of Massachusetts Avenue (NoMa) district. Conditions on the corridor have changed since NoMa was redeveloped with offices and high-density housing. The commercial corridor is well situated to benefit from these changes, but it first needs to address the needs of the residential community, manage access, upgrade the public realm, and improve public safety.

2017.4 Policy MC-2.7.1: Commercial Revitalization

Revitalize neighborhood commercial areas, including retail, dining, and small office space. Upgrade the commercial district at Florida Avenue/North Capitol/New York Avenue NE, restoring vacant storefronts and streetscapes to active use and accommodating compatible neighborhood-serving infill development.

2017.5 Policy MC-2.7.2: Neighborhood Character

Preserve and retain the architectural integrity and cultural resources of Mid-City East neighborhoods and encourage compatible rehabilitation and improvement of the area’s row houses.

2017.6 Policy: MC-2.7.3: Connecting Bloomingdale and Eckington

Improve connectivity between Bloomingdale and Eckington by expanding the North Capitol overpass, decking over the entire expanse to create a tunnel between Seaton Place NE and Rhode Island Avenue NE and creating a green space to make crossing North Capitol Street NE more inviting for pedestrians and other persons using non-motor vehicles.

2017.7 Policy: MC-2.7.4: Increased Green Space

Encourage preservation and improvement of existing green spaces in Eckington. Identify new opportunities for additional public green space and tree planting throughout the neighborhood and along the Metropolitan Branch Trail, including additional pocket parks.

2017.8 Policy MC-2.7.5: New York Avenue NE and Florida Avenue NE Intersection

Implement short-term and long-term improvements to the intersection of New York Avenue NE and Florida Avenue NE to enhance connectivity, increase safety for pedestrians and those using non-motor vehicles, and reduce motor vehicle speed.

2017.9 Action MC-2.7.A: Mid-City East Small Area Plan

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Small Area Plan.

2017.10 Action MC-2.7.B: Make/Live Workspace

Explore make/live workspace as a buffer between industrial land and residential land as identified in the Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study.

2017.11 Action MC-2.7.C: Mid-City East Livability Study

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Livability Study.

### **10-A21** NORTHWEST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 2100** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2100}

2100.1 The Near Northwest Planning Area encompasses the 3.6 square miles located directly north and west of Central Washington. It extends from Glover Archbold Park on the west to North Capitol Street NW on the east. Its northern boundary is formed by Whitehaven Parkway west of Rock Creek and by Connecticut Avenue, U Street, and Florida Avenue NW east of Rock Creek. The southern boundary is formed by the Potomac River, the Central Employment Area, and New York Avenue NW (east of 7th Street NW). These boundaries are shown on the map at left. Most of this area has historically been Ward 2, although in past and present times, parts have also been included in Wards 1, 5, and 6.

2100.2 Near Northwest is known for its historic architecture, well-established neighborhoods, lively shopping areas, and nationally recognized institutions. These features provide enduring reminders of the District’s growth, from the 18th century to today’s international destination. The Georgetown Historic District, established in 1950 in response to the demolition of large numbers of waterfront and canal-related buildings, was the first such district established in Washington, DC. Today, more than half of Near Northwest’s land area is included in historic districts, with concentrations of landmarks in Georgetown, on Washington Circle, within the campus of The George Washington University (GW), in Dupont and Logan Circles, and along Massachusetts Avenue NW. These designations include some of the oldest residential and commercial buildings in Washington, DC.

2100.3 The development pattern in the area is one of the densest in the Washington metropolitan region. Near Northwest neighborhoods contain some of the most diverse housing stock in the District, varying from single-family homes to high-rise apartments. Townhouses and mid-rise apartment buildings dating from the mid 19th to early 20th centuries define the area’s residential neighborhoods; they are most prominent in Georgetown, Burleith, Dupont Circle, Foggy Bottom, Logan Circle, Shaw, and Mount Vernon Square. Kalorama principally consists of single-family homes dating to the early 20th century. Large apartment buildings, many built during the 1920s and 1930s, are concentrated along major roadways, including Connecticut, New Hampshire, Massachusetts , and Rhode Island Avenues, and 16th Street NW. Mid-century modern and more contemporary high-density construction defines West End and the 14th Street NW corridor, as well as riverfront communities like the Watergate and Washington Harbour.

2100.4 Located outside of Georgetown, the area is well connected to other parts of the District and region by mass transit, including the Red, Green, Orange, Blue, and Silver Metrorail (Metro) lines and multiple bus lines. Several parkways, highways, and interstates also pass through or are immediately adjacent to the area, often creating barriers between neighborhoods, parks, and the Potomac River in the eastern portion of the area. These include Interstate 66, the Whitehurst Freeway, Canal Road, Rock Creek and Potomac Parkways, and the I-395/Center Leg Freeway. The overall street pattern reflects the L’Enfant Plan, with prominent diagonal boulevards bisecting a rectangular grid.

2100.5 Shopping areas in Near Northwest range from regional destinations, such as M Street in Georgetown, to neighborhood commercial districts, such as 17th Street NW in Dupont Circle. The more prominent retail areas are on the major streets and avenues, including Connecticut Avenue, U Street, and 7th, 9th, and 14th Streets NW. There are smaller retail districts throughout the area and corner stores in almost every residential neighborhood. While it has a limited number of neighborhood parks, the entire Near Northwest area is within one and a half miles of Rock Creek Park or the National Mall.

2100.6 Near Northwest is home to a number of institutions known both locally and internationally. Established in 1789, Georgetown is the nation’s oldest Catholic and Jesuit university. The 100-acre main campus overlooks the Potomac River and features traditional and modern architecture, including Healy Hall, which was designed in neo-medieval style, built between 1877-1879, and designated as a National Historic Landmark. Today, much of the university’s open space is available to community members, neighborhood schools, organizations, and individuals for recreational use. GW, located in Foggy Bottom at the edge of the Central Business District, is a much more urban campus, well integrated into the dense fabric of the neighborhood surrounding it. Museums and historic sites, including the Phillips Collection, Woodrow Wilson House, and the Mary McLeod Bethune Council House, attract visitors from the region and across the country. 14th Street NW is home to the Studio Theater, as well as other performing arts venues and galleries. After years of disinvestment following the unrest in 1968, 14th Street has experienced intense development activity and restaurant openings, which have contributed to establishing the corridor as one of Washington, DC’s premier food and entertainment districts. Foreign embassies are concentrated along Massachusetts Avenue NW, in the Dupont Circle neighborhood, and in Kalorama.

2100.7 A number of local community and business associations play an active role in shaping Near Northwest land use decisions. In addition to seven Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) that represent residents from three wards, there are many community associations and active groups with a specific focus. Some, like the Georgetown Business Improvement District (BID) , work toward building a stronger business community. Others, like the Citizens Association of Georgetown, the Foggy Bottom Association, the Logan Circle Community Association, and the Dupont Circle Conservancy, have strong preservation programs. Others work directly with residents to create a higher quality of life. The Georgetown Community Partnership, for example, includes community, university, and student leaders and was formed as a consensus-based forum to develop a campus plan for Georgetown’s historic main campus and manage community-university issues.

2100.8 In the recent past, increasing values in long-sought-after neighborhoods like Georgetown, Kalorama, Foggy Bottom, West End, and Dupont Circle, have resulted in development activity moving east into Logan Circle, Shaw, and Mount Vernon Square. The strong real estate market has prompted many owners in these neighborhoods to renovate or sell their properties, leading to sharp increases in home prices and rents and a loss of affordable units.

2100.9 The most significant challenge facing the Near Northwest Planning Area is retaining the physical and social fabric of the community in the face of intense economic pressure. Parts of the area are still trying to find the right balance between development and preservation. This plays out in daily debates on physical planning issues like height, scale, and design, and on social issues relating to changing demographics and cultural values. Policies are needed to address a host of local issues, including the preservation and production of affordable housing; strengthening the opportunities for small and local businesses; maintaining existing and expanding new infrastructure and services, such as schools and recreational spaces, to serve a growing population of families in the area; and addressing the tensions that inevitably result from the area’s highly diverse mix of land uses and densities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2101** HISTORY {#sec-10-a2101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2101}

2101.1 Near Northwest includes the oldest inhabited areas of the District. Georgetown, established in 1751 by the Maryland Assembly, was a tobacco port and independent municipality incorporated into Washington, DC in 1800. At the time, the settlement was just outside the boundaries of the federal city. Construction of Georgetown University began in 1788, three years before Pierre L’Enfant’s Plan was prepared.

2101.2 Prior to 1850, most of the area east of Georgetown was sparsely populated. Several businesses were located along the waterfront in Foggy Bottom at the mouth of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. In the area nearby, just west of the White House, some of the District’s first grand homes were built. The Shaw and Mount Vernon Square neighborhoods also experienced modest residential development prior to the Civil War and were known as Northern Liberties.

2101.3 The increase in population resulting from the Civil War facilitated residential development in Foggy Bottom, Shaw, and Mount Vernon Square. By the mid- to late- 19th century, these areas were home to a mix of professional and moderate-income residents. A number of alley dwellings were built in these areas, often housing Washington, DC’s low-income residents.

2101.4 The residential neighborhoods of Logan Circle, Dupont Circle, and Kalorama did not see significant development until the late 19th century. After the Civil War, Logan Circle became one of the most sought-after addresses in Washington, DC. The row houses in this area and along 14th Street NW were more substantial than those built before the Civil War. Small apartment buildings began to appear in the area as the population increased and building sites became more limited. The Dupont Circle area followed a similar trend, as Massachusetts Avenue NW and its intersections at Dupont and Sheridan Circles created sites ideal for large, stand-alone residences. Between 1870 and 1900, the avenue became the center of Washington, DC’s most notable cultural gatherings. Kalorama, meanwhile, began to develop with townhomes and grand apartments, followed in the 1920s by large single-family homes.

2101.5 By the late 19th century, horse-powered vehicles were replaced with independent streetcar routes that quickly became lined with commercial businesses. One line reinforced Wisconsin Avenue and M Street in Georgetown as a center of commercial activity, but residential districts on Connecticut Avenue and 14th Street NW were transformed: the former into a high-end shopping district, and the latter as a center for automobile sales and maintenance. Streetcar lines on 7th and 11th Streets NW also attracted commercial businesses that served residents living in nearby areas, as well as those heading home to areas further north.

2101.6 The ethnicity of residents living in Near Northwest has always been diverse. Until the 1930s, about one-third of Georgetown’s population was Black. An active, free Black population also lived in the Dupont Circle area prior to the Civil War and led to some of the District’s earliest education initiatives. During the mid- 20th century, parts of Logan Circle and the Strivers Section of Dupont Circle were home to prominent Blacks, and the Shaw neighborhood became a vibrant center of Black culture.

2101.7 By the 1950s, the close-in residential neighborhoods of this Planning Area were considered to be less sought-after than the outlying suburbs, and many residents moved or redeveloped their properties. Some of the large homes in Dupont Circle were torn down to make way for commercial development or apartment buildings, and the Shaw School Urban Renewal Plan replaced many of the alley dwellings with modern housing projects. Working-class Georgetown evolved into one of the District’s most notable residential and business addresses. By the 1990s, industrial uses along the waterfront had been replaced by offices, shops, and expensive residences. Similarly, the growth of GW in Foggy Bottom redefined much of that neighborhood.

2101.8 Today, 15 historic districts preserve the character of the area’s residential neighborhoods and help guide the integration of new development. Campus plans steer further development of Georgetown University and GW. The commercial parts of Georgetown and Dupont Circle are home to boutiques, galleries, and local and national retailers, and 14th Street NW is one of the District’s most vibrant areas for dining, arts, and shopping. Development along the street continues at a rapid pace, with hundreds of new housing units added in recent years. Housing production is expected to continue as the demand for living in the neighborhood remains strong. The Walter E. Washington Convention Center anchors the Shaw and Mount Vernon Square neighborhoods. Completion of the convention center has spurred significant reinvestment in the neighborhood’s housing, retail, and office spaces.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2102** LAND USE {#sec-10-a2102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2102}

2102.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, etc. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 plan that were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not actual changes in land use. 2102.1 Land use statistics for Near Northwest appear in Figure 21.1. Near Northwest comprises about 2,501 acres, including 248 acres of water and about 2,253 acres of land. This represents about 5.7 percent of the District’s land area.

2102.2 Street rights-of-way occupy more land than any other use in the Planning Area, representing about one-third of the total acreage. This is slightly higher than in other parts of Washington, DC due to the fact that a rigorous street grid and the broad avenues of the L’Enfant Plan are predominant in this area, reserving a larger percentage of the land to street right-of-way compared to more suburban areas of the District, where winding roadways, cul-de-sacs, and larger lot sizes are more common.

2102.3 Residential uses occupy 27.4 percent of the total land area. Of the residential acreage, about 30 percent consists of mid- to high-rise apartments, and about 55 percent consists of row houses. The remaining 15 percent consists of single-family detached or semi-detached homes. High-density housing is concentrated along the Connecticut Avenue, Massachusetts Avenue, and 16th Street corridors NW.

2102.4 Recreation and open space make up 19.6 percent of the Planning Area, slightly below the citywide average. Most of the open space is associated with Rock Creek Park and Roosevelt Island. Other significant open spaces include the historic Dupont, Logan , Washington Circles, and the waterfront by Georgetown. There are three recreation centers: Georgetown Recreation Center, Stead Park in Dupont Circle, and Kennedy Recreation Center in Shaw. Other park areas have active recreation facilities, including athletic fields, swimming pools, and ball courts. Small playgrounds and triangle parks are located in all parts of the area.

2102.5 Commercial and institutional uses represent a much larger share of the Planning Area than they do in Washington, DC as a whole. Collectively, they represent 17.7 percent of the Planning Area compared to 10 percent District-wide. The most significant retail areas are along linear corridors such as Wisconsin Avenue and M Street, Connecticut Avenue, and 14th Street NW. Institutional uses, including Georgetown University and GW, comprise 8.5 percent of the Planning Area.

2102.6 Figure 21.1: Land Use Composition in Near Northwest

2102.7 The Planning Area has very little federal land other than its parks and about 41.1 acres of local public facilities (primarily schools). Only about 42.2 acres of the Planning Area consist of vacant private land, and most of this land is committed to future development projects. Only 0.3 percent of the area is set aside as industrial land.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2103** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a2103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2103}

2103.1 Figure 21.2: Near Northwest at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

68,539

77,780

79,374

93,406

99,973

107,210

Households

35,121

38,410

37,551

44,337

46,170

48,551

Household Population

59,317

64,541

67,203

79,275

85,718

92,707

Persons Per Household

1.69

1.68

1.79

1.86

1.91

Jobs

95,570

83,642

90,512

93,683

97,224

101,257

Density (persons per sq mile)

19,039

21,606

22,048

25,946

27,770

29,781

Land Area (square miles)

3.6

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

6,137

56,401

33,822

22,579

6,001

9.0%

82.3%

49.3%

32.9%

8.8%

5,667

66,300

42,575

23,725

7,407

7.1%

83.5%

53.6%

29.9%

9.3%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

12,968

19.0%

9,010

13.3%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

42,846

15,880

380

4,537

2,491

2,190

62.7%

23.2%

0.6%

6.6%

3.6%

3.2%

55,046

10,907

241

6,915

3,168

3,096

69.4%

13.7%

0.3%

8.7%

4.0%

3.9%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

6,783

9.9%

9,554

12.0%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

13,499

8.5%

16,568

20.9%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

11,641

23,100

33.5%

66.5%

13,890

23,660

37.0%

63.0%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

34,741

3,201

92.5%

7.5%

37,551

4,731

88.8%

11.2%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

1,179

6,809

3,974

2,181

2,518

21,269

3.1%

17.9%

10.5%

5.7%

6.6%

56.3%

>0.1%

1,169

6,425

4,309

2,079

2,628

25,644

2.8%

15.2%

10.2%

4.9%

6.2%

60.6%

0.1%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

2103.2 With 54 percent of the population in Near Northwest between the ages of 18 and 34, young professionals make up a much higher percentage of the population in this area than they do in Washington, DC, where only 34.6 percent of the population falls in that age range. This difference is likely due to the presence of several university campuses in the area. The population under the age of 18 is significantly lower than the District-wide total of 17.5 percent. The population over 65 is also lower than the District-wide total.

2103.3 Between 2000 and 2017, the ethnic demographics of the area shifted. The white population increased from 62.7 percent in 2000 to 69.4 percent in 2017. By contrast, the Black population decreased from 23.2 percent in 2000 to 13.7 percent in 2017. The absolute number of Black residents also decreased by close to 5,000 people, a decrease of approximately 31 percent. The Asian and Hispanic/Latino populations grew in the area, with both populations increasing in percentage and in the total number of residents. Compared to the rest of the District, Near Northwest has a higher percentage of whites, Asians, and Hispanics/Latinos, and a lower percentage of Black residents. About one in five of the area’s residents were born in another country, which is significantly higher than the District-wide total, and also increased from 2000.

2103.4 In 2017, almost 15.3 percent of the area’s residents lived in group quarters. Much of this population was associated with dormitories on university campuses. Several dormitories have been built between since 2000, and in 2017, an estimated 12,171 people in Near Northwest resided in group quarters.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2104** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a2104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2104}

2104.1 In 2017, 82 percent of the housing units in Near Northwest were in multi-unit buildings, mostly buildings of 20 units or more. The percentage of housing units in large apartment buildings of 20 units or more was greater than the District-wide total (60.6 percent for the area compared to 35.4 percent for the District). Near Northwest also had a large number of one-unit attached homes, but the percentage was lower than the District-wide total (15.2 percent compared to 25.1 percent District-wide). Only 2.8 percent of the area’s housing units were single-family detached homes. The number of housing units in the Planning Area increased by about 4,300 units between 2000 and 2017, and the majority of this growth occurred in buildings with 20 or more units.

2104.2 Near Northwest experienced an increase in the number of vacant units between 2000 and 2017. In 2000, 7.5 percent of the area’s housing units were vacant. That figure increased to 11.2 percent in 2017, which was higher than the District-wide vacancy rate of 9.8 percent.

2104.3 The 2000 Census reported that 33.5 percent of housing units in the area were owner-occupied, and 66.5 percent were renter-occupied. In 2017, the percentage of owner-occupied housing units increased slightly to 37 percent, and renter-occupied units decreased slightly to 63 percent. The percentage of renter-occupied units was higher in the Planning Area than in the District as a whole, which was 58.3 percent renter-occupied.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2105** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a2105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2105}

2105.1 The 2017 Census reported the area’s median household income to be $101,099, an increase from the 2000 median household income of $48,852. Near Northwest’s median household income in 2017 was 30.2 percent higher than the District-wide median of $77,649. Nearly 13.3 percent of the area’s population was below the federal poverty line in 2017—lower than the 17.4 percent poverty rate for the District. These statistics are somewhat misleading, however, as the high poverty rate in some census tracts correlates to the large student population in Near Northwest.

2105.2 The 2015 US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Statistics dataset includes data on the commuting patterns of residents of Near Northwest, and those who lived elsewhere but commuted to jobs within this Planning Area. Approximately 70.7 percent of the area’s residents worked within the District and 29.3 percent commuted to the suburbs. Of those who worked within the District, 60 percent commuted downtown, 23 percent worked within Near Northwest, and 16.8 percent worked elsewhere in Washington, DC. For residents living in Near Northwest, the potential proximity to work can provide shorter commutes. Nearly 40 percent of the area’s residents walked or bicycled to work in 2000, which far exceeded the District-wide total.

2105.3 Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the DC Office of Planning (OP) indicates that the Near Northwest has more jobs than any other Planning Area of the city except for Central Washington. Major employers include universities and their affiliated hospitals. There were 90,512 jobs in 2017, or 11 percent of Washington, DC’s total. According to the census, about one- third of these jobs were filled by District residents.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2106** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a2106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2106}

2106.1 Based on land availability, planning policies, and regional growth trends, Near Northwest is projected to continue adding households, population, and jobs through 2045. The Planning Area is expected to grow from 37,551 households in 2017 to 48,551 households in 2045. The population will also increase over this time from 79,374 in 2017 to 93,406 in 2025, to 99,973 in 2035, and to 107,210 in 2045.

2106.2 Residential growth is expected to be concentrated on the eastern side of the Planning Area, particularly along corridors like 7th, 9th, 11th, and 14th Streets NW. Additional job growth is also expected to take place in the Near Northwest Area, with an increase of over 8,000 jobs from 90,512 jobs in 2017 to 101,257 jobs in 2045.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2107** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a2107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2107}

2107.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

2107.2 Comprehensive Plan workshops in Near Northwest during 2005-2006 provided an opportunity for residents to discuss both District-wide and neighborhood planning issues. Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) were briefed on the Comprehensive Plan on several occasions, providing additional opportunities for input. There have also been other meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan that focused on specific planning issues for different parts of the area. These include meetings relating to the Shaw/Convention Center Small Area Plan, the Great Streets Initiative, campus plans for the local universities, and a variety of transportation, historic preservation, and economic development initiatives across the area.

2107.3 During these meetings the community delivered several key messages, summarized below:

Improved public safety, a strong economy, and rising confidence in the real estate market have fueled demand for housing across the area. Home prices in Shaw rose 30 percent between 2004 and 2005 alone. As a result, there is growing anxiety about the effects of change, particularly east of 14th Street NW. On the one hand, the reduced number of abandoned units and extensive restoration of older homes are positive signs that should continue to be encouraged. On the other hand, renovation has led to increased rents and property tax assessments, along with the risk of displacement of older and lower-income residents, many who have lived in the community for generations. Economic diversity should be protected, and programs to retain and add affordable housing are urgently needed.

Given the location of Near Northwest adjacent to Central Washington, the encroachment of offices, hotels, and other commercial uses has been an issue for many years. During the 1950s and 1960s, much of downtown’s expansion occurred in the area just south of Dupont Circle. Today, zoning regulations and historic districts limit commercial encroachment into Near Northwest neighborhoods. However, the conversion of housing to non-residential uses continues to be an issue. In Sheridan-Kalorama, there continue to be concerns about homes being turned into foreign chanceries, with attendant impacts on parking, upkeep, and security. Foggy Bottom residents remain apprehensive about the impacts of university expansion on housing and neighborhood character. In Dupont and Logan Circles, there are ongoing issues relating to the conversion of apartments to hotels, offices, and institutional uses. Concentration of community-based residential facilities is an issue in Logan Circle and in Shaw.

Much of what makes Near Northwest sought-after is lies in the beauty of its tree-lined streets, its urbane and historic architecture, and the proportions of its buildings and public spaces. Maintaining the quality and scale of development continues to be a top priority for the community. Residents expressed the opinion that new infill development should avoid creating monotonous or repetitive building designs, and strive for a mix of building types and scales. View obstruction, insensitive design, and street and alley closings were all raised as issues. In the Shaw Area and the Mount Vernon Square North Area, additional designation of historic landmarks and establishment of historic districts may be needed. At the same time, downzoning is needed in parts of Dupont and Logan Circles, particularly where blocks of historic row houses are zoned for high-density apartments. Zoning in such locations has not kept up with their historic designations. There have also been ongoing debates about the definition of historic, particularly as preservationists seek to recognize the recent past.

The process of creating, administering, and enforcing zoning regulations, including the granting of variances and zoning changes, needs to be refined and consistently applied. Several meeting participants singled out the granting of large numbers of Special Exceptions as an objectionable practice. Another issue raised was the excessive use of Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and the resulting allowances for increased density. The community asked that future PUDs be rigorously reviewed and designed in a manner that minimizes their impacts on adjacent properties and provides ample community amenities. Other specific zoning issues identified included parking provisions and the regulation of institutional uses.

The area’s dense and historic development pattern results in many different uses adjacent to each other. This is part of what makes the area vibrant and interesting, but it inevitably leads to land use conflicts. There are continuing concerns about the impact of commercial development on the ambience of shopping districts and residential streets in Georgetown and Dupont Circle. Public safety and crowd control remains an issue in these areas. Certain kinds of commercial activities, such as fast food restaurants and liquor licensed establishments are a source of concern for neighbors. The proximity of commercial and residential uses also leads to issues like the regulation of deliveries, trash removal, and sidewalk cafes. ANCs in the area play a particularly important role in addressing and resolving these issues.

In some respects, those who live and work in Near Northwest enjoy some of the best transportation service in the city. The area’s compact development pattern and proximity to downtown encourages walking, biking, and transit use, and for many owning a car is a choice rather than a necessity. But the area’s location at the hub of the region’s transportation system also produces adverse impacts. Arterials such as Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania Avenues and 16th Street NW carry high volumes of car and truck traffic into the central Washington, DC from outlying District neighborhoods and from the suburbs, with accompanying noise, congestion, and safety hazards. The wide avenues are efficient for moving traffic, but the flow is complicated by the pattern of circles and squares. Moreover, the arterials move traffic in a radial direction in and out of downtown, but traveling from east to west across the area is difficult. Given this fact, long-range plans for the Whitehurst Freeway are a concern for many neighbors. Other transportation issues raised at Comprehensive Plan meetings in Near Northwest include the need for better access between Georgetown and the Metrorail system, the need to control cut-through traffic on residential side streets, and the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle safety.

Parking continues to be an issue in almost all of the area’s residential neighborhoods, particularly near the commercial districts and around major employment centers. Georgetown, Foggy Bottom, Logan Circle, and Dupont Circle, are affected by evening visitors to restaurants and bars. Foggy Bottom and Georgetown are also affected by student parking from George Washington and Georgetown Universities and other employers and businesses in the area. Many of the area’s residences do not have off-street parking, leaving residents to compete with visitors and employees for a limited number of off-street spaces. Cars circling for parking contribute to traffic and congestion in the area. Measures such as residential permit parking and university shuttle services addresses the shortage to some degree, but additional programs are needed to reduce parking conflicts.

Near Northwest is underserved by recreational facilities and open space. Despite proximity to Rock Creek Park, the ratio of park acres per resident is among the lowest in Washington, DC. Most of the neighborhood parks in the area are small and have limited or aging facilities. An analysis of recreational needs performed as part of the 2006 Parks and Recreation Master Plan concluded that virtually all parts of Near Northwest were deficient in athletic fields and that the east side was deficient in swimming pools. The Foggy Bottom-West End area and Logan Circle were identified as needing new recreation centers. Given the shortage of parkland, it is not surprising that many participants in Comprehensive Plan workshops also expressed concerns about the loss of private open space. Particular concerns included the construction of additions and new buildings on lawns, patios, and parking lots, leading one workshop participant to the conclusion that “every inch of the area was being paved over.” Creating new parks will be difficult given the built out character of the area. Looking forward, it will be imperative to retain and enhance existing parks, make better use of street rights-of-way as open space, provide better connections to the area’s large parks, and set aside ample open space within new development. Landscaping, tree planting, and rooftop gardens should all be strongly encouraged.

Retail conditions in Near Northwest are uneven. Neighborhoods on the east side of the planning area do not have adequate commercial and service establishments; 7th and 9th Streets NW, for example, still contend with shuttered storefronts and abandoned buildings. Retail districts on the west side of the planning area appear prosperous, but face other challenges. The unique quality of some of the area’s streets is disappearing, as lower-cost stores and services are replaced by national chain stores. There are worries about the area becoming too homogenous-with some suggesting that Georgetown’s M Street NW has effectively become a suburban mall in an urban setting. The changes along 14th Street NW are welcomed by some, but create tension between the old and the new. Despite the vastly different physical conditions on the east and west sides of the Planning Area, small businesses across the entire area face the stress of rising rents. Residents from Burleith to Shaw are concerned about the loss of the neighborhood businesses that define the character of their local shopping streets.

Expansion of institutional uses and nonprofit organizations is an issue both for the community and the institutions themselves. The issue was most often raised in connection with George Washington University (GW), but was also brought up more broadly with regard to the effects of institutional expansion on the District’s tax base, traffic, parking, the loss of housing, and neighborhood character. Many residents believe that additional regulation and enforcement is needed to monitor university growth. University representatives, on the other hand, note the constraints of operating within enrollment and employment caps, and point to the steps they have taken to buffer adjacent areas from objectionable effects. In general, workshop participants emphasized the need to assess institutional impacts on a cumulative, rather than incremental, basis. Campus plans guide the growth of universities, but there is no comparable mechanism to guide the expansion of institutions such as the World Bank, the IMF, and the Red Cross. One approach that warrants further consideration is to allow universities to build up on their properties, reducing the need for additional land for expansion. Of course, this raises other concerns, such as building height and mass. Another approach is to promote the development of satellite campuses and facilities. Careful balancing is needed to make sure the interests of all parties are considered, and to reach solutions where all can benefit.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2108** NNW-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a2108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2108}

2108.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Near Northwest. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

2108.2 Policy NNW-1.1.1: Residential Neighborhoods

Maintain and enhance the historic, architecturally distinctive mixed-density character of Near Northwest residential neighborhoods, including Burleith, Georgetown, Foggy Bottom, Dupont Circle, Sheridan-Kalorama, Logan Circle, Mount Vernon Square, and Shaw. Ensure that infill development within these areas is architecturally compatible with its surroundings and positively contributes to the identity and quality of each neighborhood, while providing new housing opportunities, especially affordable housing options.

2108.3 Policy NNW-1.1.2: Enhancing Established Commercial Areas

Sustain and enhance the neighborhood, community, and regional shopping areas of Near Northwest, including M, P , and U Streets, Wisconsin , Connecticut, and Florida Avenues NW, and 18th, 17th, and 14th Streets NW. Sustain these areas as diverse, unique, pedestrian-oriented shopping streets that meet the needs of District residents, workers, and visitors.

2108.4 Policy NNW-1.1.3: Neighborhood Commercial Vibrancy

Support the vibrancy of neighborhood shopping areas along 7th, 9th, 11th, 23rd, and North Capitol Streets NW. The vibrancy of the established businesses on these streets should be strongly encouraged, and new businesses that provide needed goods and services to District residents should be attracted.

2108.5 Policy NNW-1.1.4: Nonprofits and Private Service Organizations

Work with private service and nonprofit organizations in the Near Northwest area to ensure that their locations and operations complement neighboring properties and enrich the surrounding communities. In particular, the campus plans of Georgetown University and GW should minimize negative impacts to surrounding residential areas and should aspire to improve such areas through improved landscaping, better lighting, safer pedestrian connections, cultural amenities, and enhanced community policing.

2108.6 Policy NNW-1.1.5: Loss of Housing

Strongly discourage the demolition of viable housing or the conversion of occupied housing units to non-residential uses, such as medical offices, hotels, and institutions. Maintain zoning regulations that limit the encroachment of non-residential uses into Near Northwest neighborhoods, particularly around the Convention Center, along the west side of Connecticut Avenue NW, and in Foggy Bottom.

2108.7 Policy NNW-1.1.7: Student Housing

Support and promote efforts by the District’s universities to develop and renovate on-campus housing for students in order to reduce pressure on housing in nearby neighborhoods.

2108.8 Policy NNW-1.1.8: Affordable Housing

Preserve the existing stock of affordable housing in the Near Northwest Planning Area. by bringing to bear new measures to preserve and produce affordable housing in a way that advances fair housing goals and minimizes displacement.

2108.9 Policy NNW-1.1.9: Parking Management

Continue to develop and implement programs to improve parking management in the commercial districts along Wisconsin Avenue, M Street, Connecticut Avenue, P Street, and 17th, 14th, 9th, and 7th Streets NW. Using pricing, time limits, and curbside regulations, encourage motorists to use public curbside parking for short-term needs and promote curbside turnover and utilization, while pushing longer-term parking needs to private, off-street parking facilities. In addition, efforts should be taken to encourage visitors to these commercial districts via non-motorized modes, public transit, and ridesharing services.

2108.10 Policy NNW-1.1.10: Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety

Improve safety for pedestrians and bicycles throughout the Near Northwest through the continued upgrading of high-priority sidewalks, intersections, and roadways, and by supporting the construction of more separated bike infrastructure.

2108.11 Policy NNW-1.1.11: Pedestrian Connections

Improve pedestrian connections through Near Northwest, especially along M Street between Connecticut Avenue NW and Georgetown; between the Dupont/Logan Circle areas and downtown; and along (and to and from) the waterfronts in the Georgetown and Foggy Bottom areas. Create a continuous tree canopy along the area’s streets to create more comfortable conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists.

2108.12 Policy NNW-1.1.12: Managing Transportation Demand

Strongly support buses, private shuttles, and other transit solutions that address travel needs within the Near Northwest area, including connections between Metro and the universities and the Georgetown commercial district, and connections between the Connecticut Avenue and Embassy Row hotels and the National Mall and downtown areas.

2108.13 Policy NNW-1.1.13: Transit to Georgetown

Improve transit connections to Georgetown by implementing a transit way on K Street downtown.

2108.14 Action NNW-1.1.A: Managing and Balancing Entertainment Districts

The Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration (ABRA), in conjunction with the Mayor’s Office of Nightlife and Culture (MONC), should work together with local stakeholders to create retail, restaurant, and entertainment districts that have a balanced mix of uses and services that cater to both local residents and the larger District, so as to avoid an overconcentration of bars and night clubs.

2108.15 Action NNW-1.1.B: Expanding Mass Transit

Alleviate parking and traffic congestion by improving multimodal operations and by providing mass transit enhancements on K Street NW, including a dedicated transit way, as well as bus lanes on 14th and 16th Streets NW.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2109** NNW-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a2109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2109}

2109.1 Policy NNW-1.2.1: Scenic Resource Protection

Conserve and enhance the scenic visual resources of the Near Northwest Planning Area, including the Potomac waterfront, Rock Creek Park, the park circles of the L’Enfant Plan, and the historic architecture and streetscapes that define the area’s commercial and residential areas.

See the Urban Design Element for policies on preserving and enhancing architectural character.

2109.2 Policy NNW-1.2.2: Heritage Tourism

Promote the famous and the lesser-known cultural resources of Near Northwest neighborhoods, such as theaters, galleries, historic home museums, historic districts and landmarks, and colleges and universities. Encourage heritage trails, walking tours, historic markers, and other measures that create a greater awareness of these resources.

2109.3 Policy NNW-1.2.3: Noise Reduction

Continue efforts to reduce noise in Georgetown and Foggy Bottom associated with the air traffic in and out of Washington Reagan National Airport.

2109.4 Policy NNW-1.2.4: Job Linkages

Capitalize on the presence of hotels and universities within the Planning Area to create additional job opportunities for residents of Near Northwest and other parts of the District. Encourage partnerships with the area’s institutional and hospitality sector employers that help residents from across Washington, DC obtain a job and move up the employment ladder.

2109.5 Policy NNW-1.2.5: Park Partnerships

Encourage partnerships between the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and the National Park Service (NPS) so that federal parkland, particularly Rock Creek Park and the L’Enfant park reservations, can better serve Near Northwest residents. Such partnerships are particularly important given the shortage of athletic fields and other recreational facilities within Near Northwest, and the limited land available for new recreational facilities.

2109.6 Policy NNW-1.2.6: Increasing Park Use and Acreage

Identity opportunities for new pocket parks, plazas, and public spaces within the Near Northwest Planning Area, as well as opportunities to expand and take full advantage of existing parks.

2109.7 Policy NNW-1.2.7: Shoreline Access

Continue efforts to improve access along the full length of the Potomac River shoreline and to improve access between the shoreline and adjacent neighborhoods such as Georgetown and Foggy Bottom.

2109.8 Policy NNW-1.2.8: Arts Districts

Encourage existing and new arts activities along 7th and 14th Streets NW in an effort to link these corridors to the arts district along the U Street NW corridor in the adjacent Mid-City Planning Area. Theaters, galleries, studios, and other arts and cultural facilities and activities should be encouraged on these streets.

2109.9 Policy NNW-1.2.9: Design Review

Use the historic preservation design review process to promote high quality architecture and urban design in Near Northwest’s designated historic districts, including Georgetown, Sheridan-Kalorama, Strivers Section, Dupont Circle, Foggy Bottom, Massachusetts Avenue NW, Mount Vernon Square, 14th Street NW, Logan Circle, Blagden Alley, and Shaw.

2109.10 Action NNW-1.2.A: Add New Capacity to Recreational Infrastructure in Near Northwest

The Parks and Recreation Master Plan has identified the Near Northwest Area as deficient in recreational infrastructure, particularly in the east-west stretch through Shaw, Logan Circle, Dupont Circle, and Foggy Bottom. Develop additional recreation centers or additional recreation space at existing facilities. Also work with DPR, DC Public Schools (DCPS), the Department of General Services (DGS), and existing private schools to make sure that the use of existing recreational facilities in and outside schools are open to the public after hours and that permitting for the use of public facilities is easy and streamlined.

2109.11 Action NNW-1.2.B: Historic Resource Recognition

Document places of potential historic significance within the Near Northwest.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2110** NNW-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a2110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2110}

2110.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified five areas in Near Northwest as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 21.1 and Figure 21.3). These areas are:

Shaw/Convention Center Area

Dupont Circle

14th Street NW/Logan Circle

Lower Georgetown

Foggy Bottom/West End.

2110.2 Figure 21.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Near Northwest

Within Near Northwest

2.1

Shaw/Convention Center area

2.2

Dupont Circle

2.3

14th Street/Logan Circle

2.4

Lower Georgetown

2.5

Foggy Bottom/West End

Adjacent to Near Northwest

Wisconsin Avenue corridor

Connecticut Avenue corridor

18th Street/Columbia Road

U Street/Uptown

North Capitol St/Florida Av/New York Av

NoMa/Northwest one

Mount Vernon District

Golden triangle/K Street

2110.3 Map 21.1: Near Northwest Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 2111** NNW-2.1 SHAW/CONVENTION CENTER AREA {#sec-10-a2111 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2111}

2111.1 The Shaw/Convention Center area is bounded by Massachusetts and New York Avenues NW on the south, 12th Street and Vermont Avenue NW on the west, U Street and Florida Avenue NW on the north, and New Jersey Avenue NW on the east. This area has a long history as an economically and ethnically diverse residential neighborhood. An urban renewal plan for the area was adopted in 1969 in response to the unrest in 1968and deficient housing conditions in much of the area. The urban renewal plan took a more incremental approach than was taken in Southwest, selectively clearing alley dwellings and substandard housing rather than calling for wholesale clearance. As a result, the area contains a mix of affordable housing complexes from the 1970s and older row houses from the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

2111.2 Recent market trends in the District, as well as the opening of the Washington Convention Center in 2004 and other notable real estate developments such as the O Street Market, have increased development pressure on the neighborhood. This has helped revitalize the underserved business districts along 7th, 9th, and 11th Streets NW but has also brought displacement pressures for long-time, low-income residents. Development and revitalization efforts have contributed to transforming the area alley system as well. Blagden Alley has experienced a renaissance, with many creative businesses moving in and the establishment of the DC Alley Museum through a grant from the DC Commission on the Arts and Humanities (DCCHA) and support from the Blagden Alley Neighbors, which funds artists to create murals and public art in the alley. Two historic districts were created in the area in 1999 to manage growth, preserve places of architectural and cultural significance, and blend new buildings into the neighborhood.

2111.3 In 2005, OP completed the Convention Center Area Strategic Development Plan to guide development, revitalization, and conservation in this area. The plan identified several issues, including the need to conserve affordable housing, generate new quality housing, revitalize local businesses, improve sidewalks and public spaces, upgrade parks and public facilities, provide stronger design controls, and expand the Shaw Historic District. In 2006, nearly one-fifth of the housing units in the study area received some form of public subsidy and were considered affordable. Based on 2017 estimates, the share of affordable housing units in the same area dropped to seven percent, making it a much less economically diverse real estate market and community.

2111.4 In 2014, the D.C. Council approved the Mid-City East Small Area Plan (SAP), which provides a strategic framework for revitalization of Bates/Truxton Circle, Bloomingdale, Eckington, Hanover, LeDroit Park, and Sursum Corda, as well as sections of Edgewood and Stronghold. The study area is predominately in Ward 5, with portions of Wards 1 and 6, and is traversed by five major corridors: North Capitol Street and New York, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Florida Avenues. The vision for the Mid-City East SAP is to improve quality of life and enhance neighborhood amenities and character while supporting a community of culturally, economically, and generationally diverse residents. The Mid-City East SAP is a community-based plan guided by market-based solutions and a shared vision and principles. The plan builds from previous work and provides analysis and recommendations for land use, redevelopment of underutilized and/or underdeveloped sites, walkability, retail readiness along commercial corridors, and improvements to parks and open spaces.

2111.5 Policy NNW-2.1.1: Affordable Housing

Preserve existing affordable housing within the Shaw/Convention Center area and produce new affordable housing and market rate housing on underutilized and future development sites. Use a range of tools to retain and develop affordable housing in the Planning Area, including tenant organization and public education, inclusionary zoning, renewing project-based public housing contracts, tax abatements, public-private partnerships, and affordable housing when development on publicly- owned land includes a residential component.

2111.6 Policy NNW-2.1.2: Reinforce Existing Development Patterns

Stabilize and maintain existing moderate-density row house areas within the Shaw/Convention Center area. Locate multi-unit buildings in areas already zoned for greater density, including areas near the Mount Vernon Square and Shaw/Howard University Metro stations, and on publicly owned land with the potential for housing. Ensure that development on infill sites scattered throughout the row house portions of the Shaw/Convention Center area is sensitive to and complements the neighborhood’s character.

2111.7 Policy NNW-2.1.3: Shaw/Howard University and Mount Vernon Square/7th Street NW-Convention Center Metro Stations

Encourage mixed-income residential development with underground parking adjacent to the Shaw/Howard and Mount Vernon Square Metro stations, particularly on existing surface parking lots and Metro station entrances.

2111.8 Policy NNW-2.1.4: Blagden Alley

Encourage adaptive reuse and mixed-use infill development, with special consideration for cultural, creative, and art uses, along Blagden Alley, a residentially zoned block with historic structures such as carriage houses, garages, and warehouses. Appropriate measures should be taken to safeguard existing residential uses as such development takes place.

2111.9 Policy NNW-2.1.5: 7th and 9th Street NW Street Corridors

Support and sustain retail development within the Shaw/Convention Center area in a manner that best serves residents, creates the best environment for businesses to thrive, and uses land already zoned for commercial uses. Continuous ground floor retail uses should be encouraged along sections of 7th and 9th Streets NW as designated in the 2005 Strategic Development Plan to create a traditional pedestrian-oriented Main Street pattern and establish a unified identity for the community. These corridors should attract convention-goers, residents, and visitors, and should include both new and existing businesses.

2111.10 Policy NNW-2.1.6: Public Realm

Improve streets and open spaces throughout the Shaw/Convention Center area. Open space in the area should promote a sense of community, provide a high level of public safety, and address multiple needs. Connections between the area’s parks and open spaces should be strengthened and opportunities for new recreational activities should be accommodated where feasible.

2111.11 Policy NNW-2.1.7: Street Hierarchy

Design the streetscapes in the Shaw/Convention Center area to clearly differentiate between residential streets and commercial streets, and to highlight the distinct role of avenues, retail streets, greenways, and primary and secondary residential streets.

2111.12 Action NNW-2.1.A: New and Affordable Housing

Support the development of mixed-income housing above retail space on 7th and 9th Streets NW, and encourage development of multi-family apartments and condominiums on parcels that are vacant or that contain buildings identified as non-contributing to the Shaw Historic District on 11th Street NW.

2111.13 Action NNW-2.1.B: Redevelopment of Parcel 42

The long-term vacant lots known as Parcel 42 at the intersection of Rhode Island Avenue and 7th and R Streets NW represent an opportunity to add new affordable housing units in the Shaw neighborhood. The District and the Zoning Commission should support redevelopment of the vacant lots at Square 442 and Lots 106 and 803 with a mixed-use project of up to 110 feet in building height, to include ground floor retail uses with both destination and neighborhood-serving retail; a residential component that maximizes affordability beyond the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Program; and publicly accessible open space on Lot 803 as per public input shared during the community engagement process for the redevelopment of the site.

2111.14 Action NNW-2.1.C: Street Hierarchy and Public Realm

Undertake the following actions to improve the public realm in the Shaw/Convention Center area:

Develop, maintain, and enforce standards for residential and commercial streets that address sidewalks, tree boxes, and public rights-of-way;

Improve the appearance of gateway intersections at New Jersey and Rhode Island Avenues NW, New Jersey and New York Avenues NW, Mount Vernon Square, 11th Street, and Massachusetts Avenue NW; and

Explore the designation of P Street NW as a greenway and identify opportunities for connecting open spaces along the street.

2111.15 Action NNW-2.1.D: Expiring Public Housing Contracts

Implement the DC Housing Preservation Strike Force recommendations for expiring project-based public housing contracts within the Shaw area and beyond, recognizing the vulnerability of these units to conversion to market rate housing. Consider the redevelopment of these sites with mixed-income projects that include, at a minimum, an equivalent number of affordable units, additional market rate units, and measures to avoid displacement of on-site residents.

2111.16 Action NNW-2.1.E: Former Shaw High School Site

Complete redevelopment of the former Shaw Junior High School site for the renovated Benjamin Banneker Academic High School in alignment with DCPS strategic planning and capital funding availability. Continue to conduct engagement and analysis to identify any additional facility needs and programs on the DCPS and DPR portions of the site.

2111.17 Action NNW-2.1.F: Mid-City East SAP

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East SAP.

2111.18 Action NNW-2.1.G: Mid-City East Livability Study

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Livability Study.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2112** NNW-2.2 DUPONT CIRCLE {#sec-10-a2112 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2112}

2112.1 The general pattern of land use in Dupont Circle is well established. Future development in the area is managed by the area’s designation as a historic district and the application of the Dupont Circle zoning. The area is a sought-after residential neighborhood due to its proximity to downtown, restaurants and shopping, pedestrian-friendly streets, historic architecture, and diverse housing stock. Commercial and residential infill development and renovation are anticipated to continue, creating economic opportunities and concerns about the displacement of local services by national chains and regional-serving retail uses. The healthy mix of commercial and residential uses necessitates careful management and balance of public safety, and commercial noise to maintain a high quality of life.

2112.2 Policy NNW-2.2.1: Maintaining Dupont Circle’s Residential Character

Discourage the expansion of commercial uses into residential areas, while maintaining the Dupont Circle neighborhood as a primarily residential area. For the purposes of this policy, Dupont Circle shall be defined as the area generally bounded by Rock Creek Park on the west, 15th Street NW on the east, Massachusetts Avenue NW (east of Connecticut Avenue NW) and N Street NW (west of Connecticut Avenue NW) on the south, and Florida Avenue and U Street NW on the north. This area is shown on Map 21.1.

2112.3 Policy NNW-2.2.2: Dupont Circle Building Design

Use the following standards in evaluating new buildings and alterations in the Dupont Circle area:

Encourage a scale of development compatible with the nature and character of the Dupont Circle area in height and bulk;

Encourage a general compatibility in the scale of new buildings with older low-scale buildings by enacting sensitive design and appropriate transitions;

Preclude demolitions or partial demolitions that would lead to an increase in height and floor area ratios inappropriate to the area;

Enhance the residential character of the area by maintaining existing residential uses and controlling the scale, location, and density of commercial and residential development; and

Ensure compatibility of development with the Comprehensive Plan, including District-wide goals to address the affordable housing need, by promoting increased housing opportunities.

2112.4 Policy NNW-2.2.3: Q Street NW Plaza

Maintain the Dupont Circle Q Street Metro entrance as a civic plaza that is compatible with the adjacent mixed-use neighborhood. Encourage the restoration of storefronts as active retail uses along Connecticut Avenue from Q Street NW to the Circle.

2112.5 Policy NNW-2.2.4: Encourage the Development of Dupont Circle as a Neighborhood for All Ages and Families

Encourage the development of the neighborhood to be welcoming of all people of all ages and all family types by making sure that new developments are designed for all age and economic demographics and that parks and public spaces are designed for the needs of older adults and families, as well as for younger residents.

2112.7 Policy NNW-2.2.5: LGBTQ Cultural Hub

Celebrate existing and new LGBTQ arts, cultural experiences, and history within Dupont Circle with placemaking and sustained, active programming in parks and community areas in the neighborhood. Leverage opportunities presented by Dupont Circle and the Dupont Underground and the future Connecticut Avenue Streetscape and Deck-Over Project.

2112.8 Action NNW-2.2.A: Dupont Circle Zoning Expansion

Consider expansion of Dupont Circle zoning to include the east side of the 18th Street commercial area (between S and U Streets) and the south side of U Street between 15th and h 18th Streets NW.

2112.9 Action NNW-2.2.B: Connecticut Avenue Streetscape and Deck-Over Project

Complete study of the of the Connecticut Avenue Streetscape and Deck-Over project over the north Connecticut Avenue NW underpass between Dupont Circle and Q Street NW. The new park should be designed as a neighborhood gathering point with green features and public art, so it may support programming and host events like the weekly farmers market.

2112.10 Action NNW-2.2.C: Dupont Underground

In line with the DC Cultural Plan premise that all infrastructure is a stage, continue supporting the use of the long-vacant underground trolley infrastructure under Dupont Circle for arts and community development activities like the community-led Dupont Underground space.

2112.11 Action NNW-2.2.D: Streetscape Improvements Along Connecticut and Massachusetts Avenues NW

Create new streetscapes along Connecticut and Massachusetts Avenues NW that maximize green space and outdoor seating where possible.

2112.12 Action NNW-2.2.E: Expanded Recreation Center at Stead Park

Create an expanded recreation center at Stead Park, which should include modern facilities to accommodate the growing needs of community programming for residents of all ages. The expanded recreation center should strive to receive certification as a net zero energy building, if possible, or a high-level green certification.

2112.13 Action NNW-2.2.F: Improve Neighborhood Bike Lane Infrastructure

Study the possibility of creating additional protected bike lanes in Dupont Circle, including on 17th and 18th Streets NW and Massachusetts Avenue NW.

See the Central Washington Element for additional information about the Lower 16th Street Area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2113** NNW-2.3 14TH STREET NW/LOGAN CIRCLE {#sec-10-a2113 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2113}

2113.1 The 14th Street NW corridor extending from Massachusetts Avenue north to S Street NW, and the adjacent area between 12th and 15th Streets NW, includes a wide range of residential development, from large historic mansions and row houses to high-rise apartment buildings. The southern part of this area along Massachusetts Avenue is one of the most densely developed areas in Washington, DC. Low-rise and garden apartments, including subsidized housing, have also been built within this area. The Logan Circle neighborhood includes numerous churches as well. The area’s only larger-scale parks and open spaces are Logan Circle, which are owned and maintained by NPS, and the playing fields at Garrison Elementary School.

2113.2 Major building renovation has been taking place in the Logan Circle area for more than two decades. The development of a Whole Foods supermarket on P Street just west of 14th Street NW in 2001 was a catalyst for revitalization, sparking additional commercial development on P Street NW, as well as the development of many large-scale residential projects in the vicinity. Other catalytic projects, like the Studio and Woolly Mammoth Theaters (which has relocated to Penn Quarter in 2004), have helped transform 14th Street NW from its former life as Washington, DC’s Auto Row into a lively arts, restaurant, and loft district. The designation of the corridor as an Arts Zone district that includes incentives for arts-oriented businesses was an important factor in the transformation of the corridor into a hub for art galleries, theaters, and music venues. However, today's strong market is attracting retail and restaurants that are replacing arts-oriented businesses.

2113.3 Current trends in Logan Circle are expected to continue into the future, with 14th Street emerging as an even stronger center for entertainment over the next decade. Additional restaurants, theaters, lofts, and apartments are encouraged on the blocks between Thomas Circle and U Street, creating a dynamic street environment that epitomizes the best qualities of urban living. Development on the corridor should be designed to minimize impacts on adjacent residential areas, adaptively reuse important historic structures, and preserve long-time neighborhood institutions like churches.

2113.4 Policy NNW-2.3.1: 14th Street NW Arts District

Promote and encourage the presence of the arts along 14th Street NW between M Street and Florida Avenue NW, and preserve and enhance the area’s entertainment, arts, and architectural history.

2113.5 Policy NNW-2.3.2: 14th Street NW Mixed-Use Development

Promote the development of art galleries, lofts, and business incubators for the arts along 14th Street, along with the establishment of cultural facilities and street-level retail and neighborhood service uses, such as restaurants and local-serving professional offices.

2113.6 Policy NNW-2.3.3: Public Realm

Address public safety, urban design, and public space issues along 14th Street NW to foster a safe, attractive environment conducive to the arts and arts-related businesses.

2113.7 Policy NNW-2.3.4: Lot Consolidation

Encourage lot consolidation to address the many narrow commercial sites that exist along 14th Street NW to encourage suitable scale and massing and to improve conditions for new development along the corridor.

2113.8 Policy NNW-2.3.5: Arts Funding

Encourage programs that support arts and cultural activities and facilities along 14th Street NW.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2114** NNW-2.4 LOWER GEORGETOWN {#sec-10-a2114 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2114}

2114.1 At one time, the Foggy Bottom and Georgetown waterfronts included industrial uses, such as gas works, glass companies, breweries, and warehouses. Most of these buildings were removed long ago to make way for office, retail, parks, and residential development. Some have been adapted for contemporary mixed-use development. The waterfront has emerged as a major activity center, with new parkland west of the Washington Harbour complex.

2114.2 In recent years, the extension of the waterfront park from Washington Harbour to the Key Bridge has created a new, popular regional public attraction for Georgetown, revitalizing a long-neglected portion of the riverfront.

2114.3 Policy NNW-2.4.1: Georgetown and Foggy Bottom Waterfront

Provide a continuous linear park connection along the Potomac River waterfront in Georgetown and Foggy Bottom, including paths for pedestrians and bicyclists, fountains, seating areas, landscaping and open space, lighting, public access to the water, new non-motorized boating facilities, and fishing areas. Focus on improving safe pedestrian access routes to and from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, the Watergate Complex, and to and from the larger Foggy Bottom neighborhood. A long-range plan in partnership with federal agencies to re-urbanize and improve connections over Route 66 will be needed in order to truly reconnect Foggy Bottom to its riverfront and better use land. The plan should also take into account the area’s potential flood vulnerability caused by climate change and sea level rise.

2114.4 Policy NNW-2.4.2: Upper Potomac Waterfront

Partner with NPS and other federal agencies to conserve open space along the Potomac waterfront and preserve the wooded and scenic qualities of the Potomac Palisades and adjacent islands and shoreline. Be sensitive to the risks posed by climate change that increase flood risk along the river.

2114.5 Policy NNW-2.4.3: Chesapeake & Ohio (C&O) Canal

Support efforts by NPS and partners to restore, reimagine, and revitalize the C&O Canal National Historic Park.

2114.6 Policy NNW-2.4.4: High-Capacity Transit Connections

Explore multimodal options to improve high-capacity transit from Rosslyn, Virginia to Georgetown and from Georgetown to other parts of the District.

2114.7 Policy NNW-2.4.5: Erosion and Bank Stabilization

Work with NPS to stabilize the Potomac River’s banks, clean tidal flat areas, and reduce erosion along the Potomac shoreline and along Rock Creek.

2114.8 Action NNW-2.4.A: West Heating Plant

Support redevelopment of the West Heating Plant to include residential uses and a publicly accessible park with pedestrian and bicycle connections to Rock Creek Park and the C&O Canal National Historical Park. The connectivity should foster travel from those parks and trails to Georgetown and points south. Work with NPS to widen the bike/pedestrian path beside the Rock Creek Parkway to protect the safety of its many users.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2115** NNW-2.5 FOGGY BOTTOM/WEST END {#sec-10-a2115 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2115}

2115.1 Foggy Bottom is one of the District’s oldest residential neighborhoods. It includes a mix of 19th century alley houses, small-scale townhouses, mid-rise apartments, and condominiums, as well as GW’s campus and GW Hospital. Major federal uses, including the Department of State and the Kennedy Center, are located in the neighborhood, as well as major international institutions like the Pan American Health Organization. The neighborhood also includes Columbia Plaza and the Watergate, both mixed-use complexes that are predominantly residential. There are several hotels and office buildings in the area as well.

2115.2 Starting with the planning and construction of the Whitehurst Freeway shortly after World War II, substantial parts of Foggy Bottom were lost to highway right-of-way. Highway construction followed the condemnation and demolition of large areas of Foggy Bottom. This prompted the organizing of a grass-roots, anti-highway movement in Washington, DC and other US cities experiencing a similar level of urban demolition, which eventually helped end the highway building boom by the mid-1960s. The abrupt end to the building of urban highway systems left areas like Foggy Bottom with unfinished roads and ramps feeding into existing grids that were never designed to support highway-level traffic and with barriers bisecting the community and separating it from the Potomac River.

2115.3 The neighborhood has a shortage of usable parkland. The Potomac Freeway along the area’s western boundary restricts access between the neighborhood, adjacent parkland, the waterfront, and the Kennedy Center. George Washington Circle provides a large, centrally located open space, but vehicular traffic around the circle makes it difficult to access. Rock Creek Park itself is accessible from Virginia and Pennsylvania Avenues but is otherwise cut off from the area by the freeway.

2115.4 The heart of the neighborhood, including the major concentration of 19th century townhouses, was designated a historic district in 1986. In 1992, the Foggy Bottom Overlay District (now the R-17 zone) was created to provide further conservation of the area and to maintain the residential development pattern. In 2014, the GW/Old West End historic district was established in the heart of the campus and some of the surrounding area, formerly known as West End.

2115.5 The current West End, just north of Foggy Bottom, is a former industrial and residential area that has been undergoing major change since the late 1970s. The area was rezoned in 1975 to encourage mixed-use development. Since that time, there has been major office, hotel, residential, and creative mixed-use, public-private partnership development, including a new library with eight stories of residences above and a number of affordable units. Very few vacant sites remain. The opportunity remains to enhance the M Street NW corridor between Georgetown and Connecticut Avenue NW and to strengthen the Pennsylvania Avenue NW corridor, which currently defines the edge between Foggy Bottom and West End.

2115.6 The expansion of GW has been an ongoing issue of significant concern in Foggy Bottom and West End, with neighbors expressing unease about the loss of housing stock and the changing character of the community. Continued commercial, hotel, and institutional expansion, coupled with increased regional commuter traffic, has caused traffic, parking problems, and concerns about air quality and disruption of the quality of life. On the other hand, GW has also been an engine of economic, social, and cultural growth for the community by revitalizing the retail and food offerings in the area, and providing medical services. Pursuant to the 2007 Foggy Bottom Campus Plan, the university committed to develop its academic programs in the area within its boundaries and to discontinue off-campus undergraduate housing facilities. The objectives for land use decisions in the Foggy Bottom/West End area are to conserve and enhance the existing residential neighborhood, maintain and improve existing parkland and access to it, and balance the needs of local residents with the needs of the university to carry out its academic mission. Efforts should continue to retain the residential balance of the area, ensure adherence to the campus plan, and proactively address neighborhood and university concerns.

2115.7 The area includes the Foggy Bottom/GW Metro station, one of the busiest stations in the Metrorail system, which has only one entrance/exit. A second entrance would be desirable and is encouraged in the future.

2115.8 Policy NNW-2.5.1: GW/Foggy Bottom Coordination

Encourage continued efforts to improve communication and coordination between GW and the Foggy Bottom and West End communities. Campus plans for the university must demonstrate how the university can manage its academic mission within applicable limits for both campus development and enrollment. These efforts should preserve the residential character of Foggy Bottom while contributing to the cultural and physical diversity of the community.

2115.9 Policy NNW-2.5.2: Student Housing and Parking Issues

Support continued efforts by GW to place students in residential facilities within the campus boundaries or at the Mount Vernon campus to alleviate pressure on the housing stock in Foggy Bottom/West End and to develop transportation demand management programs and facilities that reduce parking problems on residential streets in the campus area.

2115.10 Policy NNW-2.5.3: GW Building Intensity

As approved in the 2007 Foggy Bottom Campus Plan, increase density on the existing GW campus to accommodate future space and facility needs (as measured by the enrollment, staff, and faculty limits set in the approved plan). Take steps to avoid sharp contrasts in height and bulk between the campus and the surrounding community to mitigate the effects of increased traffic, parking, and other impacts.

2115.11 Policy NNW-2.5.4: West End/Foggy Bottom Parkland

Maximize the benefits of all parks and open spaces in this area, including George Washington Circle, Juarez Circle, and adjacent open space islands: Rock Creek Park, Rock Creek, and the Potomac Parkway. The publicly owned land between M Street and Virginia Avenue NW and 26th and 29th Streets NW, which includes both federally and District-owned land, shall be part of a larger study on open space accessibility, transportation infrastructure reconfiguration, urban fabric reconnectivity for Foggy Bottom.

2115.12 Policy NNW-2.5.5: Study Potential for Removing Highway Infrastructure in Foggy Bottom

Study the feasibility of improving Foggy Bottom and West End’s access to the Potomac River, including the E Street NW corridor and the connection to Whitehurst Freeway, and existing park land, and create new open space and new development parcels by reconfiguring existing transportation infrastructure. Reconnecting to the District grid is essential for improving neighborhood connectivity and to support desirable enhanced transportation, improved park accessibility, affordable housing, and neighborhood-oriented development.

2115.13 Action NNW-2.5.A: Foggy Bottom/West End Transportation Improvements

Conduct studies and implement appropriate changes to improve access and circulation between, through, and around the Foggy Bottom and West End neighborhoods, respecting the L’Enfant Plan street grid, conserving Juarez Circle and other parklands as open space and better incorporating the transportation needs of various institutions and uses into the fabric of surrounding neighborhoods.

2115.14 Action NNW-2.5.B: Washington Circle

Design and implement pedestrian access improvements to Washington Circle’s open space, such as removing fences and architectural barriers to the lawns.

2115.15 Action NNW-2.5.C: Foggy Bottom River, Park, and Cultural Access Study

Study the feasibility of reconfiguring existing highway infrastructure in Foggy Bottom so as to maximize the benefits and accessibility of the open space and parkland and maintain overall park space, reconnect the gaps in the street grid and urban fabric, create opportunities for affordable housing production, improve pedestrian and bike connections to and from Georgetown, the Kennedy Center, President’s Park, National Mall, national parkland, and other attractions, and create new memorials, linear parks, and civic spaces.

### **10-A22** ROCK CREEK EAST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 2200** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2200}

2200.1 The Rock Creek East Planning Area encompasses the 7.4 square miles located east of Rock Creek Park, north of Spring Road NW, and west of North Capitol Street and Riggs Road NW. Its boundaries are shown in the map at left. Most of this area has historically been in Ward 4, although in past and present, parts have been included in Ward 5.

2200.2 Rock Creek East is a sought-after residential community containing many low- and moderate-density neighborhoods. Single-family communities like North Portal Estates, Colonial Village, Crestwood, Crestwood North, Carter Barron East, Shepherd Park, 16th Street Heights, and Takoma are known for their park-like ambiance, sense of community, open spaces, and family atmosphere. These neighborhoods house persons across the full income spectrum. Row house and semi-detached neighborhoods such as Lamond-Riggs, Brightwood, Brightwood Park, Petworth, and Manor Park have similar qualities. The major planning objective throughout the community is to conserve these traits as the housing stock matures and infill development occurs.

2200.3 Georgia Avenue NW is the commercial heart of this Planning Area, with local shops and regional retail anchors that serve the adjacent neighborhoods and beyond. There are also small shopping districts in Takoma, near 14th Street and Colorado Avenue NW, along Kennedy Street NW, along Upshur Street NW, and along 14th Street NW between Allison and Decatur Streets NW. Major employment centers in the area include the Washington Hospital Complex, consisting of the Veterans Affairs Hospital, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Children’s National Hospital, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH). The possible reuse of a portion of the AFRH during the next 20 years presents an opportunity to integrate the long-isolated site into its adjacent growing and vibrant neighborhoods while strengthening functional and perceptual connections to the District. The site of the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center, which closed in 2011, is redeveloping into a mixed-use neighborhood that will one day become a major commercial and institutional employment center in the area.

2200.4 Rock Creek East is served by two major transit hubs: the Takoma and the Georgia Avenue/Petworth Metrorail stations. Residents also use transit stations in adjacent Planning Areas, including Fort Totten, Columbia Heights, Van Ness/UDC, and Cleveland Park, as well as the Silver Spring Transit Center in Montgomery County, Maryland. Historically, the major circulation routes through the planning area have been the north-south arterials leading out of downtown, such as 16th Street NW, 14th Street NW, Georgia Avenue NW (7th Street), New Hampshire Avenue NW, and North Capitol Street NW. East-west circulation is more limited. Missouri Avenue/Military Road NW is the major east-west street and one of the few that connects the neighborhoods east of Rock Creek Park with those to the west.

2200.5 The community includes many important open spaces and natural resources, the most significant of which is Rock Creek Park itself. The park is a massive green space that provides opportunities for both passive and active recreation. It includes amenities, such as a golf course, Carter Barron Amphitheater, and tennis facilities that host professional tennis players from across the United States. There are also a number of neighborhood parks, some serving the dual function of being school recreation areas. Recreation centers have recently been built in Brightwood, Lamond, Takoma, and Petworth. The Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, also cross the area, providing a series of green spaces from Rock Creek to Fort Totten and beyond. Rock Creek Cemetery, the oldest cemetery in Washington, DC is also located here.

2200.6 Rock Creek East has a vibrant sense of community, due in part to a well-organized network of community associations, places of worship, and interest groups. Committed and established neighborhood groups and civic associations in Shepherd Park, Brightwood, South Manor Park, Crestwood, Lamond-Riggs, Carter Barron East, 14th Street, Sixteenth Street Heights, and Takoma have been bolstered in recent years by newly formed community organizations in Petworth and on Kennedy Street, founding events like Celebrate Petworth and the Kennedy Street Festival. Farmers markets are hosted in Petworth, Takoma, and 14th Street Heights.

2200.7 The future of the Planning Area’s evolution holds a number of land use and community development challenges and opportunities. Public schools are being renovated, while public charter schools are locating or expanding in Rock Creak East. Georgia Avenue NW continues to have high commercial vacancy rates, aesthetic issues, parking problems, and land use conflicts where commercial businesses abut low-density housing. While attracting new businesses to the avenue is a high priority, helping existing businesses thrive is also important. In Takoma, there are issues related to the impacts of infill development around the Metro station. The CSX rail corridor in Manor Park and Lamond-Riggs continues to support industrial land uses, sometimes without sufficient buffering for adjacent residential areas. However, new zoning regulations passed in 2016 address additional buffers for industrial or production, distribution, and repair (PDR) uses. The ongoing redevelopment of the Walter Reed campus will bring new jobs, amenities, and residents, contributing to the growth of upper Georgia Avenue NW while responding to the needs of the surrounding community. As noted above, portions of the AFRH may be developed in the coming years, which presents the opportunity to improve connectivity, open up publicly accessible green space, convert historic assets into new amenities, and provide new housing options to meet Washington, DC’s growing demand.

2200.8 Rock Creek East also faces the challenge of retaining its economic and social diversity in the face of rising housing costs. Appreciation of single-family home prices in the Petworth and Brightwood neighborhoods was among the fastest in the District between 2006 and 2016. Many apartments in areas like Brightwood and Brightwood Park have been converted to condominiums. The increase in housing costs has made the area much less affordable for Rock Creek East’s moderate-income families and for its large population of low- and moderate-income older adults. On the other hand, demographic changes are making the area more ethnically diverse than it used to be. The area’s Hispanic/Latino population has continued to increase since 2000, accounting for over 20 percent of residents in 2015.

2200.9 Looking to the future, residents seek to retain the residential character, appearance, and historic continuity of their neighborhoods. Sustaining these qualities has resulted in plans and development that are carefully and strategically directed to accommodate growth. At the same time, plans also seek to conserve neighborhoods, enhance environmental quality, provide an effective transportation network, improve health care and educational services, reduce crime, upgrade public facilities and infrastructure, and expand housing choices.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2201** HISTORY {#sec-10-a2201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2201}

2201.1 European settlement in the Rock Creek East Planning Area dates back to 1712, when St. Paul’s Episcopal Church was sited in the area. Rock Creek Cemetery was established in 1719. The area initially developed as a result of the presence of underground springs and the area’s popularity for recreational horse racing in the early to mid-1800s. Brightwood Turnpike, later renamed Georgia Avenue, was built in 1819 and served as a major route for race patrons and agricultural commerce between Maryland and Downtown Washington, DC. During the Civil War, Fort Totten, Fort Slocum, and Fort Stevens were developed to defend the capital from attack. Fort Stevens was the site of Civil War combat in 1864, a battle that gained notoriety as the only military action in which a sitting U.S. president came under fire from an enemy force. All three of the forts are now part of the National Park Service’s (NPS) Fort Circle Parks, and the Battleground National Cemetery on Georgia Avenue NW is listed in the DC Inventory of Historic Sites and National Register of Historic Places.

2201.2 Following the Civil War, development in the area increased, especially along Georgia Avenue and Military Road. Farms, estates, and summer homes were the first housing types to be developed. Toward the end of the 19th century, Brightwood became a suburban village where high-income families lived on large estates. As further development occurred, Brightwood was subdivided into the neighborhoods that we know today as Petworth, Brightwood Park, Brightwood, and Lamond.

2201.3 On the northeast edge of Brightwood, Takoma Park was founded by Benjamin Gilbert in the early 1880s and developed around the Brightwood railroad station (later renamed Takoma Park station) near Fourth Street and Blair Road. Many of its spacious wood-frame bungalows and Victorian homes remain today, and much of the neighborhood is a designated historic district.

2201.4 Federal facilities also shaped the growth of Rock Creek East. Chief among them were the AFRH, established in 1851 near Rock Creek Church Road, and Walter Reed Army Medical Center, built in 1909 on Georgia Avenue and now designated a historic district. Walter Reed’s development sparked residential and commercial development in surrounding areas. For example, the Shepherd Estate north of Walter Reed was subdivided in 1911 and developed as Shepherd Park during the 1910s. Shepherd Park initially was developed with restrictive covenants that excluded Black and Jewish residents from the community. However, by the 1960s, the neighborhood was the heart of the District’s Jewish community, and today it is one of the most racially diverse neighborhoods in Washington, DC.

2201.5 The racial composition of Rock Creek East shifted during the 1950s and 1960s. The area was predominantly white prior to 1950, but by 1970 it was predominantly Black. The area became a desirable neighborhood for upper-middle and middle-income Black professional families, and the stately homes and subdivisions along 16th Street developed a cachet as Washington’s Gold Coast. Racial composition remained fairly constant during the 1970s and 1980s but became more diverse during the 1990s as the number of Hispanic/Latino residents increased, and the shares of white and Asian residents, respectively, nearly doubled between 2000 and 2015.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2202** LAND USE {#sec-10-a2202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2202}

2202.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, etc. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not actual changes in land use. Land use statistics for this Planning Area appear in Figure 22.1. Rock Creek East comprises about 4,800 acres, or about 12 percent of the District’s land area.

2202.2 Figure 22.1: Land Use Composition in Rock Creek East

2202.3 The largest single land use in the Planning Area is residential, representing about 34 percent of the total area. Of the 2,126 acres of residential land in Rock Creek East, over 90 percent consists of single-family homes, row houses, and garden apartments. The lowest density areas are located west of 16th Street NW and in the Takoma and Shepherd Park areas. Concentrations of more dense housing exist in Brightwood, Brightwood Park, and Petworth.

2202.4 Commercial, mixed-use, and industrial uses make up under three percent of the Planning Area. Most of this land consists of retail and service businesses along Georgia Avenue and Kennedy Street NW, and in smaller commercial districts like Takoma and Central 14th Street NW. Accounting for less than one percent of the total area, industrial areas total less than 41 acres and are located along the Metrorail/CSX tracks, generally following Blair Road NW. There are also light industrial uses between Taylor and Upshur Streets NW on the northwest edge of Petworth.

2202.5 Parks, recreation, and open space comprise about 22 percent of the Planning Area. Most of this acreage is associated with Rock Creek Park and its stream valleys. The vast majority of the open space in the Planning Area is owned and operated by the NPS. Non-park federal properties comprise about five percent of the Planning Area. Almost all of this acreage is associated with the former Walter Reed site and the AFRH. Public facilities and institutional uses each represent about three percent of the Planning Area.

2202.6 One of the largest land uses in the Planning Area is streets. Transportation rights-of-way, including rail, roads, medians, alleys, traffic islands, and sidewalks, comprise 29 percent of Rock Creek East. There are only 47 acres of vacant land in the Planning Area, representing one percent of the total area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2203** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a2203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2203}

2203.1 Basic demographic data for Rock Creek East is shown in Figure 22.2. In 2017, the area had a population of 77,017, or about 11 percent of the city’s total. Since 2000, there was an increase in the population by nearly 10,000 people, mostly occurring between 2010 and 2017.

2203.2 Approximately 59.3 percent of the Area’s residents were Black in 2017, which is higher than the District-wide total of 47.7 percent but lower than the percentage of Black residents in Rock Creek East in 2000 (77.5 percent). During this time, the number of Black residents in the Area declined to 45,694 in 2017. The number of white residents more than doubled from 6,891 to 17,241 between 2000 and 2017, and by 2017 represented 22.4 percent of the Rock Creek East Planning Area. There was a large increase in the Hispanic/Latino population between 2000 and 2017; persons of Hispanic/Latino origin now represent 20.3 percent of the area’s population, double the average for the District as a whole. The percentage of foreign-born residents is also much higher than the District-wide total at 23 percent, which also increased from 2000 to 2017.

2203.3 Relative to the District as a whole, the Area has higher percentages of children and older adults. About 19.3 percent of the residents were under 18, compared to a District-wide total of 17.6 percent. About 14.3 percent were 65 and over, compared to the District-wide total of 11.9 percent.

2203.4 Figure 22.2: Rock Creek East at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

67,188

68,814

77,017

83,477

97,141

106,319

Households

26,252

26968

28,008

30,671

35,656

37,638

Household Population

65,779

67,968

75,985

81,800

95,048

103,996

Persons Per Household

2.51

2.52

2.71

2.67

2.76

Jobs

23,129

33,871

35,371

37,577

42,005

44,924

Density (persons per sq mile)

9,079

9,299

10,408

11,281

13,127

14,367

Land Area (square miles)

7.4

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

13,953

41,864

14,609

27,255

11,371

20.8%

62.3%

21.7%

40.6%

16.9%

14,848

51,161

18,924

32,237

11,008

19.3%

66.4%

24.6%

41.9%

14.3%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

8,645

13.0%

9,297

12.2%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

6,891

51,422

245

666

4,843

2,280

10.4%

77.5%

0.4%

1.0%

7.3%

3.4%

17,241

45,694

298

1,757

9,912

2,115

22.4%

59.3%

0.4%

2.3%

12.9%

2.7%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

8,850

13.3%

15,657

20.3%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

12,174

18.3%

17,746

23.0%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

15,208

10,746

58.6%

41.4%

15,735

12,273

56.2%

43.8%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

25,954

1,922

93.1%

6.9%

28,008

2,521

91.7%

8.3%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

6,613

10,860

2,060

971

2,199

5,149

23.7%

39.0%

7.4%

3.5%

7.9%

18.4%

0.1%

6,297

11,439

2,615

893

2,698

6,586

20.6%

37.5%

8.6%

2.9%

8.8%

21.6%

0.0%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

##### **10-A DCMR § 2204** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a2204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2204}

2204.1 About 58 percent of the housing units in Rock Creek East are single-family homes, compared to 37 percent District-wide. In 2017, 20.6 percent of the area’s homes were single-family detached units and 37.5 percent were single-family attached units (row houses and townhouses). Only 21.6 percent of the area’s housing stock consists of multi-family buildings of 20 units or more, compared to 35.4 percent for the District as a whole.

2204.2 The home ownership rate in Rock Creek East is higher than in the District as a whole. The 2017 Census reported that 56.2 percent of the households in the Planning Area were homeowners (compared to 41.7 percent in the District) and 43.8 percent were renters (compared to 58.3 percent in the District).

##### **10-A DCMR § 2205** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a2205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2205}

2205.1 Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) indicates there were 35,141 jobs in Rock Creek East in 2015 , primarily in health care, local-serving businesses, public schools, and government. This represents four percent of the city’s job base. The largest employment centers are hospitals, including the Washington Hospital Center, the National Rehabilitation Hospital, Children’s National Medical Center, and the VA Medical Center. .

2205.2 The Planning Area’s median household income was $73,464 in 2017, which was slightly lower than the District-wide median of $77,649. Approximately 12 percent of the area’s residents were below the federal poverty line. This is below the District-wide total of 17.4 percent.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2206** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a2206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2206}

2206.1 Based on land availability, planning policies, and regional growth trends, Rock Creek East is projected to experience growth between 2017 and 2045. An increase of about 9,600 households is projected, with the Planning Area reaching 37,600 households by 2045. Population is projected to grow by 37.6 percent , reaching approximately 106,000 in 2045. The population forecasts presume the redevelopment of portions of the AFRH, accounting for more than one-third of the total for the Planning Area. Most of the remaining growth is projected to occur along Georgia Avenue NW, near the Metro stations in Takoma and Petworth, and at the former Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) site, compatible with the adopted Small Area Plans for each location.

2206.2 The number of jobs is expected to increase from about 35,141 in 2015 to 44,924 in 2045. Employment growth is anticipated throughout the area, with notable growth at the former WRAMC site, the Washington Hospital Complex, the AFRH redevelopment site, and other established business districts in the Planning Area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2207** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a2207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2207}

2207.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

2207.2 Three Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in Rock Creek East during the Comprehensive Plan revision. These meetings provided an opportunity for residents to discuss neighborhood planning issues, as well as District-wide issues. The Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and several civic associations were briefed on the Comprehensive Plan, providing additional input. There were also many meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan, but addressing long-range planning issues. These include Small Area Plan meetings for Takoma and Georgia Avenue/Petworth, as well as meetings on the Great Streets program, the District’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and various transportation studies.

2207.3 The community delivered several key messages during these meetings, summarized below:

Land use planning for Rock Creek East should preserve and enhance the established neighborhoods for which the area is known. Residents at Comprehensive Plan meetings described their neighborhoods as parklike due to their tree cover, low densities, and proximity to Rock Creek Park. Apart of what creates the park-like ambiance is the large federal and institutional properties in the community. This is particularly true for Walter Reed Hospital and the Armed Forces Retirement Home, both of which may be redeveloped during the next two decades. Plans for these sites should make every effort possible to retain the open space, mature trees, and visual buffers that make these sites welcome neighbors in the community today. Residents at Comprehensive Plan meetings were also clear that design guidelines and zoning standards for these sites, and for other areas addressed by Small Area Plans, must be followed and enforced once they are prepared.

While preserving established neighborhoods is a priority, Rock Creek East also recognizes the need to provide a variety of housing choices. This community has always taken pride in the fact that it is economically integrated, with housing options for older adults, lower-income households, young professionals, moderate- income families, and persons with disabilities, as well as high-income households. Appropriate sites for infill housing have been identified along Georgia Avenue NW, around the Takoma Metro station, between Upshur and Taylor Streets NW near 14th Street NW, along Kennedy Street, NW and on a limited number of other properties in the community. Development on these sites should be in keeping with the scale of the surrounding community, provide ample green space, address parking and traffic issues, upgrade infrastructure where needed, and serve a variety of incomes. Existing housing should continue to be renovated and rehabilitated, with programs to assist older adults and low-income residents and avoid displacement.

Neighborhood-serving commercial facilities need to be upgraded and expanded throughout the Planning Area. Some of the commercial areas have experienced decades of declining activity. Small Area Plans for Takoma and Georgia Avenue NW have focused on ways to improve the future viability of the local business districts in each area and attract investment that better meets the needs of residents, businesses, and property owners. Similar attention should be given to Kennedy Street NW, and to the Riggs Road Center in the adjacent Upper Northeast Planning Area. Much of the area continues to be underserved by basic consumer services like banks, hardware stores, and sit-down restaurants. Rather than siting these uses in long auto-oriented strips, future development should emphasize pedestrian-oriented centers. The community also expressed a strong preference for neighborhood-serving, rather than regional commercial uses. Such uses should be complementary to the low scale of existing development, and should enhance neighborhood identity through façade improvements, landscaping, signage, and lighting. Urban design excellence should be a very high priority.

As neighborhood commercial areas are upgraded, the potential for conflicts due to traffic, noise, litter, and other environmental impacts must be recognized and proactively addressed. In addition, conflicts caused by existing commercial and industrial uses in the community need to be addressed more effectively. This is particularly true in Petworth (along Georgia Avenue NW) and in Takoma and Lamond-Riggs near the CSX railroad tracks. For years, these neighborhoods have dealt with semi-industrial uses such as auto repair shops, bus storage, maintenance yards, and distribution centers, and in some cases immediately adjacent to single-family homes. These uses are important to the District and provide jobs and needed community services for Rock Creek East residents. But they also generate truck traffic, fumes, odors, noise, and vibration, often without buffering. Over the next 20 years, steps should be taken to reduce the land use conflicts and unappealing visual elements associated with industrial uses in such locations as Blair Road NW, Chillum Place NW, and Upshur Street NW. In a few cases, this may mean phasing out industrial and heavy commercial uses and replacing them with housing or mixed uses.

Residents of Rock Creek East have expressed concerns about the growth of particular land uses, including group homes, places of worship, and related facilities such as day care centers and social service centers. The Planning Area’s inventory of large homes, many located on major transit lines, has made it an appealing choice for social service providers and community-based residential facilities. Issues relating to safety, parking, and neighborhood character have been raised, particularly in areas where group homes are clustered. Residents seek a stronger role in decisions on the siting and management of such facilities, and desire increased coordination with group home operators. There are also issues connected to code enforcement, related not only to housing for persons with disabilities, but also to broader issues such as unpermitted construction and vacant or abandoned properties.

Growth and development in neighboring jurisdictions particularly affects Rock Creek East. This is most apparent along Eastern Avenue NW in Shepherd Park, where tall condominiums in Silver Spring, Maryland face single-family homes in the District. The revitalization of Downtown Silver Spring has provided new shopping, entertainment, and dining options for area residents, but has also siphoned away some of the District’s retail potential and brought traffic to Shepherd Park. Takoma Park, Maryland is experiencing more modest growth near its border with the District. Regardless of location, it is important to ensure that neither jurisdiction bears an undue share of the impacts of growth related to traffic congestion and parking needs. Coordination between the District and Maryland is essential to preserving community stability. Coordination should also emphasize improvement of gateways into the city at New Hampshire Avenue NW, Georgia Avenue NW, and 16th Street NW. These entries provide first impressions for residents on both sides of the border, and do not convey as positive of an image of Washington, DC as they could.

The transportation system should be designed so that residents can easily travel between home, work, school, shopping, and public facilities. Right now, the network is designed to facilitate north-south circulation (between downtown and Maryland), but east-west circulation is problematic. Improvements are needed to reduce traffic congestion and address safety concerns, particularly on Blair Road NW in Takoma, Georgia Avenue NW and Missouri Avenue NW in Brightwood, and Riggs Road NW in Lamond-Riggs. Better transportation to the west side of Rock Creek Park is also needed, as many residents travel in this direction to access schools, shopping, and Metrorail. Parts of Rock Creek East are more than one mile from Metrorail stations and need better, more reliable bus and bicycle connections. On the other hand, it should also be recognized that auto ownership is higher in Rock Creek East than it is in most other parts of Washington, DC. Transit is not a practical option for everyone, and adequate parking should be provided as development occurs. This was a clear message provided by many Comprehensive Plan participants in the area. The safety of pedestrians and bicyclists is also an issue in many neighborhoods and at many intersections. New traffic management measures, including street design changes, should be explored to better regulate traffic volume and flow, particularly where major development is proposed. Such changes have already been made to 16th Street NW and will need to be explored along Georgia Avenue NW as plans for Bus Rapid Transit along the avenue move forward.

A high priority should be placed on upgrading public services and facilities. The community has more recreation centers per capita than most parts of the District, but these facilities are not evenly distributed. Neighborhoods in the northern part of the Planning Area do not have a full-scale recreation center, while areas like Brightwood Park and Petworth are lacking facilities such as athletic fields and tennis courts. The new Takoma, Lamond, and Emery Recreation Centers are important additions, but maintenance of the parks themselves continues to be a concern. The Fourth District Police Headquarters is on Georgia Avenue NW, and there are fire stations in Petworth and Brightwood Park, but areas like North Portal and Colonial Village are several miles from the nearest station. Public libraries and schools in the community are in need of modernization. The community has the largest concentration of hospitals in the city, but they are clustered in the southern part of the Planning Area, with no facilities in the north. The new wellness center on Kennedy Street NW will provide a much-needed facility in a community where nearly one in five residents is over 65.

Important historic resources in the Planning Area should be recognized and preserved. The Fort Circle Parks are a resource of national importance, yet their significance is unknown even to many District residents. Additional interpretive facilities are needed, and the integrity and historic context of the parks themselves should be protected. The Takoma Historic District helps conserve the homes known for their architecture, as well as the small-town architecture of Takoma; however, other older neighborhoods and structures are not similarly preserved under historic designations. Important architectural resources like the Wardman row houses of Brightwood, the older homes of 16th Street, and the legacy of early 20th century commercial buildings along Georgia Avenue NW remain vulnerable to demolition or unsympathetic alteration. Additional properties in the Planning Area may merit designation as historic landmarks or districts. Plans for neighborhood heritage trails in Brightwood and elsewhere will help preserve Rock Creek East’s legacy in the future.

The Georgia Avenue NW corridor remains a source of great interest and hope, as well as poses challenges for the community. In March 2005, the entire 5.6-mile corridor was designated as one of the District’s six Great Streets to be targeted for reinvestment. Participants in Comprehensive Plan meetings noted some positive signs, while focused on the work yet to be done. One issue raised was the limited demand for the avenue’s small, narrow storefront spaces (with no off-street parking), and the need to concentrate retail at key nodes rather than in a continuous strip. Additional programs and investments are needed to assist businesses, attract the desired mix of retail, resolve traffic problems, address problematic land uses, and provide appropriately designed infill housing for older adults and others. Transit plans for the corridor were the subject of much discussion during the Comprehensive Plan process, with concerns expressed about impacts on parking and congestion. The link between plans for Upper Georgia Avenue NW and plans for Walter Reed Hospital also was raised. Regardless of what happens on the hospital site, change should be leveraged to achieve positive results for Georgia Avenue NW and the neighborhoods around it.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2208** RCE-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a2208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2208}

2208.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in the Rock Creek East Planning Area. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

2208.2 Policy RCE-1.1.1: Strengthening Lower Density Neighborhoods

Maintain and strengthen the neighborhoods of the Rock Creek East Planning Area while providing new housing opportunities for a range of incomes and household sizes. Any new development in the Planning Area should be attractively designed and should contribute to the community’s physical characteristics.

2208.3 Policy RCE-1.1.2: Design Compatibility

Ensure that renovations, additions, and new construction in the area’s low-density neighborhoods respect the scale and densities of adjacent properties, provide new housing opportunities, and preserve parklike qualities, such as dense tree cover and open space.

See the Urban Design Element for additional policies on compatible building design and the Land Use Element for additional guidance on infill development.

2208.4 Policy RCE-1.1.3: Directing Growth

Concentrate economic development activity, employment growth, and new housing, including affordable housing, in Rock Creek East around the Georgia Avenue-Petworth and Takoma Metro station areas, along the Georgia Avenue NW corridor, along Kennedy Street NW, at key nodes along 14th Street NW, at the former WRAMC site, and at the AFRH site. Provide improved pedestrian, transit, and bicycle access to these areas, and improve their visual and urban design qualities to create a unique destination for the local community to enjoy.

2208.5 Policy RCE-1.1.4: Neighborhood Shopping Areas

Maintain and encourage the development of multi-use neighborhood shopping and services in those areas designated for commercial or mixed-uses.

Please consult the Land Use Element for policies addressing commercial development impacts.

2208.6 Policy RCE-1.1.5: Housing Renovation

Strongly encourage the rehabilitation and renovation of existing housing in Rock Creek East, taking steps to keep housing affordable for current and future residents with a range of ages and household sizes.

2208.7 Policy RCE-1.1.6: Development of New Housing

Encourage the retention of existing public housing units within the Rock Creek East Planning Area, along with other measures to increase housing choices and improve housing affordability for area residents. This should include the production of new housing for a mix of incomes and household sizes along Georgia Avenue NW, and the encouragement of mixed-income housing in the industrially zoned area west of Georgia Avenue between Upshur and Shepherd Streets NW, and on District-owned land along Spring Road near the Georgia Avenue-Petworth Metro station. A particular emphasis should be placed on providing affordable housing for older adults and families.

2208.8 Policy RCE-1.1.7: Cross Jurisdictional Coordination

Work closely with the Maryland National Capital Parks and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) and the City of Takoma Park to guide development, including retail, traffic management, and other planning issues along the Maryland/District line, especially at the gateway areas along Eastern Avenue at 16th Street NW and Georgia and New Hampshire Avenues NW.

2208.9 Policy RCE-1.1.8: Industrial Zone Buffering

Provide improved buffering and screening along the interface between residential areas and industrial areas, especially along Blair Road NW, Chillum Place NW, and the CSX/Metrorail corridor. To protect nearby neighborhoods from noise and other industrial impacts, the expansion of industrial uses should be limited to areas designated for PDR.

2208.10 Policy RCE-1.1.9: Traffic Management Strategies

Establish traffic management strategies to keep through-traffic on major arterials, separate local traffic from commuter traffic, and keep trucks off residential streets. These strategies should include improvements to public transit, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks, as well as measures to coordinate traffic signal timing and improve traffic flow. Particular focus should be given to Georgia Avenue, North Capitol Street, Blair Road, 14th Street, 16th Street, Missouri Avenue, New Hampshire Avenue, Kennedy Street, Chillum Place, and Piney Branch Road NW.

See also the Transportation Element for policies on transportation demand management, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, including pedestrian safety.

2208.11 Policy RCE-1.1.10: Parking for Neighborhood Retail Districts

Discourage the use of retail business and municipal building parking lots for long-term commuter parking through more aggressive enforcement and the provision of other parking and transportation options.

2208.12 Policy RCE-1.1.11: Transit Improvements

Promote more efficient bus service in the Planning Area, with a particular emphasis on connecting residents and workers to the Metro stations, providing faster and more reliable service along Georgia Avenue NW, 14th Street NW, and 16th Street NW, and improving circulation between the east and west sides of Rock Creek Park. Explore ride-hailing services and micro-transit to supplement additional bus routes.

2208.13 Policy RCE-1.1.12: Enforcement

Mitigate traffic, parking, noise, and related safety problems that result from non-residential uses through strict enforcement of zoning, parking, and other municipal regulations.

2208.14 Policy RCE-1.1.13: Vibrant Local Shopping Streets

Encourage a vibrant mix of commercial businesses, including local retail options, to avoid excessive concentrations of liquor stores on local shopping streets.

2208.15 Policy RCE-1.1.14: Livability in Rock Creek East

Continue to evaluate transportation safety and comfort for all users of the street network and identify concrete actions to increase safe and accessible mobility options.

2208.16 Policy RCE-1.1.15: Sustainable Development

Integrate sustainability strategies at the site and project level in new developments in the Rock Creek East Planning Area.

2208.17 Action RCE-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

Implement urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial districts along Georgia Avenue NW, Kennedy Street NW, and 14th Street NW to enhance community identity. These improvements should be based on standards that can be enforced through city codes such as zoning and building regulations.

2208.18 Action RCE-1.1.B: Improving Traffic Flow

Improve traffic flow and safety through improved lighting, signage, pavement markings, traffic islands, truck route signs, and other transportation system management measures for Georgia Avenue NW, North Capitol Street NW, Missouri Avenue NW, the 4th/Blair Streets NW intersection, and New Hampshire Avenue NW.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2209** RCE-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a2209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2209}

2209.1 Policy RCE-1.2.1: Fort Stevens and Fort Slocum

Maintain and improve the Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, especially Fort Stevens and Fort Slocum. The Fort Circle green spaces should be more effectively linked and commemorated, and conserved as an essential cultural, historical, recreational, aesthetic, and natural resource.

2209.2 Policy RCE-1.2.2: Historic Resources

Protect, preserve, and increase public awareness of buildings, facilities, and places of historic and archaeological significance in Rock Creek East, including Rock Creek Park, the Fort Circle Parks, the Lucinda Cady House, George Lightfoot House, Van View, Hampshire Gardens, Petworth Gardens, Rock Creek Parish Glebe, and the Takoma Park, Grant Circle, Walter Reed, AFRH, and Marjorie Webster historic districts. Identify and increase awareness of other places of potential significance, and consider appropriate protections, incorporating the community’s recommendations as part of the process.

2209.3 Policy RCE-1.2.3: Rock Creek Park

Improve multimodal access to Rock Creek Park by providing additional parking, public transit service, bicycle trails, wayfinding, and walking paths. Expand outdoor recreational activities at the park to better meet community needs.

2209.4 Policy RCE-1.2.4: Erosion and Drainage

Carefully assess the erosion and drainage impacts of existing and proposed development, particularly in the North Capitol/Rock Creek Church area, where flooding has been a problem .

2209.5 Policy RCE-1.2.5: Small and Local Businesses

Assist small and local businesses along Kennedy Street, Georgia Avenue, and other Rock Creek East commercial districts in providing neighborhood services and creating job opportunities for area residents.

2209.6 Policy RCE-1.2.6: Multicultural Services

Community services should be responsive to cultural changes in the Rock Creek East community, particularly the growing number of Latino residents in the Planning Area .

2209.7 Policy RCE-1.2.8: Recreational Acreage

Expand access to parkland in the southern part of the Planning Area (Petworth, Brightwood, and 16th Street Heights). The Parks and Recreation Master Plan identified these areas as being particularly deficient in parkland acreage. The opportunity for publicly accessible open space at the AFRH should be considered as part of the site’s redevelopment.

2209.8 Policy RCE-1.2.9: Scenic Resource Protection

Conserve and enhance the important scenic and visual resources of Rock Creek East, including the areas of the AFRH site and the Fort Circle Parks. Future development should be designed to highlight and respond to scenic assets.

2209.9 Action RCE-1.2-A Rock Creek Park and Fort Circle Parks Coordination

In collaboration with the NPS, explore the feasibility of developing additional community-serving recreational facilities at Rock Creek Park and within the Fort Circle Parks to increase recreational options, public safety, and community stewardship of these assets. All facilities should be consistent with the General Management Plans for these park areas.

2209.10 Action RCE-1.2.B: Historic Resource Recognition

Document places of potential historic significance in the Rock Creek East Planning Area, with a priority on the Petworth, Brightwood, Crestwood, Crestwood North, 16th Street Heights, Shepherd Park, North Portal Estates, and Colonial Village areas. Identify appropriate preservation efforts for these places, using community recommendations and the Ward 4 Heritage Guide prepared by the DC Historic Preservation Office as part of the process. Consider expanding the Takoma Historic District to include appropriate structures and places. Identify significant historic anchors and architectural resources along the upper 16th Street corridor and evaluate properties meriting recognition through historic designation. Use other existing programs and mechanisms as needed to preserve and enhance neighborhood character.

2209.11 Action RCE-1.2.C: Shepherd Park Recreation Center

Determine the feasibility of developing a new recreation center that considers the needs of Shepherd Park, as well as the Walter Reed site and Colonial Village area. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan identified this area as needing additional recreation center space.

2209.12 Action RCE-1.2.D: Metropolitan Branch Trail

Complete the Metropolitan Branch Trail from Fort Totten to the Maryland border at Takoma, integrating it into planning for the broader neighborhood as a transportation asset and also for placemaking and economic development.

2209.13 Action RCE-1.2.E: Gateway Thoroughfares

Enhance the defining characteristics of Georgia Avenue, 16th Street, and New Hampshire Avenue NW as gateway thoroughfares through Rock Creek East connecting with Maryland. The thoroughfares’ origins and purpose should define how public space and buildings along them enhance views toward important civic monuments and distant landmarks, create neighborhood-defining places, and complete Washington DC’s park and open space system.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2210** RCE-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a2210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2210}

2210.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified eight areas in Rock Creek East as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that given in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements (see Map 22.1 and Figure 22.3). These eight areas are:

Takoma Central District

Georgia Avenue/Petworth Metro Station Area

Upper Georgia Avenue/Walter Reed

Kennedy Street NW

Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue

Central 14th Street NW

Walter Reed Army Medical Center Site

Armed Forces Retirement Home/ Washington Hospital Complex

2210.2 Figure 22.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Rock Creek East

Within Rock Creek East

2.1

Takoma Central District

2.2

Georgia Avenue-Petworth Metro Station Area

2.3

Upper Georgia Avenue/Walter Reed

2.4

Kennedy Street NW

2.5

Armed Forces Retirement Home/Washington Hospital Complex

2.6

Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue

2.7

Central 14th Street NW

2.8

Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center Site

Adjacent to Rock Creek East

14th Street/Columbia Heights

McMillan Sand Filtration Site

Fort Totten Metro Station

Georgia Avenue Corridor

2210.3 Map 22.1: Rock Creek East Policy Focus Areas

##### **10-A DCMR § 2211** RCE-2.1 TAKOMA CENTRAL DISTRICT {#sec-10-a2211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2211}

2211.1 Takoma is a unique community in Washington DC. It shares its history and its name with Takoma Park, Maryland. Both communities embody classic pedestrian-scale streets and a rich architectural legacy. The area’s principal business district along Carroll Street NW links the District and Maryland portions of the community. The border across this bi-jurisdictional commercial center is seamless, and recent developments on the District side complement the streetscape, retail mix, and vitality on the Maryland side.

2211.2 The Central District Plan (CDP) was developed through an intensive public process and was adopted by the D.C. Council as a Small Area Plan in 2002. It covered an area extending from Chestnut Street on the north, the Maryland/ District border on the east, 4th and 5th Streets NW on the west, and Aspen and Laurel Streets NW on the south. The area includes the Metro station and the shopping districts along Carroll and 4th Streets NW, comprising a variety of neighborhood-serving businesses, a former theater, houses and apartments, parking lots, and vacant land.

2211.3 The CDP seeks to improve neighborhood retail choices, restore vacant buildings and storefronts, accommodate compatible infill housing, address traffic and parking conditions, enhance open space, and improve the safety and quality of the pedestrian environment. Key principles from the CDP are captured in the policies and actions below; the CDP itself should be consulted for additional detail. The Comprehensive Plan describes a vision for Central Takoma as a Town Center, with Metro serving as a gateway to new mixed-use development, restored historic buildings, and pedestrian-friendly streets. It places a priority on preserving the small-town character that embodies historic Takoma, emphasizing development that is in keeping with the character and businesses that serve the local community.

2211.4 Several specific sites were identified in the CDP as housing opportunities. Since 2002, numerous mixed-use and multi-family residential development projects have been completed on many sites. Multi-family residential development is proposed on the Metrorail site itself, including parking for Metro riders and a reimagined public green space. Improvements to Carroll Avenue and Blair Road NW are planned to maintain traffic flow and make the area safer for pedestrians. Future development in the Central Takoma Area should maximize Metro access while taking care to provide appropriate buffers and transitions to adjacent uses.

2211.5 Policy RCE-2.1.1: Historic Preservation in Takoma

Recognize and respect Takoma’s rich heritage, architectural character and scale, and small-town ambiance in all redevelopments, urban design improvements, and marketing strategies and initiatives.

2211.6 Policy RCE-2.1.2: Strategic Public and Private Investment in Takoma

Target public investment in the Takoma Central District Area in ways that can be leveraged to improve private investment and create public benefits. This should include streetscape and building façade improvements, partnerships with neighborhood and business organizations, and the development of key public properties.

2211.7 Policy RCE-2.1.3: Takoma Central District Housing Strategy

Accommodate housing demand, including affordable housing, at the opportunity sites identified in the Takoma Central District Plan. Support the creation of a mixed-use, mixed-income neighborhood for a range of household sizes.

2211.8 Policy RCE-2.1.4: Takoma Central District Retail Strategy

Concentrate retail activities on key sites along Carroll and 4th Streets NW through requirements that mandate ground-floor retail space within the established business district. Continuous street walls and active ground-floor retail should be encouraged in these areas, consistent with the Small Area Plan. Inappropriate uses, such as storage yards, auto sales, and warehouses, should be strictly limited.

2211.9 Policy RCE-2.1.5: Takoma Central District Transportation Strategy

Place a priority on meeting transit needs at the Takoma Metro station and accommodate all Metro and Ride-On services on the station site itself. Incorporate Metropolitan Branch Trail options into all transportation improvements for the area.

2211.10 Action RCE-2.1.A: Traffic Congestion and Parking

Mitigate intersection and corridor congestion on Blair Road and Carroll Street NW. Improve parking for local businesses by encouraging better management of existing parking, including shared parking arrangements with Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and other landowners in locations that can better support the commercial district.

2211.11 Action RCE-2.1.B: Pedestrian Safety and Connections

Improve pedestrian safety in the Takoma Central District with a coordinated program of physical improvements, including new western entrances to the Metro station that better connect communities east and west of the tracks.

2211.12 Action RCE-2.1.C: Takoma Metro Station Redevelopment

Review the Takoma Central District redevelopment guidelines for the Metro Station in accordance with the updated Future Land Use Map designations for the site and the updated Rock Creek East Area Elements.

2211.13 Action RCE-2.1.D: Takoma Central District Village Green

Create a village green as the Central District’s signature open space feature.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2212** RCE-2.2 GEORGIA AVENUE/PETWORTH METRO STATION AREA {#sec-10-a2212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2212}

2212.1 The Georgia Avenue/Petworth Metro Station Focus Area extends from Decatur Street NW on the north to Euclid Street NW on the south. The text below addresses the area between Decatur Street and Spring Road NW, including the Metro station itself.

See the Mid-City Area Element for detail on the area from Spring Road south to Euclid Street.

2212.2 The Rock Creek East portion of the Focus Area includes flats, apartments, the Petworth Library, several schools and recreation areas, and many small shops such as beauty salons, carry-outs, and liquor stores. The corridor also includes vacant buildings and underutilized sites with the potential for redevelopment.

2212.3 A Corridor Plan and Revitalization Strategy was developed for Georgia Avenue - Petworth in 2005. It provides a framework to guide future development and to enhance the quality of life in neighborhoods along the corridor. The strategy recognizes the opportunity to re-energize Georgia Avenue NW as a thriving and attractive street, building on historic assets like the area’s building stock and relatively new assets like the Metro station. It includes strategies to strengthen existing businesses, restore abandoned storefronts, attract new mixed-income development, address parking issues, and draw new businesses through financial and regulatory incentives. Several blocks along the avenue are identified as new housing sites. Numerous parking, traffic flow, and pedestrian improvements are identified, such as more visible crosswalks, landscaped medians, and improved lighting.

2212.4 Several mixed-use projects have been completed or are planned for the area, bringing new population and businesses to Georgia Avenue NW in Petworth. Completed in 2009, the Park Place project located at the Petworth Metro station site added over 150 new housing units, including affordable units. Ground-floor retail is a catalyst for other residential and mixed-use projects planned or underway on Georgia Avenue NW. Future projects should include a diversity of housing types and retail amenities oriented toward the needs of the surrounding community.

2212.5 Policy RCE-2.2.1: Development Character

Encourage development in the Georgia Avenue/Petworth area to respect the area’s pedestrian-oriented, moderate- to medium-density character. A variety of project scales should be encouraged, ranging from small adaptive reuse and rehabilitation projects to mixed-use projects combining housing and commercial uses. Mixed-income housing with a variety of housing types is particularly encouraged. Design transitions between large-scale and small-scale development to ameliorate the appearance of overwhelming scale and to relate to context of the lower scale of surrounding neighborhoods.

2212.6 Policy RCE-2.2.2: Strategic Public and Private Investment in Petworth

Target capital improvements toward the locations that are best equipped to leverage new private development, particularly the 3600-4100 blocks of Georgia Avenue NW. These capital investments should include façade improvements, streetscape amenities, pedestrian safety measures, parking management improvements, and public art.

2212.7 Policy RCE-2.2.3: Limiting Undesirable Uses in Petworth

Discourage uses deemed unpopular along Georgia Avenue NW, such as liquor stores, used car lots, and automobile repair shops. Provide flexibility for businesses with desirable uses that would like to expand their services and facilities. Such measures will help strengthen the economic vitality of the corridor, retain businesses, and serve the shopping needs of the surrounding neighborhoods.

2212.8 Policy RCE-2.2.4: Upshur/Taylor Area

Recognize the opportunities for new mixed income housing, loft, and live-work development in the area located between Georgia Avenue, Upshur, Shepherd, , and 13th Streets NW.

2212.9 Action RCE-2.2.A: Site Acquisition

Enforce the higher tax rates applicable to vacant properties, and especially to vacant and underutilized properties, to encourage their being put into productive use. Continue acquisition of underused or vacant land to facilitate public-private infill development that catalyzes the revitalization of Georgia Avenue NW and reinforces its role as the central business district of Petworth.

2212.10 Action RCE-2.2.B: Petworth Co-Location Opportunities

Explore opportunities to co-locate new and improved public facilities along Spring Road NW and at the Petworth Library. Consider other uses in the co-location development programs, such as a health care center, housing, and senior living.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2213** RCE-2.3 UPPER GEORGIA AVENUE NW {#sec-10-a2213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2213}

2213.1 The Upper Georgia Avenue NW corridor extends more than 2.5 miles from Decatur Street north to Eastern Avenue. The corridor includes local and community-serving retail uses, gas stations, car dealerships, small offices, public and institutional buildings, and residential uses. The character of the corridor changes between Aspen and Fern Streets NW, where the Walter Reed Army Medical Center Historic District occupies the west side of the avenue, and row houses and low-rise apartments line the east side.

2213.2 Portions of Upper Georgia Avenue NW lack retail diversity and streetscape amenities, an unsafe pedestrian environment, and an aesthetic quality that is not in keeping with the high-quality residential areas on its east and west. The corridor has the potential to attract significant redevelopment, potentially supporting new retail, housing, and mixed-use activity. It has many assets that are attractive to investors, including its historic building stock and proximity to a diverse community with significant purchasing power and a wide range of retail interests.

2313.3 Approved by the D.C. Council in 2008, the Upper Georgia Avenue Land Development Plan guides growth and development along the corridor to create an attractive destination for residents, business owners, and visitors. The plan builds upon efforts of the government, the community, and the private sector along Georgia Avenue NW to increase local neighborhood livability and create a new environment that stimulates private investment and neighborhood revitalization.

2213.4 The Upper Georgia Avenue Land Development Plan emphasizes development along the corridor in five zones at key intersections, each highlighting different redevelopment opportunities. Zones should be clearly identified with streetscaping and other physical features that define their identities and create a clearer sense of place while providing a pedestrian-friendly public realm. The strategy of nodal zones on the corridor will support attraction of a variety of retail options, preserve and promote historic resources, stimulate mixed-income housing, and encourage multimodal transportation options while developing a clear northern gateway presence into the District at Eastern Avenue.

2213.5 Strategies for Upper Georgia Avenue NW should be coordinated with ongoing redevelopment of the WRAMC campus, which will buoy the corridor and expand the market for small businesses.

2213.6 Policy RCE-2.3.1: Upper Georgia Avenue NW

Develop upper Georgia Avenue NW (from Decatur Street to Eastern Avenue NW) as a walkable shopping street with five distinct and clearly identifiable activity centers along its course. Encourage development that reinforces this nodal pattern, with new retail or local-serving office development clustered at key locations and new housing or mixed-use development on underutilized commercial properties in between. Conserve existing housing along the corridor, supporting its maintenance and renovation, and encourage affordable housing options.

2213.7 Policy RCE-2.3.2: Pedestrian and Transit Improvements to Upper Georgia Avenue NW

The development of upper Georgia Avenue NW as one of Washington, DC’s prominent commercial gateways should encourage new retail and infill that is pedestrian and transit oriented. Improve transit access along Georgia Avenue itself and support better connections with other parts of the city. Improvements to the public realm also should be made to make walking, biking, and transit use, including bus rapid transit, safe, comfortable, and convenient, including greening and landscaping in the public space and rights-of-way.

2213.8 Policy RCE-2.3.3: Walter Reed Development

Work with federal officials in ongoing discussions on the Department of State’s Foreign Missions Center at the Walter Reed site, Children’s National Research and Innovation Campus, as well as the Parks at Walter Reed project to support economic development on upper Georgia Avenue NW. In addition, the District will seek outcomes that preserve the stability and quality of neighborhoods around the site, minimize the potential for future land use and transportation conflicts, preserve open space buffers between the site and its neighbors, provide community amenities wherever feasible, build new housing, including affordable housing for a range of incomes and household sizes, and create educational and employment opportunities that benefit District residents.

2213.9 Policy RCE-2.3.4: Coordinated Business Community

Support existing business organizations that provide beautification and business assistance services along upper Georgia Avenue NW. Encourage efforts to coordinate business improvement strategies among the various Georgia Avenue business associations through the implementation of the Upper Georgia Avenue Land Development Plan. Assist businesses in adapting to changing markets and customer bases that shift with new uses and development on the corridor, particularly around the Walter Reed site.

2213.10 Policy RCE-2.3.5: Upper Georgia Avenue NW Development

New development should provide ground-floor retail with either residential, office, or institutional uses above. Transitions in height can be designed to ameliorate the appearance of overwhelming scale and to relate to the lower scale of the surrounding neighborhood. Additional residential development, including affordable and moderate-income housing, can create more vibrant and inclusive destinations at the zones along the corridor.

2213.11 Action RCE-2.3.A: Retail Strategies for Upper Georgia Avenue NW

Complete market studies of upper Georgia Avenue NW to assess unmet retail market demand, evaluate strategies for retaining local retailers, identify potential locations for new neighborhood-serving retail, and develop strategies for attracting and retaining the appropriate mix of retail in each area.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2214** RCE-2.4 KENNEDY STREET NW {#sec-10-a2214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2214}

2214.1 Kennedy Street NW spans the Brightwood Park and South Manor Park neighborhoods. The street is mixed-use in character, with low-density storefront commercial uses as well as residential uses. Apartment buildings, row houses, and single-family detached homes line the streets immediately adjacent to the corridor and parts of Kennedy Street itself. The street also serves as one of the few east-west transit routes in the Rock Creek East Planning Area.

2214.2 Approved by the D.C. Council in 2008, the Kennedy Street Revitalization Plan was the result of collaboration among community and government stakeholders. The plan includes broad recommendations and a community vision on how this neighborhood main street can be revitalized, detailed through urban design guidelines and illustrative concepts representing the community’s vision of where new development opportunities should be explored. The plan comprises four overarching goals: ensure a clean and safe environment to live, work, and play; create a walkable, safe public realm with mobility connections; encourage new mixed-income, mixed-use development while providing opportunities for existing residents and businesses; and empower residents to support implementation of the plan.

2214.3 During the last several years, the District has targeted resources to the area for crime prevention, community cleanup, public safety, short-term family housing support, streetscape improvements, and designation as a federal Opportunity Zone, while residents and business owners have come together to support the revitalization of Kennedy Street. This has generated interest in the area and attracted new residents, businesses, and activities. While the neighborhoods surrounding the corridor are quite relatively unchanged, demographic changes have altered the kinds of retail services that are needed. Typical businesses on the corridor have included convenience stores, beauty/barber shops and carry-outs. Kennedy Street is evolving into a more vibrant mixed-use area, with new local-serving businesses and restaurants. The success of existing businesses also should be encouraged as this revival occurs.

2214.4 The diverse population in the Brightwood area, including those aged 60 and over, provides an opportunity to bolster the tenant mix and attract new mixed-use development. Existing services, such as the Hattie B. Holmes Senior Wellness Center, the Kennedy short-term family housing facility, and new mixed-use development, with street activated uses and mixed-income housing above, will catalyze revitalization along the corridor.

2214.5 Policy RCE-2.4.1: Kennedy Street Improvement

Improve Kennedy Street NW between Georgia Avenue and 1st Street NW as a locally oriented neighborhood shopping street. A distinct identity should be created for the street to boost the performance of existing businesses and attract new businesses to the vacant storefronts on the corridor.

2214.6 Policy RCE-2.4.2: Housing Along Kennedy Street NW

Encourage moderate-density, mixed-use projects along Kennedy Street NW, including public and mixed-income housing to serve all generations of residents in the neighborhood.

2214.7 Policy RCE-2.4.3: Investment on Kennedy Street

Target public investment along the Kennedy Street corridor in ways that will leverage private investment and create public benefits. This should include streetscape and building façade improvements, culture and public art, partnerships with neighborhood and business organizations, and the development of key public properties.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2215** RCE-2.5 ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME/ WASHINGTON HOSPITAL COMPLEX {#sec-10-a2215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2215}

2215.1 The AFRH, formerly known as the U.S. Soldiers and Airmen’s Home, is a functioning home for almost 500 veterans of the U.S. military. It occupies a 272-acre site in the southeast part of the Planning Area.

2215.2 The AFRH has been an institution of national importance for more than 160 years, and is a historic district listed in both the DC Inventory of Historic Sites and the National Register of Historic Places. The property has exceptional significance as a natural, cultural, historic, and scenic resource and is one of the largest contiguous properties in Washington, DC. President Abraham Lincoln maintained a cottage on the site and wrote parts of the Emancipation Proclamation while residing there in 1862. The Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan acknowledge the significance of the AFRH as an important open space.

2215.3 In 2001, the Secretary of Defense was authorized to sell, lease, or otherwise dispose of any AFRH property determined to be excess to the needs of the home. The AFRH developed a master plan for that purpose in 2008. Since 2008, the area context has changed as Washington, DC has grown, and additional planning has been completed, necessitating future amendments to the AFRH Master Plan. While the District has limited jurisdiction over AFRH as long as it remains in federal use, consultation between local and federal officials is necessary on many redevelopment issues. Private-use redevelopment presents the opportunity to integrate AFRH into its adjacent growing neighborhoods while strengthening the functional and perceptual connections to Washington, DC. The District government anticipates that the creation of a new neighborhood on the AFRH property can be successfully incorporated in the city and provide a model of 21st-century urban living that achieves a high standard of environmental sustainability, social equity, design excellence, and economic innovation.

2215.4 In 2018, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) on behalf of AFRH for private use redevelopment of the 80-acre AFRH Master Plan area. The prospect of redevelopment creates exciting opportunities but also has raised community concerns about the scale of development, provisions for open space, traffic and environmental impacts, effects on visual and historic resources, the addition of affordable housing, and the compatibility of the development with the surrounding neighborhoods. The District will work closely with the federal government over the coming years to promote changes on the site that benefit the community and to avoid land use conflicts, create community access and open space wherever feasible, and mitigate impacts on traffic and community character. As portions of the site are leased or sold to the private sector, they are subject to new Comprehensive Plan Map and zoning designations by the District.

2215.5 To the south of the AFRH, the Washington Hospital Complex includes approximately 50 acres of health care-related uses located between Michigan Avenue NW, Irving Street NW, Park Place NW, and First Street NW. The hospital complex is a major employer; facilities include the Washington Hospital Center, Children’s Hospital National Medical Center, the National Rehabilitation Hospital, and the Veterans Administration Medical Center . The Medstar Washington Hospital Center, founded in 1958, is the largest private hospital in the District.

2215.6 Expansion of hospital facilities may be necessary to maintain appropriate levels of care for a growing population and to support new medical care initiatives. This expansion may include ancillary uses such as medical office buildings, clinics, hotels, and conference facilities.

2215.7 Planning for the future growth and redevelopment of the ARFH site and Washington Hospital Complex has continued. In 2009, District agencies and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) collaborated on the North Capitol Street Cloverleaf Feasibility Study, which explored alternative intersection configurations for the cloverleaf intersection of North Capitol and Irving Streets. The District Department of Transportation’s (DDOT) 2016 Crosstown Multimodal Transportation Study recommends capital and operational improvements for multimodal east-west travel through the District, further encouraging the removal or reconfiguration of the cloverleaf intersection. The study highlights capacity upgrades needed for current and future transit service across the District while identifying multimodal infrastructure improvements that can impact urban design considerations of the ARFH and Washington Hospital Complex sites as they expand and redevelop. Building on these initiatives, OP launched the North Capitol Crossroads project in 2019 to develop a broader planning framework for the North Capitol Street, Irving Street, and Michigan Avenue NW corridors.

2215.8 Policy RCE-2.5.1: AFRH Redevelopment

Future private-use redevelopment at AFRH should create a new, well-integrated mixed-use neighborhood that can contribute to the vibrancy of Washington, DC and help the District meet major priorities such as new housing opportunities for its growing population, including affordable housing; new commercial and retail spaces that generate new jobs; and supportive infrastructure for multimodal transportation.

2215.9 Policy RCE-2.5.2: Reintegrating AFRH into the District

Private-use redevelopment of AFRH should physically engage with the District and invite people into the site, where possible. Develop a neighborhood that is designed to prioritize transit, walking, and bicycling, compatible with recommendations in the Crosstown Multimodal Transportation Study. Internal street designs should reflect current best practices and connect with the existing public street network to enhance access along and across Irving and North Capitol Streets NW.

2215.10 Policy RCE-2.5.3: Housing and Community Opportunities

Strongly support a variety of housing types, developed at a range of densities and serving a range of incomes, in the event the AFRH is developed. The opportunity to develop larger units suitable for families on the site should be recognized. Adequate servicing infrastructure and accommodation of necessary public facilities should be provided on-site to the extent feasible to support a successful urban neighborhood.

2215.11 Policy RCE-2.5.4: Resource Preservation

To the extent possible, and compatible with its new uses, preserve panoramic views, historic landmarks, and important historic landscapes on the AFRH site. The historic links between this site and adjacent land at the McMillan Sand Filtration site and the 49-acre property acquired by Catholic University should be reflected in its design and planning.

2215.12 Policy RCE-2.5.5: Sustainable and Resilient AFRH

Ambitious energy efficiency goals should be set for private-use redevelopment, exploring the potential for on-site energy production and distribution. AFRH redevelopment should actively manage area flooding by maximizing stormwater retention on-site through low-impact development techniques.

2215.13 Policy RCE-2.5.6: Open Space at AFRH

Encourage the designation of a substantial portion of the AFRH as open space and public parkland as the site is made available for reuse, particularly on the western perimeter of the site where it abuts residential uses. Design and plan for open space at AFRH to be more accessible as a local and regional public amenity for its natural setting, historic and cultural importance, and recreational offerings. .

2215.14 Policy RCE-2.5.7: Washington Hospital Complex Development

Encourage continued development of the Washington Hospital Complex with hospitals and health care services. Promote land uses that are flexible enough to accommodate the future needs of the facilities while considering the impacts to the surrounding residential areas and the additional impacts to the District’s roadway, infrastructure, and public service resources.

2215.15 Action RCE-2.5.A: AFRH Master Plan Coordination

Coordinate with the AFRH, NCPC, and GSA to amend the AFRH Master Plan with the goal of integrating new private-use development into adjacent neighborhoods and District systems, with a focus on servicing infrastructure, transportation connectivity and capacity, social services, employment opportunities, and new amenities. Site plan review should be carefully coordinated to address potential impacts in compliance with new land use and zoning designations for any private-use redevelopment in the creation of a successful new neighborhood.

2215.16 Action RCE-2.5.B: North Capitol Crossroads Planning

Coordinate with hospital operators on the Washington Hospital Complex, AFRH, Catholic University, adjacent neighborhoods, and other institutional, federal, and community stakeholders to ensure that necessary facility expansions and large site redevelopments contribute to a coordinated plan that leverages the opportunity to improve multimodal mobility, open up publicly accessible green space, convert historic assets into new amenities, and provide new housing options to meet Washington, DC’s growing demand.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2216** RCE-2.6 RIGGS ROAD AND SOUTH DAKOTA AVENUE {#sec-10-a2216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2216}

2216.1 The area surrounding the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue NE intersection was historically part of the Civil War defense of Washington, DC, with nearby Fort Totten and Fort Slocum preserved as open spaces by the NPS. The broader area is characterized by residential neighborhoods with pockets of commercial and industrial land uses at the intersection and along the adjacent rail tracks. Despite ample parks, schools, proximity to the Fort Totten Metro station, and other public amenities, the area has had poor pedestrian facilities and circulation.

2216.2 The Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area Development Plan was initiated in 2006 to revitalize the commercial and residential properties within a quarter-mile radius of the intersection, many of which were underutilized and vacant. Approved by the D.C. Council in 2009, the plan recommends a transit-oriented development strategy with increased densities and heights for six opportunity sites, with corresponding design guidelines for each. Implementing the plan’s vision will expand housing, transportation, retail, and service choices in an amenity-rich, walkable neighborhood.

2216.3 Policy RCE-2.6.1: Neighborhood Center

Establish a dynamic neighborhood center at Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue NE that enhances community character and reactivates the street.

2216.4 Policy RCE-2.6.2: Development for an Inter-generational Community

Attract development that leverages proximity to public transit, encourages pedestrian activity, and provides new mixed-income housing that serves all generations.

2216.5 Policy RCE-2.6.3: Open Spaces

Connect, activate, and create new open spaces and recreational opportunities in the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area through redevelopment while improving the safety, maintenance, and quality of existing parks.

2216.6 Policy RCE-2.6.4: Access and Circulation

Promote safe access and circulation throughout the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue NE neighborhood, especially to Fort Totten Metro Station, with a well-lit and connected sidewalk network.

2216.7 Action RCE-2.6.A: Housing Opportunities

Provide housing opportunities in the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue area for a mix of incomes, with an emphasis on older adults and home ownership.

2216.8 Action RCE-2.6.B: Parking Coordination

Engage WMATA, DDOT, and neighboring property owners in a discussion regarding innovative parking solutions for Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue NE, including parking pilots, shared parking, and other tools.

2216.9 Action RCE-2.6.C: First Place NE

Develop First Place NE as a multimodal neighborhood-serving corridor with safe and accessible bicycle connections.

2216.10 Action RCE-2.6.D: Parks and Open Space

Provide publicly accessible pocket parks, active recreation, and/or green space in the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area where appropriate in new development, with resident input. The sites on the west side of South Dakota Avenue NE should be targeted to include innovative green and open space amenities within any proposed development concept.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2217** RCE-2.7 CENTRAL 14TH STREET NW {#sec-10-a2217 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2217}

2217.1 The segment of 14th Street NW from Spring Street to Longfellow Street NW has a 100-year history of planned settlement. The 14th Street streetcar extension in the early 20th century played a major role in the growth and development of the surrounding neighborhoods, whose physical legacy is reflected by the turn-around at Colorado Avenue NW and the car barn (now bus barn) at Decatur Street NW. The streetcar line supported early commercial buildings, which clustered into bustling nodes along the corridor by the mid-20th century. Population decreased from the 1970s, but the corridor has experienced a new transformation, with increased private interest and investment accompanying a rebound in population since 2000.

2217.2 The Central 14th Street Vision Plan and Revitalization Strategy was approved by the D.C. Council in 2012 following a planning process that involved extensive community outreach, including input from both residents and merchants and the formation of an Advisory Committee. With three distinctive commercial nodes along the corridor, the Central 14th Street Plan sets forth a vision for a vibrant and eclectic mix of residential and commercial development that reflects the neighborhood’s cultural heritage, offers unique shopping destinations, and is enriched with green public spaces.

2217.3 Policy RCE-2.7.1: Central 14th Street NW Nodal Development

Support the nodal redevelopment opportunities of 14th Street NW:

Southernmost Node One (Spring to Shepherd Streets NW) can leverage the development activity and streetscape identity of neighboring Columbia Heights.

Intermediary Node Two (Webster to Decatur Streets NW) can become a neighborhood-serving retail area with potential for additional uses in conjunction with the reconstruction of the existing bus barn.

Northernmost Node Three (Jefferson to Longfellow Streets NW) can be repositioned to attract creative arts uses with an enhanced public space.

2217.4 Policy RCE-2.7.2: Public Realm

Improve the aesthetics of the Central 14th Street corridor, as well as pedestrian safety and connectivity.

2217.5 Policy RCE-2.7.3: Mobility

Improve multimodal options along the Central 14th Street corridor while increasing the efficiency of parking systems.

2217.6 Policy RCE-2.7.4: Small Business Opportunities

Strengthen opportunities for existing and new small businesses along the Central 14th Street corridor and enhance their marketing and advertising to increase neighborhood patronage.

2217.7 Action RCE-2.7.A: Land Use Change

Encourage moderate-density, mixed-use commercial uses for properties, where appropriate, along 14th Street NW and Arkansas Avenue NW between Webster and Decatur Streets NW to support mixed-use redevelopment of commercial properties.

2217.8 Action RCE-2.7.B: Public Realm

Enhance the Central 14th Street corridor with sustainable streetscape amenities, expanded tree canopy, interpretive signs at each of the commercial nodes reflecting the history and culture of 14th Street NW, and a reconfigured island park at the intersection of 14th Street, Colorado Avenue, and Kennedy Street NW.

2217.9 Action RCE-2.7.C: Bus Transit

Enhance WMATA bus service along 14th Street NW to address customer concerns and efficiency in scheduling, and determine future improvements to transit operations and management as necessary.

2217.10 Action RCE-2.7.D: Parking

Consider more efficient curbside management along the Central 14th Street corridor and explore shared parking opportunities in underutilized parking lots (e.g., the DSK Mariam Church) to increase foot traffic and activate sidewalks.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2218** RCE-2.8 FORMER WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER SITE {#sec-10-a2218 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2218}

2218.1 For over 100 years, WRAMC housed the main U.S. Army General Hospital that served wounded soldiers and veterans. In addition to establishing a strong legacy of service and medical innovation that achieved an international reputation, WRAMC was a major center of employment in the Rock Creek East area for several decades. The beautiful and architecturally significant 110-acre campus is bounded by Fern Street and Alaska Avenue NW to the north, 16th Street NW to the west, Aspen Street NW to the south, and Georgia Avenue NW to the west.

2218.2 In 2005, the site was identified for closure through the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) law, and all employees, services, and programs vacated the site and moved to other existing and/or planned facilities in 2011. In 2009, the federal government declared a 67.5-acre surplus at the former Army hospital, thereby making portions of it available to a Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for redevelopment. Since 2009, the redevelopment process, supported by significant community and stakeholder engagement, has progressed through several milestones that meet both federal and local requirements, as well as community needs. Stewarded by the LRA, along with critical community input, the planning process produced a Reuse Plan to comply with federal requirements. Concurrently, the Walter Reed Army Medical Center Small Area Plan, approved by the D.C. Council in 2012, was developed in conjunction with the community to satisfy local requirements for land use and zoning, including urban design guidelines that complement the vision laid out in the Reuse Plan. The District government selected a master developer team in 2013, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) approved the Reuse Plan in 2014. In 2016, the U.S. Army transferred 66.57 acres of the site to Washington, DC, while the remaining 43 acres of the site are to be used by Children’s National Research and Innovation Campus and for federal purposes, including by the Department of State (DOS) for foreign missions.

2218.3 The Small Area Plan’s vision to honor Walter Reed’s legacy as a center for innovation and excellence is set forth through four goals: to integrate the site with the community; provide a mix of uses; create jobs and revenue for Washington, DC; and activate the site. The plan provides for 3.1 million square feet of development, accommodating 1,950 residential units, and 14 acres of open space. Seven site-wide urban design principles were established in the plan: maintain the site character; retain historic Building 1 as the core; enhance open space; preserve historic elements; extend the street network; create vibrant, multimodal corridors; and integrate sustainable strategies.

2218.4 Policy RCE-2.8.1: Walter Reed Site Character

Maintain the existing Walter Reed site character of five identified east-west bands, each different in spatial and formal character.

2218.5 Policy RCE-2.8:2: Walter Reed Building 1

Retain the Walter Reed site’s Building 1 as the core of the site, reinforced with open spaces along the north-south axis and views terminating at its historic façade up and down 13th Street NW.

2218.6 Policy RCE-2.8.3: Walter Reed Open Space

Preserve and enhance the Walter Reed site’s historic green open spaces with healthy mature tree canopies to help integrate the site with surrounding neighborhoods. Incorporate naturalized stormwater management systems, urban agriculture, and recreation to showcase innovative sustainable development in Washington, DC.

2218.7 Policy RCE-2.8.4: Historic Elements

Celebrate Walter Reed’s legacy through preservation and reuse of existing buildings and landscapes of historic significance on the former campus.

2218.8 Policy RCE-2.8.5: Multimodal Street Network

Re-integrate the Walter Reed site back into the District’s transportation fabric by extending existing streets into the site to create new, multimodal, north-south and east-west connections. New access points to and through the Walter Reed site will provide visual and physical access to buildings and landscapes, helping to establish a sense of place on all streets in the network.

2218.9 Policy RCE-2.8.6: Sustainability

Incorporate strategies to achieve the sustainability goals in the Walter Reed Small Area Plan and Reuse Plan as part of the redevelopment of the former Walter Reed campus. Sustainability strategies should address sustainable energy systems, building design, transportation, waste management, storm and sewer infrastructure, and community outreach and education.

2218.10 Action RCE-2.8.A: Land Use and Zoning

Establish appropriate land uses for the Walter Reed site pursuant to the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations map in the Walter Reed Small Area Plan.

2218.11 Action RCE-2.8.B: Interim Activation

Implement interim uses to activate the former Walter Reed site in advance of major construction and rehabilitation projects.

2218.12 Action RCE-2.8.C: Aspen Street NW

Widen Aspen Street NW along the southern border of the former Walter Reed campus between 16th Street and Georgia Avenue NW to accommodate one travel lane, a dedicated five-foot bike lane in each direction, on-street parking, and the addition of sidewalks.

2218.13 Action RCE-2.8.D: Transportation Demand Management

Create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan and implement TDM measures for the former Walter Reed site, with a designated TDM coordinator to monitor the program and determine additional TDM measures on an annual basis.

### **10-A23** ROCK CREEK WEST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 2300** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2300}

2300.1 The Rock Creek West Planning Area encompasses 13 square miles in the northwest quadrant of Washington, DC. The Planning Area is bounded by Rock Creek to the east, Maryland to the north/west, and the Potomac River and Whitehaven Parkway to the south. Its boundaries are shown in the map at left. Most of this area has historically been Ward 3, but in past and present times, some parts have been included in Wards 1, 2, and 4.

2300.2 Rock Creek West’s most outstanding characteristic is its high-opportunity, attractive neighborhoods. These include predominantly single-family neighborhoods, such as Spring Valley, Forest Hills, American University Park, and Palisades; row house and garden apartment neighborhoods like Glover Park and McLean Gardens; and mixed-density neighborhoods such as Woodley Park, Chevy Chase, and Cleveland Park.

2300.3 Some of Washington, DC’s most important natural and cultural resources are located in Rock Creek West. These resources include Rock Creek Park, the National Zoo, Glover Archbold Park, Battery Kemble Park, and Fort Reno Park, as well as numerous smaller parks and playgrounds. Many of these areas serve as resources for the entire city. Cultural resources include the Washington National Cathedral, American University, the University of the District of Columbia, Howard Law School, and George Washington University’s Mt. Vernon Campus; numerous places of worship; and several museums, including the Kreeger and Hillwood. The neighborhoods themselves are an important cultural resource, with many historic landmarks and several historic districts, such as Cleveland Park, Grant Road, and the Immaculate Seminary. Rock Creek West is also the location of the Naval Observatory and the home of the U.S. Vice President.

2300.4 Despite its residential character, Rock Creek West is also home to a diversity of employment centers, including public and private educational and cultural institutions, local broadcasters, and a large number of foreign missions, including the International Chancery Complex on Van Ness Street. Several large hotels are located in the community, including the Omni Shoreham and Marriott Wardman Park near the Woodley Park Metro station.

2300.5 Vibrant retail districts are located around the area’s Metro stations and along its major corridors. Special zones have been created in three of these areas, allowing a mix of retail uses and retaining a human scale and pedestrian character along neighborhood shopping streets. Much of the commercial land use in the area is located along the Wisconsin and Connecticut Avenue NW corridors in shopping districts like Friendship Heights, Tenleytown, Van Ness, and Cleveland Park. With services and retail serving both the neighborhood and broader region, these mixed-use corridors are commuter thoroughfares that are often congested, minimizing pedestrian safety and comfort.

2300.6 Since the early 2000s, as many neighborhoods across Washington, DC have seen reinvestment and population growth, commercial corridors in Rock Creek West have experienced competition for customers and for new restaurants and retailers. Although Rock Creek West’s commercial corridors can still rely on local assets, such as proximity to busy transit stations, high-opportunity neighborhoods, and well-travelled roadways, some of the Rock Creek West commercial corridors have faced challenges with retaining businesses and competing successfully with other rapidly growing and popular corridors both within Washington, DC and Montgomery County, Maryland. Some commercial strips experiencing challenges in attracting new retailers or customers have relied largely on restaurants to fill out storefronts. Recent mixed-use developments such as Park Van Ness and Cathedral Commons have helped to add new retail and restaurant choices as well as housing and new patrons for local businesses to major corridors such as Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues NW. Main Street organizations in Cleveland Park, Glover Park, Tenleytown, Van Ness, and Woodley Park are working to help attract desired retailers and enliven and improve the public realm.

2300.7 The Rock Creek West area has significant economic potential, leading to past and present concerns about the community impacts of development The combination of a relatively high-income population, transportation options , high-opportunity and attractive neighborhoods, high-quality retail, and a limited supply of vacant land has led to very strong market demand. The desire to thoughtfully guide growth, while trying to preserve neighborhoods, remains a top priority throughout the community and is a major theme of this element.

2300.8 The demand for housing remains consistently strong in Rock Creek West. During the 1980s and 1990s, when Washington, DC was losing residents, neighborhoods west of Rock Creek Park continued to add households. Growth has resulted from a combination of factors, including relatively low crime rates, numerous neighborhood amenities, accessible neighborhood retail, convenient Metrorail (Metro) access, active community organizations, relatively high-performing public schools with strong parental support, and numerous private schools.

2300.9 These same factors have created a continuing affordable housing dilemma in the community. The 2016 median sale price for homes in zip codes west of Rock Creek Park exceeded $975,000. Although there are opportunities for new housing development in the area, there continues to be a substantial unmet need for new affordable units and a need to preserve existing affordable and moderate-income options. Increasing the production of affordable and moderate-income units in Rock Creek West is a priority.

2300.10 Washington, DC has a strong need to preserve and create affordable and moderate-income housing across all Planning Areas. Rock Creek West offers opportunities for creating low- to moderate-income housing units, particularly where available capacity exists under current zoning, such as near Metro stations. As an Area of High Economic Opportunity, as defined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Rock Creek West has a role to play both in preserving its existing stock of affordable housing while providing new mixed-income housing to meet Washington, DC’s fair housing goals.

2300.11 The preservation and improvement of the natural environment is also a high priority in Rock Creek West. The community is fortunate to have one of the densest tree canopies in the District, several community gardens, the Capital Crescent Trail, and more park and open space acreage than any other Planning Area in the city. However, development on the fringes of the parks has caused erosion and diminished water quality and views in some places. The existing tree and slope protections in the zoning code need to be preserved for the foreseeable future.

2300.12 The sense of community in Rock Creek West is reinforced by a particularly active network of neighborhood associations, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), and involved residents. Well-organized citizens associations serve many of the area’s neighborhoods, including AU Park, Chevy Chase, Cleveland Park, Forest Hills, Foxhall, Glover Park, Palisades, Spring Valley, Wesley Heights, Tenleytown, and Woodley Park. A number of historical societies and interest groups are also actively involved in community affairs. Main Street organizations in Cleveland Park, Glover Park, Tenleytown, Van Ness, and Woodley Park are working to help attract desired retailers and enliven and improve the public realm. These groups shape local land use and development decisions, and provide guidance on a wide range of issues relating to transportation, community services, public safety, and other long-range planning concerns.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2301** HISTORY {#sec-10-a2301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2301}

2301.1 The first settlements in Rock Creek West developed along roads connecting the port of Georgetown to the countryside north and west of Washington, DC. One of the first settlements was at the juncture of Georgetown Pike (now Wisconsin Avenue) and River Road, where there was a toll station. John Tennally opened a tavern at the intersection around 1790, giving his name to the area now called Tenleytown. Several large estates were developed in the area during the 1800s, including the estate of Colonel Joseph Belt (named Chevy Chase), Major John Adlum’s 200-acre vineyard in what is now North Cleveland Park, and the Henry Foxhall estate in modern-day Foxhall.

2301.2 The Chesapeake & Ohio (C&O) Canal was completed in 1843, and a parallel road (now MacArthur Boulevard) was constructed to Washington, DC’s water intake facilities at Great Falls. The canal prompted industrial development along the Potomac River and in the Palisades, including a foundry and several slaughterhouses along Canal and Foxhall Roads. The Rock Creek West area developed strategic military importance during the Civil War, when Fort Reno, Fort DeRussy, Fort Bayard, Battery Kemble, and other fortifications were developed.

2301.3 The area remained rural after the Civil War. The Potomac Palisades became popular as a summer retreat for high-earning Washingtonians. Land adjacent to Fort Reno, meanwhile, was occupied by people who had been enslaved and came north in search of homes and land. Their community, dubbed Reno City, remained until the 1930s when the District developed Deal and Wilson schools, and the National Park Service (NPS) developed Fort Reno Reservoir. Another community of persons freed from slavery developed along Chain Bridge Road in the Palisades.

2301.4 Development in the Rock Creek West area began in earnest around 1890. In that year, Senators William Stewart and Francis Newlands founded the Chevy Chase Land Company. The company was responsible for the extension of Connecticut Avenue into Maryland, construction of a trolley line, and the development of the residential community of Chevy Chase. Also in 1890, Congress dedicated 1,700 acres along the Rock Creek Valley as Rock Creek Park, which defined development, transportation, and demographic patterns that would shape the District during the century to come. Other defining moments of the era included the groundbreaking for American University in 1893 and the start of construction on the National Cathedral in 1907.

2301.5 Rapid residential development took place during the early 20th century as the Rock Creek rail line began operating on Connecticut Avenue and electric streetcar lines were extended up Wisconsin Avenue and through the Palisades to Glen Echo. Many of the large estates were subdivided during the 1890s and early 1900s. The country estate of President Grover Cleveland, for example, was developed as the Cleveland Park neighborhood, and much of the land owned by the Methodist church was developed as American University Park. Row house neighborhoods like Woodley Park, Glover Park, and Foxhall Village were also developed during this period. By the 1920s and 1930s, apartment construction was occurring up and down Connecticut Avenue NW, with structures like Cathedral Mansions (built in 1924) and the Kennedy-Warren (built in 1931) defining the avenue’s image as a desirable residential address.

2301.6 During World War II, the federal government razed the country estate of John R. McLean to build wartime housing in what would become McLean Gardens. Specifically, the Defense Home Corporation built a mix of apartment buildings and dormitories for military personnel. After the war, the units were converted to private apartments, and the dormitories were later torn down. The 30-building complex was converted to condominiums in 1980 and houses more than 1,000 residents today.

2301.7 By the 1960s, the land use pattern was well established. Connecticut Avenue NW had apartment buildings interspersed with retail shopping areas. Wisconsin Avenue NW still had expanses of single-family residences, but mid-rise apartment and office buildings were being constructed on some blocks. The development of Metro led to additional development in the 1970s, including the University of the District of Columbia and Mazza Gallerie in Friendship Heights. By the late 1990s, almost all privately owned land in the community had been developed. In spite of this fact, much of Rock Creek West retains a small-town character today. The area’s attractive and architecturally appealing and well-maintained housing stock, tree-lined streets, neighborhood-oriented shopping districts, and well-used parks and public facilities make this one of a highly sought-after part of Washington, DC.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2302** LAND USE {#sec-10-a2302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2302}

2302.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, etc. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart and not actual changes in land use. Land use statistics for the Rock Creek West Planning Area appear in Figure 23.1. The Planning Area comprises about 8,300 acres, or roughly 19 percent of the District. This total includes 7,961 acres of land and 340 acres of water.

2302.2 Residential uses represent the largest single land use in the Planning Area, accounting for about 36 percent of the total. Of the residential acreage, 77 percent is developed with single-family detached homes. About 13 percent is developed with semi-detached homes, row houses, and other attached single-family housing. The remaining 10 percent is developed with multi-family apartments and condominiums. Higher density housing is concentrated along the Connecticut Avenue corridor, along Massachusetts Avenue NW between Ward Circle and Idaho Avenue NW, and along Lower Wisconsin Avenue NW. Densities in most of the area are well below the District-wide total, although individual blocks along the avenues contain some of the densest housing in Washington, DC.

2302.3 Commercial land uses occupy just two percent of the area. Major commercial centers are located around the five Metro stations, in walkable shopping districts along the avenues, and in neighborhood shopping centers like Spring Valley. Institutional uses make up about four percent of the land area. These uses include American University, Sibley Hospital, and the campuses of numerous private schools and religious institutions. There are no industrial uses in Rock Creek West.

2302.4 Parks, recreation, and open space comprise 28 percent of the Planning Area. The majority of this acreage is owned by NPS, including Rock Creek Park, the national parklands along the Potomac River, and Glover Archbold Park. Transportation rights-of-way represent about 23 percent of the Planning Area, which is somewhat lower than the District-wide total. Federal government facilities comprise about 3.5 percent of the land area. A majority of this acreage is contained within federal complexes such as the Naval Security Center and the Naval Observatory. Only 1.8 percent of the Planning Area consists of private, undeveloped land.

2302.5 Figure 23.1: Land Use Composition in Rock Creek West

##### **10-A DCMR § 2303** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a2303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2303}

2303.1 Basic demographic data for the Rock Creek West Planning Area is shown in Figure 23.2. Compared to other areas in the District, Rock Creek West experienced only a modest population growth of nearly 8,500 people between 2000 and 2017. The 2017 population was estimated at 92,399, or about 14 percent of the District’s total.

2303.2 Compared to other areas of the District, Rock Creek West is less racially diverse and has an older population. Approximately 80.6 percent of the area’s residents are white, which is significantly higher than the District-wide total of 40.7 percent. Only 6.9 percent of the area’s residents are Black, and only 11.2 percent are of Hispanic/Latino origin. The area has a higher percentage of Asian residents than the District as a whole (6.4 percent compared to 3.8 percent). Nearly 19 percent of the residents are foreign born, which is substantially higher than the District-wide total of 14 percent. The area also has a lower percentage of children and a higher percentage of older adults relative to the District as a whole. While 17 percent of the residents are under 18, this was an increase from 12.8 percent in 2000, compared to a District-wide total of 17.5 percent, which has decreased. About 17.2 percent are over 65, compared to 11.9 percent District-wide. The percentage of older adults has increased since 2000 , when it was 15.1 percent.

2303.3 Figure 23.2: Rock Creek West at a Glance

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

83,940

86,816

92,399

99,786

106,261

113,151

Households

41,085

41,610

41,061

45,251

46,807

48,814

Household Population

77,337

82,042

87,811

94,538

100,994

107,855

Persons Per Household

1.88

1.97

2.14

2.09

2.16

2.21

Jobs

47,899

45,909

49,211

51,712

53,769

55,444

Density (persons per sq mile)

6,715

6,945

7,392

7,983

8,501

9,052

Land Area (square miles)

12.5

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

10,724

60,558

27,053

33,505

12,658

12.8%

72.1%

32.2%

39.9%

15.1%

15,747

60,730

26,131

34,599

15,922

17.0%

65.7%

28.3%

37.4%

17.2%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

5,829

6.9%

7,320

8.3%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

70,132

5,401

197

4,398

1,746

2,246

83.4%

6.4%

0.2%

5.2%

2.1%

2.7%

74,435

6,407

184

5,931

1,747

3,694

80.6%

6.9%

0.2%

6.4%

1.9%

4.0%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

5,397

6.4%

10,380

11.2%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

15,804

18.8%

17,498

18.9%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

21,488

19,784

52.1%

47.9%

23,148

17,913

56.4%

43.6%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

25,954

1,922

93.1%

6.9%

41,061

3,052

93.1%

6.9%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

12,866

4,511

1,238

1,631

1,346

21,306

30.3%

10.5%

2.9%

3.8%

3.1%

49.6%

0.1%

12,917

4,956

916

1,551

1,314

22,441

29.3%

11.2%

2.1%

3.5%

3.0%

50.9%

0.0%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2304** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a2304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2304}

2304.1 In 2017, 29.3 percent of the housing units in Rock Creek West were single-family detached homes, and 11.2 percent were single-family (one-unit) attached homes (row houses, semi-detached homes, and townhouses). The percent of single-family detached housing is more than twice the District-wide percentage, but the percent of one-unit attached housing is less than half of what it is District-wide (which is 25.1 percent) . At the same time, the Planning Area also contains a significantly higher percentage of units in large multi-family buildings compared to the District as a whole. A slim majority, 50.9 percent, of the housing units in Rock Creek West are contained in multi-family buildings of 20 units of more, compared to 35.4 percent District-wide.

2304.2 In 2017, 56.4 percent of the households in the Planning Area were homeowners and 43.6 percent were renters. This compares to District-wide figures of 41.7 percent and 58.3 percent, respectively. The percentage of homeowners in the Planning Area has been increasing, whereas renters have been decreasing since 2000. The percentage of vacant housing units in the Planning Area was 6.9 percent in 2017 compared to a District-wide total of 9.8 percent.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2305** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a2305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2305}

2305.1 Data from the District Department of Employment Services (DOES) and the Office of Planning (OP) indicates that there were 48,684 jobs in Rock Creek West in 2015, primarily in professional offices, international organizations, local-serving businesses, public schools, universities, and government. This represents approximately 6.1 percent of the District’s job base, with nearly no net increase in employment in the Planning Area.

2305.2 The Rock Creek West Planning Area has the highest median income of any Planning Area in Washington, DC. In 2017, the median was $131,394, compared to a District-wide median of $76,649. The area’s high median incomes benefit the District by significantly contributing to the tax base while requiring a lower level of publicly subsidized services. Nonetheless, 8.3 percent of the area’s residents lived below the federal poverty level in 2017, well below the District-wide total of 17.4 percent. Many of the residents below the poverty level were older adults with special housing and transportation needs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2306** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a2306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2306}

2306.1 Given its largely built-out land area, Rock Creek West is projected to be among the slowest growing areas of Washington, DC over the next 30 years. About 7,000 additional households are forecast for the 2017-2045 period, increasing from 41,061 to approximately 48,100 in 2045. The population of the area is expected to increase from 92,399 in 2017 to 113,151 by 2045. Most of the growth is expected to consist of multi-family housing in mixed-use projects along the avenues.

2306.2 The number of jobs is expected to increase from about 48,684 in 2015 to 55,444 in 2045 . Most of this increase is likely to take place near Metro stations as additional retail and local-serving office development occurs.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2307** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a2307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2307}

2307.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

2307.2 Three large Comprehensive Plan workshops took place in Rock Creek West during 2005 and 2006. These meetings provided a chance for residents and local businesses to discuss both District-wide and neighborhood planning issues. Many smaller meetings on the Comprehensive Plan also took place in the community, including briefings and workshops with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and neighborhood organizations.

2307.3 There have also been many meetings in the community not directly connected to the Comprehensive Plan, but focused on related long-range planning issues. These meetings have covered topics such as the future development of Upper Wisconsin Avenue NW, streetscape improvements along the Glover Park commercial corridor, and proposals for individual properties.

2307.4 The community delivered several key messages during these meetings, summarized below:

Residents of the Rock Creek West Planning Area remain deeply concerned about growth. While there is support for development on underutilized sites along the major corridors, issues of height, scale, character, and density remain a source of concern, as well as a source of debate within the community. The relatively low-density commercial zoning on most of the corridors has not provided the predictability that many residents seek. The reliance on planned unit developments (PUDs) has brought neighborhood amenities but has also resulted in density bonuses that are beyond what many residents find acceptable. The potential impact of density increases on schools, emergency response and safety, infrastructure, traffic, parking, environmental health, and neighborhood character led residents to conclude that the only acceptable growth rate is one that matches infrastructure capacity.

Rock Creek West has the unique characteristic of containing some of Washington, DC’s most dense and least dense neighborhoods, some of which are located next to each other. Along parts of Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues NW, multi-story apartment buildings abut single-family homes along rear lot lines. These uses successfully coexist in part because of the significant buffering effects of open space, parking lots, alleys, mature trees and shrubbery, changes in topography, and other screening and site planning measures. Neighborhoods seek assurances that existing buffers will be maintained and that additional buffers, setbacks, and a stepping down in building heights will be provided, if and when, infill development occurs along the corridors.

Like the rest of the District, Rock Creek West is facing a lack of affordable housing. Home prices here are the highest in Washington, DC and many residents could not afford the homes they live in now if they were first-time buyers today. The conversion of formerly modest apartments to upscale condominiums has created a burden for low- and moderate-income renters, older adults, and workers just entering the job market. On the other hand, these conversions have provided a more affordable alternative to individuals and families who would otherwise have been priced out of the community entirely. There is broad support for requirements to include affordable or moderate-income housing units within new market-rate projects, but the prospect of density bonuses and other zoning flexibility in exchange for these units continues to raise objections. While there is support for development on underutilized sites along the major corridors, issues of height, scale, character, and density remain a source of concern as well, as a source of debate within the community.

A wider variety of retail choices is needed in some parts of the Planning Area. It was acknowledged that the area does not need public action or the involvement of nonprofit community development corporations to attract retail in the same way that other parts of the District do. However, some neighborhoods still lack the range of goods and services needed to support the basic needs of local residents. High costs have had a negative effect on some of the area’s small businesses, leading to a loss of small businesses and family-owned neighborhood institutions. The community continues to favor neighborhood-serving retail rather than office space along the corridors, both to meet community needs and to avoid uses that would generate commuter traffic.

Some of the Planning Area’s commercial streets lack the vibrancy of other pedestrian-oriented neighborhood shopping streets. Recent efforts to renovate existing commercial buildings in Friendship Heights have generally been well-received and created a more vibrant pedestrian environment. There is support for development that emphasizes walkability over auto-orientation, provided that height, scale, parking, infrastructure capacity, and other issues can be reconciled.

Traffic congestion and pedestrian safety are also problematic. The radial street pattern results in very high volumes along major corridors, particularly Connecticut, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and Western Avenues NW, MacArthur Boulevard NW, and Military, River, and Canal Roads NW. Local trips combined with commuter traffic to and from the Maryland suburbs and I-495, push many intersections beyond their capacities. As is the case in many parts of the District, major arterials are at Level of Service D or E during peak hours, with stop and go traffic. The prior Ward Plan for this area suggested that traffic be restored to Level of Service B or C, yet such conditions cannot be attained without massive road reconstruction and removal of major trip generators. This is neither a realistic nor desirable solution. Consequently, more integrated solutions to traffic control, including bus improvements, bicycle improvements, transportation demand management programs for new development, and more efficient use of existing roadways (such as synchronized traffic signals), are needed.

Parking is also an issue. On-street parking has been removed in some locations to facilitate traffic flow, which has exacerbated parking needs on side streets. Residential permit parking has helped, but additional parking management measures are needed. Some residents have suggested municipal parking garages. Others have called for limits on development as a way to control parking demand. Still others have suggested that developers build more parking spaces than are required by law, or that the District limit the issuance of residential parking permits. There are pros and cons to these options. One downside of building more parking garages is that they may attract more non-local traffic to the area, particularly near Metro stations.

The community’s public facilities are experiencing the strains of age and increased demand. While enrollment has fallen at DC Public Schools (DCPS) in other parts of Washington, DC, many of the schools in Rock Creek West are over capacity. Some of these schools are experiencing physical deterioration and are in need of modernization. There continue to be concerns about fire and rescue services, and the difficulties associated with renovating historic fire stations to modern standards. The projected addition of nearly 3,000 households in Rock Creek West by 2025 will likely mean that additional fire and emergency management services may be needed, and that library services may need to be expanded. Some of the recreation centers in the area are lacking the amenities found in other parts of the District or are insufficient. The planned new recreation center at Stoddert will provide a much needed facility not only for the community, but for children at Stoddert Elementary.

The character of new development is an issue, particularly as more smaller homes are expanded or torn down and replaced with larger homes. While many decry tear downs and mansionization, others believe the District should not overly restrict the scale or design of new homes. Communities like the Palisades expressed interest in the conservation district concept to preserve neighborhood identity without regulating each detailed aspect of architectural design. Related issues confront the older apartment buildings along Connecticut Avenue and some of the historic estates in the community. These properties may have the capacity for additional development under zoning, but such development could reduce the integrity of the sites or structures and compromise the features that allow them to coexist so well with adjoining single-family homes.

The preservation of the natural environment and improvement of environmental health remain top priorities. Like the rest of the District, Rock Creek West includes areas where storm sewers and sanitary sewers are combined, leading to sewage overflow problems during heavy rains. Tree removal and development on steep slopes in areas such as the Palisades and Forest Hills causes erosion, despite tree and slope protections in the zoning regulations. Spring Valley continues to contend with the effects of discarded chemicals and munitions from World War I-era weapons testing. Residents in the westernmost part of the Planning Area are concerned about proposed dewatering facilities at Dalecarlia Reservoir, while those in Tenleytown are concerned about the health effects of communication antennas. Residents in Friendship Heights continue to be concerned about emissions and ground pollutants from the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA) Western Bus Garage. Along major corridors throughout the Planning Area, residents contend with air and noise pollution due to cut-through traffic and idling vehicles.

Esthetic improvements are needed along some of the area’s roadways to become the gracious gateways to the nation’s capital they were intended to be. In other areas, aesthetic qualities already exist, and should be preserved from future degradation. This is true on roads traversing national parklands such as Canal Road NW, Dalecarlia Parkway, and Rock Creek Parkway.

There are far fewer community-based residential facilities (CBRFs) in Rock Creek West than other parts of Washington, DC. There is support in the community for scattering small-scale shelters for persons experiencing homelessness (especially in places of worship), providing social service facilities on the commercial corridors, and accepting small community residence facilities within single-family neighborhoods.

Institutional uses, including private schools, nonprofits, large nursing homes, colleges, hospitals, and religious establishments, are part of the fabric of the Rock Creek West community. In fact, they comprise almost 660 acres in the Planning Area, almost one-third of the District-wide total. Local institutions provide resources for local families and include some of the most architecturally distinctive buildings in the community. Many of these facilities have structures that do not conform to the underlying zoning. In some instances, tensions have arisen between institutions and surrounding neighbors due to noise, parking, traffic, and other issues. Pursuant to the District’s zoning regulations, the compatibility of these uses should be maintained, their expansion carefully controlled, and conversion to other non-conforming uses avoided. Solutions to traffic, parking, and other issues should continue to be developed so that the quality of life in surrounding neighborhoods is not diminished.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2308** RCW-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a2308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2308}

2308.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Rock Creek West. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

2308.2 Policy RCW-1.1.1: Neighborhood Conservation

Preserve the low-density residential neighborhoods west of Rock Creek Park . Future development in both residential and commercial areas should be carefully managed to address the existing scale, function, and character of these neighborhoods. Updates to zoning regulations offer the opportunity to create more accessory dwelling units for this area to help absorb a share of the District’s growth and provide a more proportional portion of affordable and moderate-income housing sensitive to existing neighborhood context.

2308.3 Policy RCW-1.1.2: Economic Development

Given the strength of the private market within Rock Creek West, carefully consider public-private partnerships that provide public space and community amenities and support additional mixed-use development in the area.

2308.4 Policy RCW-1.1.3: Conserving Neighborhood Commercial Centers

Support and sustain local retail uses and small businesses in the area’s neighborhood commercial centers as outlined in the Generalized Policy Map. Compatible new uses such as multi-family housing or neighborhood-serving office space (above local-serving ground-floor retail uses) should be considered within the area’s commercial centers to meet affordable and moderate-income housing needs, provide transit-oriented development, and sustain existing and new neighborhood-serving retail and small businesses.

2308.5 Policy RCW-1.1.4: Infill Development

Recognize the opportunity for infill development within the areas designated for commercial land use on the Future Land Use Map. When such development is proposed, work with ANCs, residents, and community organizations to encourage mixed-use projects that combine housing, including affordable housing, neighborhood-serving retail, and commercial uses. s. Design transitions between large- and small-scale development to ameliorate the appearance of overwhelming scale and to relate to context of lower-scale surrounding neighborhoods.

2308.6 Policy RCW-1.1.5: Preference for Local-Serving Retail

Support new commercial development in the Planning Area that provides the range of goods and services necessary to meet the needs of local residents. Such uses are preferable to the development of new larger-scale or bigbox retail uses that serve a regional market. Destination retail uses are not appropriate in smaller-scale commercial areas, especially those without Metro access. Regardless of scale, retail development should be planned and designed to mitigate traffic, parking, and other impacts on adjacent residential areas.

2308.7 Policy RCW-1.1.6: Metro Station Areas

Recognize the importance of the area’s five Metro stations to the land use pattern and transportation network of Northwest Washington and Washington, DC as a whole. Each station should be treated as a unique place and an integral part of the neighborhood around it. Mixed-use redevelopment at the area’s Metro stations should prioritize the production of affordable and moderate-income housing and retail uses in a manner consistent with the Future Land Use Map, the Generalized Policy Map, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Design context-specific transitions to be more aesthetically pleasing from development along the avenues to nearby low-scale neighborhoods.

2308.8 Policy RCW-1.1.7: Housing for Older Adults and Persons with Disabilities

Maintain and increase housing for older adults and persons with disabilities, especially along the major transportation and commercial corridors of Wisconsin and Connecticut Avenues NW.

2308.9 Policy RCW-1.1.8: Managing Institutional Land Uses

Institutional land uses in the Rock Creek West Planning Area should be harmonious with surrounding uses, and potential adverse effects on neighboring properties should be minimized when institutions seek expansion. Redevelopment of institutional land should be compatible with the physical character of the community, the changing nature of the District, and not inconsistent with provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the underlying zoning rules and regulations. Densities and intensities of any future development on such sites should reflect input from the local community, accommodating student housing on campuses and future infrastructure needs.

See the Land Use Element for policies on the expansion of institutional uses and the neighborhood impacts of private schools and other institutional uses.

2308.10 Policy RCW-1.1.9: Conserving Common Open Space

Conserve the large areas of green space and interior open spaces that are common in and around the community’s institutional uses and its older apartment buildings. Where these open spaces are recognized to contribute to the integrity of the site or structure, consideration should be given to reconcile infill with these open spaces.

2308.11 Policy RCW-1.1.10: Conservation of Historic Estates

Conserve the historic estates in the neighborhoods west of Rock Creek Park, including those that are formally landmarked and those that may be eligible for landmark status. Encourage the future use of these sites to be compatible with their landmark status and protect the integrity of their architectural and landscape design. As development and repurposing of these sites does occur, it should be sensitive to surrounding natural areas and not harm historic resources on the site. The use of conservation easements to conserve open spaces on these properties should be considered.

2308.12 Policy RCW-1.1.11: Managing Transportation Demand

Support the implementation of transportation demand management programs and other measures to more efficiently use the area’s road network by reducing the volume of vehicle trips generated by new developments. Encourage new developments to provide multimodal transportation options and implement traffic calming to reduce development impacts on surrounding neighborhoods.

2308.13 Policy RCW-1.1.12: Reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle Trips

Encourage land use decisions that support multimodal transportation options including walking, biking, and transit use in areas such as the Friendship Heights, Tenleytown, and Connecticut/Van Ness Metro stations to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. When planned unit developments (PUDs) are proposed in these areas, site design and mitigation measures should prioritize non-automobile modes. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities, enhanced transit stops, and carsharing services should be integrated into site designs , in addition to measures addressing passenger, delivery, and service vehicles.

Please consult the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for policies on traffic levels of service and transportation demand management programs.

2308.14 Policy RCW-1.1.13: Parking

Support parking management strategies to encourage multimodal options for accessing the area’s residential and commercial districts.

2308.15 Policy RCW-1.1.14: Bicycle Facilities

Implement moveDC and livability studies to improve facilities for bicyclists, including adding bike lanes and bikeshare stations, where feasible, , along Connecticut, Wisconsin, and Massachusetts Avenues, along MacArthur Boulevard, along Calvert and Abermarle Streets, Broad Branch Road NW (to Rock Creek Park), and at each of the Metro stations.

2308.16 Policy RCW-1.1.15: Metrorail Access

Prioritize pedestrian, bicycle, and bus access to the five Metro station areas, and improve their visual and urban design qualities. Space for carshare and rideshare vehicles should be provided near the stations where feasible to reduce parking congestion in neighborhoods and to encourage alternatives to vehicle ownership.

2308.17 Action RCW-1.1.A: Commercial Zoning Assessment

Conduct an evaluation of commercial zoning designations throughout the Rock Creek West Planning Area. Consider the creation of additional neighborhood commercial zones at the Van Ness-UDC, Tenleytown, and Friendship Heights Metro stations, and at neighborhood commercial centers and Main Streets throughout the area. Such zones should promote pedestrian-oriented development and be responsive to community concerns about building height, buffers, and transitions between uses, while promoting locally owned businesses and mixed-use development.

2308.18 Action RCW-1.1.B: Traffic Flow Improvements

Conduct and implement transportation and livability studies for the area’s major corridors to identify possible traffic flow and safety improvements. These studies should also identify improvements to diminish cut-through traffic, reduce speeding, and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety on local streets, especially in residential areas adjacent to Wisconsin Avenue, Connecticut Avenue, Western Avenue, River Road and Military Road NW.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2309** RCW-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a2309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2309}

2309.1 Policy RCW-1.2.1: Urban Design Focus

Focus urban design efforts in the Rock Creek West Planning Area on its commercial centers and major avenues, historic landmarks, historic districts, and areas with significant environmental and topographical features.

See the Urban Design Element for policies on preserving and enhancing architectural character, including guidelines for height, scale, massing, setbacks, and materials.

2309.2 Policy RCW-1.2.2: Scenic Resource Conservation

Conserve the important scenic and visual resources of Rock Creek West, including:

Views from Fort Reno National Park, which is the highest point of land in the city and a place of historic significance;

The Potomac Palisades, which should be preserved as a low-density, wooded area above the Potomac River and C&O Canal, with future improvements along the river limited to passive open space, trails, and natural parkland;

Dalecarlia Reservoir, which is environmentally important because of its large land area and proximity to the Potomac River;

The US Naval Observatory Grounds, which contain abundant woodlands, are proximate to parkland, and are vulnerable to light and heat pollution;

Stream valleys, including Battery Kemble Park, Rock Creek Park and its tributaries, and Glover Archbold Park;

Neighborhoods developed on hilly terrain on or near stream valleys, such as Chain Bridge Road/University Terrace, Barnaby Woods, Forest Hills, Hawthorne, Spring Valley, and Woodland-Normanstone; and

The Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, including Battery Kemble Park, Fort Bayard Park, and Whitehaven Parkway.

2309.3 Any future development adjacent to these areas should be designed to respect and maintain their park-like settings and conserve their environmental quality.

2309.4 Policy RCW-1.2.3: NPS Areas

Conserve and improve the more than 2,000 acres of natural open space in the forested neighborhoods that lie between the Potomac River and Rock Creek Park, including Battery Kemble Park, Glover Archbold Park, the Potomac National Heritage Scenic Area, and the Fort Circle Parks. Support efforts to restore water quality and improve natural habitat, along with capital improvements to enhance trails and provide appropriate recreational features.

2309.5 Policy RCW-1.2.4: Cultural and Visitor Attractions

Preserve and enhance the cultural and visitor attractions west of Rock Creek Park, including the National Cathedral, the C&O Canal, the Capital Crescent Trail, Peirce Mill, the Hillwood Estate, and the National Zoo. Encourage broader recognition of other attractions in the area, such as the Naval Observatory and the Fort Circle Parks. Ensure that visitor activity can blend positively with quality of life for nearby residents. Implement and maintain traffic routing, transportation and parking management plans, and reasonable visitation hours.

2309.6 Policy RCW-1.2.5: Historic Resources

Conserve the important historic resources of the neighborhoods west of Rock Creek that are identified in the DC Inventory of Historic Sites, the sites of significance inventoried in the Historic Resources Survey conducted by the DC Historic Preservation Office, the Tenleytown Historical Society, and NPS. Where more intense development is proposed in the vicinity of historic properties, adverse effects should be mitigated through careful siting, massing, and design to respect the character of the historic property and to provide appropriate transitions between the historic property and surrounding areas.

2309.7 Policy RCW-1.2.6: Naval Observatory

Planning decisions in the vicinity of the Naval Observatory should consider the possible effects of light pollution and take appropriate steps to avoid adverse impacts.

2309.8 Policy RCW-1.2.7: Fire and EMS Services

Renovate and enlarge fire stations while remaining sensitive to their historic architectural qualities. The number of fire stations should be sufficient to serve the needs of area residents and businesses.

2309.9 Policy RCW-1.2.8: Schools and Libraries

Place a very high priority on the expansion, renovation, and improvement of schools and libraries. The fact that a majority of the schools in this Planning Area are operating at or above capacity should be considered in DC Public Schools (DCPS) facility planning. Changes to school service boundaries, the expansion of existing school facilities, and/or development of additional school facilities should be aggressively pursued so that school overcrowding is proactively addressed.

2309.10 Policy RCW-1.2.9: Active Outdoor Recreation for All Ages and Abilities

Expand recreation grounds where and when feasible, with a particular emphasis on athletic fields for activities such as soccer, softball, and regulation baseball. A skate park, playgrounds, and other outdoor spaces for children and youth of all abilities are needed.

2309.11 Policy RCW-1.2.10: Community-based Residential Facilities

Encourage the development of small-scale, community-based residential facilities

on scattered sites within the Planning Area, and social service counseling and referral facilities on the commercial corridors. Additional group homes and community-based residential facilities should be accommodated. Local religious institutions should be encouraged to host small shelters to provide for persons experiencing homelessness, and to provide other needed social services or housing facilities, taking into consideration issues of liability, security, and adequacy of facilities.

See the Environmental Protection Element for additional policies on stream valley parks, limits on impervious surface coverage, expansion of the tree and slope protections in the zoning code, urban forestry, air quality, aircraft noise, and development adjacent to parkland. See the Urban Design Element for policies on conserving natural landform and topography. See the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element for policies discouraging the placement of buildings on parkland.

2309.12 Action RCW-1.2.A: Combined Sewer Separation

Continue efforts to separate storm and sanitary sewers consistent with Consent Decree requirements and continue to rehabilitate sewers within the area’s stream valleys.

See the Infrastructure Element and Environmental Protection Element for more information on combined sewers.

2309.13 Action RCW-1.2.B: Palisades Open Space Conservation

Conserve the historic linear open space that once supported the Palisades/Glen Echo trolley line, with its unique scenic vistas that it provides for public benefit. Consider rehabilitating the trestle bridges to accommodate a walk/bike trail.

2309.14 Action RCW-1.2.C: Wellness Center Development

Develop a wellness center in the Rock Creek West Planning Area, partnering with existing facilities that serve all ages and community groups to provide decentralized programming, activities, and services to the area’s large population of older adults.

2309.15 Action RCW-1.2.D: Façade Improvements

Encourage urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial districts along Wisconsin Avenue and Connecticut Avenue NW.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2310** RCW-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a2310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2310}

2310.1 The Comprehensive Plan has identified three areas in Rock Creek West as Policy Focus Areas, indicating that they require a level of direction and guidance above that in the prior section of this Area Element and in the Citywide Elements. These areas are shown in Map 23.1 and are listed in Figure 23.2. The policy focus areas include:

Connecticut Avenue corridor

Wisconsin Avenue corridor

Van Ness Commercial District

Each Policy Focus Area is addressed below.

2310.2 Figure 23.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Rock Creek West

Within Rock Creek West

2.1

Connecticut Avenue Corridor

2.2

Wisconsin Avenue Corridor

2.3

Van Ness Commercial District

Adjacent to Rock Creek West

Mount Pleasant Street

18th and Columbia Road

Dupont Circle

2310.3 Map 23.1 Rock Creek West Policy Focus Areas

2310.4 Two Future Planning Analysis Areas are located along Connecticut Avenue NW and Wisconsin Avenue NW. Within those Analysis Areas, additional finer-grained small area plans are needed at Friendship Heights, Tenleytown, Chevy Chase, Cleveland Park, Forest Hills, and Woodley Park, and may be appropriate at other areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2311** RCW-2.1 CONNECTICUT AVENUE CORRIDOR {#sec-10-a2311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2311}

2311.1 From the Taft Bridge across Rock Creek, Connecticut Avenue NW extends 3.5 miles northwest to the Maryland state line. Along the way, the avenue passes through the Woodley Park, Cleveland Park, and Van Ness/UDC commercial districts (with Metro stations of the same name at each location), as well as the Chevy Chase commercial district at its northern end. The avenue is a broad, attractive boulevard for most of its length, handling over 30,000 vehicles on an average day. The areas between the commercial districts are generally developed with mid- to high-rise apartments and condominiums, although there are pockets of less dense development as well.

2311.2 Land use issues vary from one segment of the corridor to the next. The Woodley Park and Cleveland Park segments are historic districts and contain almost no undeveloped land. In Woodley Park, two large hotels contribute to ongoing parking and traffic issues. Cleveland Park’s historically vibrant cluster of neighborhood-serving retail spaces and services. This area has experienced challenges in recent years from limited nearby population growth and competition from other growing and revitalized commercial destinations. In 2016, the Commercial Market Analysis and Enhancement Strategy for Cleveland Park identified four opportunities to help Cleveland Park businesses adapt to the changing competitive context and attract additional customers:

Grow and strengthen the Cleveland Park Business Association;

Retain and expand Cleveland Park’s customer base in its primary market area;

Capture a larger share of existing vehicular and transit commuters along Connecticut Avenue; and

Attract more visitors from other neighborhoods in Washington, DC and Maryland, and National Zoo visitors.

2311.3 Since the completion of the Commercial Market Analysis and Enhancement Strategy for Cleveland Park, community resources and business efforts have shifted toward the Cleveland Park Main Street organization. Additionally, a larger emphasis has been placed on capturing existing transit and multimodal commuters along Connecticut Avenue NW.

2311.4 While the corridor is largely built out, there remain opportunities for redevelopment and renovation to support the future vitality of commercial districts and to create much needed affordable and moderate-income housing. Retail strips along Connecticut Avenue NW could benefit from well-designed infill redevelopment or renovation and improved retail and service amenities.

2311.5 Policy RCW-2.1.1: Connecticut Avenue NW Corridor

Sustain the high quality of the Connecticut Avenue NW corridor. The positive qualities of the corridor, particularly its architecturally appealing, older apartment buildings; green spaces; trees; and walkable neighborhood shopping districts, should be conserved and enhanced. Continued efforts to improve traffic flow and parking should be pursued, especially in the commercial districts.

2311.6 Policy RCW-2.1.2: Infill Development

Recognize the opportunity for additional housing, including new affordable and moderate-income units, with some retail and limited office space along the Connecticut Avenue NW corridor.

2311.7 Policy RCW-2.1.3: Cleveland Park Retail Enhancement

Support retail enhancement strategies for Cleveland Park to grow and strengthen the local business association, continue to attract and serve local residents, capture a larger share of Connecticut Avenue commuters as business patrons, and attract more visitors from outside neighborhoods.

2311.8 Action RCW-2.1.A: Large Hotel Sites

Future development and operational proposals for the Omni-Shoreham hotel should include analyses of impacts on adjacent residential and commercial areas and appropriate mitigating measures, prepared by the property owner. Proactively address ongoing issues at the hotels, such as a motor coach and visitor parking. The redevelopment of the Wardman Park hotel site should be studied and included in neighborhood planning efforts.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2312** RCW-2.2 WISCONSIN AVENUE CORRIDOR {#sec-10-a2312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2312}

2312.1 Wisconsin Avenue extends 4.5 miles north from the Georgetown waterfront to the District border, where it continues beyond the state line into Bethesda, Maryland. The road pre-dates the 1791 L’Enfant Plan. At one time, it was one of the main commercial routes connecting the Port of Georgetown with communities farther north and was lined with houses and estates, some of which remain today. Today, Wisconsin Avenue serves as the primary commercial and civic corridor for several District neighborhoods, including Glover Park, Cathedral Heights, Tenleytown, and Friendship Heights.

2312.2 The mix of uses along the avenue is varied. Its lower portions include pedestrian-oriented shopping, mid- and high-rise apartment buildings, and prominent institutional uses such as the Russian Embassy and the National Cathedral. Farther north, the avenue passes through lower density neighborhoods, with a mix of retail uses, mid-rise office buildings, places of worship, private schools, and other institutional uses. For several blocks on either side of the Maryland line, the avenue passes through a regional commercial center at Friendship Heights. The regional center includes large department stores, office buildings, and hotels on both the Maryland and District sides.

2312.3 After years of planning and review, new mixed-use development has been completed on Wisconsin Avenue NW in recent years, including Cathedral Commons near McLean Gardens and a few residential buildings in Tenleytown. Along the corridor, smaller infill projects are adding new residents. Large tract projects at the old Fannie Mae building and neighboring 4000 Wisconsin Avenue NW are approved to bring several hundred new homes and commercial space, and the private schools on the corridor are also expanding. While the Friendship Heights Metro area has urbanized rapidly north of Western Avenue NW, there have been few changes on the District side. With changes underway and growth extending up Wisconsin Avenue, directed and coordinated planning is needed around both Tenleytown and Friendship Heights Metro station areas.

2312.4 The Tenleytown and Friendship Heights Metro stations are important multimodal transit hubs that serve as termini for crosstown bus lines, as well as private institutional shuttles. Both station areas offer opportunities for transit-oriented redevelopment to improve streetscapes, create convivial public spaces, diversify the shopping experience, and create new housing, including affordable housing. Friendship Heights is a regional center, and Tenleytown is a multi-neighborhood center, each with opportunities for new retail and residential uses. Given the high land values in the neighborhoods along Wisconsin Avenue NW, redevelopment projects are an opportunity to increase the limited number of affordable and moderate-income housing units in the Rock Creek West Planning Area.

2312.5 Friendship Heights and Tenleytown are transit-accessible neighborhoods that will contribute to the sustainable and equitable growth of Washington, DC as new development arrives along Wisconsin Avenue NW. Thus, several core issues must be addressed as plans for any of the sites around the Metro stations or along the corridor move forward. Any redevelopment along the corridor should promote walkability and create a more attractive street environment. The impact of new development on traffic, parking, infrastructure, and public services should be mitigated to the greatest extent feasible. The scale and height of new development on the corridor should transition appropriately to nearby single-family homes, while the design of new buildings should reflect their urban transit-oriented context.

2312.6 Urban design improvements can make the Tenleytown Metro station area a more attractive and better connected community hub in the future. With busy public schools, parks, a library, commercial uses, and new residential projects, the pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular connectivity throughout the Tenleytown Metro station area remains an urban design challenge. In 2014, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and District Department of Transportation completed a joint study of pedestrian access to the Tenleytown Metro station and recommended physical changes to address safety and access at this busy multimodal area. Amenities, such as public art, more attractive facades, and street trees, should be encouraged. Attention should also be paid to reducing pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, both across streets and within sites, and to ensuring safe pedestrian access to both Metro station entrances.

2312.7 Policy RCW-2.2.1: Housing Opportunities

Pursue the opportunity for additional housing, including affordable and moderate-income housing, with some retail and limited office space on Wisconsin Avenue and underdeveloped sites west of the Friendship Heights Metro station. .

2312.8 Policy RCW-2.2.2: Tenleytown and Friendships Heights Metrorail Station Areas

Support coordinated planning for Wisconsin Avenue’s Tenleytown and Friendship Heights Metro station areas, extending north from Van Ness to the Maryland state line at Western Avenue. Planning considerations for the corridor should:

Use the public transit infrastructure and maximize Metro and bus access;

Enable merchants to upgrade existing businesses, attract new customers and new business establishments, and provide neighborhood services;

Provide for the development of new housing for a mix of incomes;

Conserve existing low-density residences in the vicinity, and the surrounding institutions and local public facilities, by mitigating the adverse effects of development;

Ensure that planning and building design is sensitive to the area’s topography, existing architectural assets, street layout, and pedestrian circulation patterns;

Promote safe and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle circulation to parks, schools, transit, and shopping, as outlined in the Rock Creek West II Livability Study;

Enhance a robust public life on the corridor, with key public spaces that function as places where neighbors and visitors want to stay, linger, and enjoy; and

Partner and collaborate with public and private institutional and educational facilities along the corridor.

2312.9 Policy RCW-2.2.3: National Cathedral

Any development adjacent to the National Cathedral should complement its setting and mitigate direct traffic impacts on the Cathedral’s operations. At the same time, the Cathedral’s traffic, parking, and activity impacts should not diminish the quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods.

2312.10 Policy RCW-2.2.4: Wisconsin and Western Avenues NW

Any changes to facilitate through-traffic on Wisconsin and Western Avenues NW should be accompanied by pedestrian and bicycle safety measures and ease adverse effects of traffic on local streets.

2312.11 Policy RCW-2.2.5: Land Use Compatibility Along Wisconsin Avenue NW

Future development along Wisconsin Avenue NW should be architecturally sensitive to adjoining residential neighborhoods. Use a variety of means to improve the interface between mixed-use districts and lower-scale residential uses, such as architectural design, the stepping down of building heights away from the avenue, landscaping and screening, and additional green space improvements.

2312.12 Policy RCW-2.2.6: Livability in Rock Creek West

Continue to evaluate transportation safety and quality of life issues for all users of the street network and identify concrete actions to increase transportation options and safety.

2312.13 Action RCW-2.2.A: Zoning and Design Measures

Continue to work with the community, the ANCs, and local property owners to address concerns regarding building density and height, PUDs and related density bonuses, and architectural design in the Planning Area. Zoning techniques should be considered to break up the auto-oriented commercial appearance of much of Wisconsin Avenue NW and instead create a more pedestrian-oriented street, distinct in function and visual character from adjacent residential areas.

2312.14 Action RCW-2.2.B: Livability

Implement the recommendations in the Rock Creek West II Livability Study completed in 2011 and subsequent completed livability studies.

2312.15 Action RCW-2.2.C: Wisconsin Avenue NW Planning

Craft a coordinated vision with the District and community to better understand the realities of change along northern Wisconsin Avenue NW to inform future development and manage growth on the Wisconsin Avenue corridor at the Tenleytown and Friendship Heights Metro station areas. A plan will identify opportunities for urban design, commerce, housing, mobility, culture, public space, and community facilities to preserve a high-standard urban quality of life and advance District policies promoting inclusive prosperity.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2313** RCW-2.3 VAN NESS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT {#sec-10-a2313 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2313}

2313.1 At the Van Ness Metro station on the Connecticut Avenue corridor, the commercial district is a multi-neighborhood center with a shopping district, institutional and office buildings, and several mid- to high-rise residential buildings. The area includes the 20-acre campus of the UDC, which has an enrollment of more than 5,000 students, as well as the International Chancery Complex.

2313.2 Recent improvements to the Van Ness commercial district include the new UDC Student Center, the Park Van Ness redevelopment, and the creation of the Van Ness Main Street organization. However, this section of the corridor experiences a challenging street environment that is not welcoming to pedestrians, with an excess of hardscaped surfaces and noted parking problems. A lack of distinctive facades and storefronts offers a limited range of retail goods and services. Meanwhile, ground-floor retail space has been lost to institutional and school uses. Opportunities exist for greater synergy between UDC and nearby shopping areas along Connecticut Avenue NW.

2313.3 A Campus Plan for UDC was completed in 2011 to guide campus growth and development at Van Ness through 2020 at its flagship location. The Campus Plan recommends optimizing the university’s facilities, providing an environment for cultural exchange, enlivening the surrounding community, and greening the campus. As the Campus Plan is implemented, efforts should be made to improve the public space around the Metro station and make future facility development compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

2313.4 In 2016, OP in partnership with community members and UDC, completed the Van Ness Commercial District Action Strategy to improve the corridor, with a focus on public space, retail, sustainability, and commercial opportunities. The Action Strategy includes new streetscape and façade improvement recommendations.

2313.5 Policy RCW-2.3.1: Public Space in Van Ness

Enhance the linear public space on both sides of Connecticut Avenue NW with larger landscaped areas and increased café seating where appropriate. Create focal points with public art and activate plazas with temporary placemaking and other programming.

2313.6 Policy RCW-2.3.2: Retail in Van Ness

Support Van Ness Main Street and the ANC in efforts to develop a more cohesive and vibrant retail environment, focusing on creating top quality retail space near the Metro station and developing a coordinated marketing approach for Van Ness.

2313.7 Policy RCW-2.3.3: Sustainability in Van Ness

Support stakeholder collaboration in Van Ness to enhance sustainability in the Van Ness commercial district. Incorporate green infrastructure into the landscape amenity zone as part of any major streetscape work by the District or a private property owner.

2313.8 Policy RCW-2.3.4: Commercial Opportunities in Van Ness

New building construction and major renovation projects should produce high-quality retail space that engages with the sidewalk and increases housing near the Metro station where possible.

2313.9 Policy RCW-2.3.5: UDC and Van Ness Community

Continue to enhance coordination and communication between UDC officials, Van Ness Main Street, and the surrounding Van Ness community on issues such as parking, traffic, property maintenance, and facility development. UDC and community stakeholders should collaborate to leverage the university’s cultural resources and promote activities that can enliven the street and serve the community.

2313.10 Action RCW-2.3.A: Van Ness Streetscape Improvements

Improve the streetscape on Connecticut Avenue in Van Ness to support commercial revitalization of ground-floor retail, enhance public life on the street, and reduce impervious area between building face and curb.

### **10-A24** UPPER NORTHEAST AREA ELEMENT

##### **10-A DCMR § 2400** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2400}

2400.1 The Upper Northeast Planning Area encompasses 8.7 square miles and includes about two-thirds of the District’s northeastern quadrant. The Planning Area’s western boundary is formed by North Capitol Street (north of Rhode Island Avenue) and the CSX railroad tracks (south of Rhode Island Avenue), and its southern boundary is formed by Florida Avenue, Benning Road, and the Anacostia waterfront area. The northern/eastern border is Eastern Avenue at the District of Columbia line. These boundaries are shown in the map at left. Historically, most of Upper Northeast has been in Ward 5.

2400.2 Northeast is principally known as a residential community, with single-family neighborhoods, including Arboretum, Woodridge, Queens Chapel, and Michigan Park. It also includes row house neighborhoods, such as Stronghold and Trinidad, and apartments and higher-density housing in communities, such as Fort Lincoln, Edgewood, and Carver Terrace. Some communities—Brookland, Ivy City, Fort Totten, and Riggs Park, for example—offer a traditional base of single-family housing and an emerging cluster of transit-oriented development around Metrorail (Metro) stations.

2400.3 The mix of uses in Upper Northeast is particularly diverse compared to other parts of Washington, DC. The Planning Area contains the largest concentration of industrial land uses in the District, following the CSX rail lines north and east from Union Station. It includes three major institutions of higher education—the Catholic University of America (CUA), Trinity University, and Gallaudet University—and numerous other institutions serving other missions. For many years, the CUA planned to repurpose land along Michigan Avenue once occupied by residence halls. In 2014, approximately 11 acres were transformed into Monroe Street Market, a cluster of residences, restaurants, and shops located next to the Brookland/CUA Metro Station. Upper Northeast includes one hospital— the Hospital for Sick Children. It also includes several large federal properties, including the Brentwood Postal Facility and the U.S. National Arboretum, a Federal Express distribution center and the now- revived Hecht’s Warehouse site.

2400.4 Upper Northeast is also home to the historic Union Market located within the Florida Avenue Market, which is the District’s fresh produce district, as well as dozens of small shops and local businesses along neighborhood commercial streets, such as 12th Street, 18th Street, and Rhode Island Avenue. At one time, Upper Northeast had many more neighborhood shopping districts like these, but the number of shopping districts has been reduced, or in some cases disappeared entirely due to competition from larger auto-oriented and suburban-style shopping centers, including shopping centers in the District.

2400.5 The Planning Area is especially well known for its large concentration of religious institutions, including the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center. It contains numerous seminaries and ministries, some occupying park-like settings with rolling lawns and impressive buildings. The Franciscan Monastery and the homes of the Josephites, the Carmelites, and many other religious orders are located here. Most of these properties meet the qualifications for historic designations, but few are officially recognized. In addition to these historic institutions, the Planning Area also includes portions of several important public landscapes, all of which are historic: multiple Civil War Defenses of Washington, otherwise known as the Fort Circle Parks, Langston Golf Course, and the National Arboretum.

2400.6 Several major arterial streets, including New York Avenue, Rhode Island Avenue, South Dakota Avenue, Bladensburg Road, Michigan Avenue, and Riggs Road, cross the Planning Area. The area also includes the Fort Totten, Brookland/CUA, and Rhode Island Avenue-Brentwood Metro stations, as well as NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro station, which is on the border with the Central Washington and Capitol Hill Area Elements. All four of these stations are served by Metro’s Red Line. The Metropolitan Branch Trail is being developed through this area, linking Upper Northeast neighborhoods to Downtown Washington, DC.

2400.7 Upper Northeast has experienced significant growth along the Red Line over the past 10 years. This growth is anticipated to continue as underused land, such as surface parking lots and underperforming strip malls near the Metro stations and along the neighboring corridors, redevelop.

2400.8 Upper Northeast neighborhoods are home to many lifelong Washingtonians and have a history of strong civic. Civic associations, Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs), churches, and community organizations are actively involved in discussions about the community’s future. Nonprofit organizations, such as the North Capitol and Brookland-Edgewood Family Support Collaboratives and the United Planning Organization, also play an important role in community life.

2400.9 Upper Northeast shares some of the same challenges facing other parts of the District. The area’s poverty and unemployment rates are all above the District average. . Many parts of the area lack access to open space, parks, and retail services. The area has a large population of older adults, many with special transportation, housing, and health care needs. The Planning Area also faces the challenge of an increasingly unaffordable housing market. A new generation of homeowners has invested in Upper Northeast, which has led to increased prices and housing demand. The greatest future challenge will be to respond to change in a way that keeps Upper Northeast a socially, culturally, and economically diverse community.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2401** HISTORY {#sec-10-a2401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2401}

2401.1 Upper Northeast began as a series of land grants made by British King Charles I to George Calvert, the first Lord Baltimore. During the 1700s and early 1800s, early settlers enjoyed meadows, woodlands, farms, and open countryside. Tracks for the Baltimore and Ohio (B&O) Railroad were laid out in the 1830s, but the area remained sparsely populated until the turn of the 20th century. In the 1840s, Colonel Brooks, a veteran of the War of 1812, built the Greek Revival mansion that still stands today at 901 Newton Street. Several Civil War strongholds were developed in the area during the 1860s, including Fort Bunker Hill, Fort Slemmer, Fort Totten, and Fort Lincoln.

2401.2 One of the first settlements in the area was Ivy City, developed around 1872 along the B&O Railroad tracks. Ivy City later became a brick manufacturing center and was home to the National Fair Grounds in the late 1800s. In 1879, the B&O Railroad developed additional rail lines through Upper Northeast, connecting Washington to Pittsburgh, Chicago, and points west. Industrial uses followed the railroads, locating along the sidings. Trolley lines were extended out Rhode Island Avenue in 1897, beginning the area’s residential growth, as well as the growth of nearby communities in Maryland.

2401.3 Beginning in the late 1880s, the Brooks estate was subdivided, and the Brookland neighborhood was born. The deep lots and spacious porches created the ambiance of small-town living just a few miles from central Washington, DC. The houses were affordable for moderate-income residents. By 1900, the neighborhood boasted plank sidewalks and a streetcar line. Much of the neighborhood’s architectural heritage, including Victorians, bungalows, and colonial homes, remains intact today and is part of the neighborhood’s appeal.

2401.4 CUA was established in the area in 1887. Several other religious organizations settled nearby. The Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur founded Trinity University in 1901, and the Dominicans built their House of Studies the same year. The Paulists, the Marists, and Holy Cross Fathers soon followed. By the 1920s, the area had gained the nickname Little Rome. By this time, Gallaudet University was already well established for half a century on a campus near Ivy City, quickly becoming the nation's premier college for deaf and hard-of-hearing students after opening in the 1860s.

2401.5 Much of Upper Northeast was developed between 1920 and 1950. Major industrial and commercial development occurred during this period, and the rail corridors became a well-established regional distribution center. New York Avenue became the major route into Washington from the northeast, attracting hotels, motels, and visitor services. Large-scale housing construction took place during the 1920s in Ivy City and Trinidad, and the 1930s saw construction of historic Langston Dwellings, one of the nation’s first public housing complexes, and one of the District’s first examples of modern architecture. Housing developments like Brentwood Village and Riggs Park were constructed during the 1930s and ’40s, and smaller-scale development took place during the 1950s in the Lamond-Riggs and Fort Totten areas.

2401.6 By the 1960s, most of the area was fully developed. Fort Lincoln, the last remaining large tract of vacant land, was conceived as a New Town as part of the Johnson Administration’s Great Society Program. The 360-acre site was intended to be an innovative experiment in participatory democracy and racial and economic integration, with residents involved in the community’s development and profits. A private company was selected to build the project, which initially included 550 condominiums, 666 apartments for older adults, and 157 garden apartments. During the 1970s, the National Park Service (NPS) built a playground and park area, and the District built an elementary school and indoor swimming pool. Only about half of the original plan was actually carried out, however. In the early 2000s, the next phases of Fort Lincoln New Town were developed. They include townhomes and retail, such as Costco, Lowe’s Home Improvement, and Dick’s Sporting Goods.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2402** LAND USE {#sec-10-a2402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2402}

2402.1 Statistics on existing land use are estimated from current lot-by-lot property tax data together with additional information on housing units, employment, District and federal land ownership, parks, roads, water bodies, etc. They are not comparable to the statistics included in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, which were based on a much simpler method. Even large differences between the older and newer statistics may reflect differences in the modeling approaches used a decade apart, not actual changes in land use. Upper Northeast is made up of approximately 5,739 acres, or about 13 percent of the District’s land area. The composition of uses is shown in Figure 24.1. The area’s land use mix is among the most diverse in Washington, DC.

2402.2 Figure 24.1: Land Use Composition in Upper Northeast.

2402.3 Residential development is the single largest land use, representing about 26 percent of the total area. Of the residential land area, about 44 percent is developed with single-family detached homes and about 41 percent with row houses and two-family houses. Apartments make up only about 15 percent of the residential land area. Denser housing is located at Carver Terrace, Montana Terrace, Langston Terrace, Edgewood, Fort Lincoln, and Brentwood.

2402.4 Commercial and industrial uses make up about nine percent of Upper Northeast’s land area. Upper Northeast contains almost two-thirds of the District’s industrial acreage. Much of the space consists of warehouse and distribution facilities, light manufacturing, automotive services, and service businesses, such as construction suppliers and printers. These uses are concentrated along New York Avenue, Bladensburg Road, Brentwood Road, Florida Avenue, V Street, and West Virginia Avenue, as well as in the area between the Rhode Island and Fort Totten Metro stations, and elsewhere along the heavy rail/Metro corridor. Commercial uses include neighborhood-oriented shopping districts and larger shopping centers like the Rhode Island Place Shopping Center on Brentwood Road and Hechinger Mall.

2402.5 Institutional and local public facilities land make up 11 percent of the Planning Area. Most of this total is associated with colleges, universities, and religious institutions. The area also contains more than 1,106 acres of parks, recreation, and open space, representing 19.6 percent of its total area. However, much of the open space is Mount Olivet and Glenwood Cemeteries, or is located on the far eastern edge of the area within the confines of the National Arboretum. Large parks are generally associated with the Fort Circle chain parks and are located on the area’s northern and eastern perimeter.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2403** DEMOGRAPHICS {#sec-10-a2403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2403}

2403.1 The Upper Northeast area has grown at a moderate pace since 2000. Currently, the population is 70,613 residents, an increase of more than 10,000 people in 17 years. The population is expected to grow over the next several decades to a population exceeding 112,000 by 2045. Figure 24.2 presents a snapshot of the Upper Northeast area and change since 2000.

2403.2 As indicated in Figure 24.2, approximately 70 percent of the area’s residents are Black, which is higher than the District-wide total of 48 percent. Since 2000, the Black population has decreased from 51,705 residents to 49,614 residents. Approximately ten percent of the area’s residents are of Hispanic/Latino origin, which is an increase compared to three percent in 2000. The area has also experienced an increase in the foreign-born population, increasing from five percent in 2000 to 12 percent in 2017. The foreign-born population is lower than the District-wide total of 14 percent.

2403.3 Relative to the District , the area has a higher percentage of seniors. Almost one in seven residents of Upper Northeast is 65 and over, and the percentage is higher in neighborhoods like North Michigan Park and Woodridge. The percentage of older adults has decreased since 2000 by almost three percent, and the percentage of residents under the age of 18 has decreased slightly since 2000 but is higher than the District-wide total (19 percent compared to 18 percent District-wide).

2403.5 Figure 24.2: Upper Northeast at a Glance.

Basic Statistics and Projections

2000

2010

2017*

2025

2035

2045

Population

58,684

60,682

70,613

83,263

98,198

112,756

Households

23,513

24,762

27,000

35,780

43,253

50,501

Household Population

53,990

55,168

64,897

76,144

90,697

104,849

Persons Per Household

2.30

2.23

2.40

2.13

2.10

2.08

Jobs

45,769

27,155

30,731

36,715

46,443

52,846

Density (persons per sq mile)

6,669

6,896

8,024

9,462

11,159

12,813

Land Area (square miles)

8.8

2000 and 2017 Census Data Profile

2000

2017*

Citywide 2017*

Total

Percentage

Total

Percentage

Age

Under 18

18-64

18-34

35-64

65 and over

12,353

35,901

13,728

22,173

10,430

21.1%

61.2%

23.4%

37.8%

17.8%

13,143 46,818

20,769

26,050

10,651

18.6%

66.3%

29.4%

36.9%

15.1%

17.6%

70.6%

34.6%

35.9%

11.9%

Residents Below Poverty Level

11,564

19.5%

12,133

18.3%

17.4%

Racial Composition

White

Black

Native American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Other

Multi-Racial

5,316

51,705

202

496

845

830

9.0%

87.1%

0.3%

0.8%

1.4%

11,045

49,614

470

1,430

3,217

1,837

19.9%

70.3%

0.7%

2.0%

4.6%

2.6%

40.7%

47.7%

0.3%

3.8%

4.6%

2.9%

Hispanic Origin

1,769

3.0%

7,012

9.9%

10.7%

Foreign-Born Residents

2,998

5.0%

8,414

11.9%

14.0%

Tenure

Owner Households Renter Households

11,501

12,240

48.4%

51.6%

12,333

14,666

45.7%

54.3%

41.7%

58.3%

Housing Occupancy

Occupied Units

Vacant Units

23,741

3,111

88.4%

11.6%

27,000

2,625

91.1%

8.9%

90.2%

9.8%

Housing by Unit Type

1-unit, detached

1-unit, attached 2-4 units

5-9 units

10-19 units

20 or more

Mobile/other

5,506

8,483

4,845

1,902

3,001

3,090

20.5%

31.6%

18.0%

7.1%

11.2%

11.5%

0.1%

5,684

9,118

4,840

1,846

3,247

4,874

19.2%

30.8%

16.3%

6.2%

11.0%

16.5%

0.1%

11.9%

25.1%

10.3%

6.8%

10.5%

35.4%

0.1%

* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2404** HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS {#sec-10-a2404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2404}

2404.1 Half the housing units in Upper Northeast are single-family homes. According to the 2017 Census, about 19 percent of the units were single-family detached homes, and 31 percent were row houses and townhomes. Both of these figures exceed the District-wide total. Duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes made up about 16 percent, which is higher than the District-wide total. Seventeen percent of the area’s housing stock consists of multi-family buildings of 20 units or more, compared to 35 percent in the District as a whole.

2404.2 The 2017 Census also reported that the number of renter households was slightly higher than the number of owner households in Upper Northeast (54 percent and 46 percent, respectively). The percent of renter households has increased by about three percent since 2000.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2405** INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT {#sec-10-a2405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2405}

2405.1 According to the 2017 Census, median household income in Upper Northeast was $62,605 compared to a District-wide median of $77,649. Approximately 18 percent of the area’s residents lived below the federal poverty level. This is slightly higher than the poverty level District-wide, at 17 percent.

2405.2 Data from the District Department of Employment Services and the Office of Planning indicate that Upper Northeast had 30,731 jobs in 2017, primarily in institutional uses and in the production, distribution, and repair sector. This represents four percent of the city’s job base. The Planning Area has about 1.1 jobs per household.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2406** PROJECTIONS {#sec-10-a2406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2406}

2406.1 Based on an analysis of approved development, available land, regional growth trends, and local planning policies, the population decline experienced in Upper Northeast from the 1950s to the early 2000s has come to an end. In fact, the Planning Area is projected to add approximately 22,565 households by 2045, and its population is projected to rise about 60 percent to 112,756 residents. The primary areas of population growth are around the Metro stations at Fort Totten, Brookland, NoMa-Gallaudet U, and Rhode Island Avenue; along major corridors like New York Avenue, Rhode Island Avenue, and North Capitol Street; at Fort Lincoln; and in the vicinity of Hechinger Mall/Benning Road.

2406.2 More than half of the additional households are associated with specific sites that are in various stages of planning and development. These include the remaining vacant parcels at the Fort Lincoln New Town, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)-owned land at three Metro stations, and private development projects, such as the approximately 257-unit Arboretum Place built north of Hechinger Mall, Union Market, Brookland Manor, and CUA.

2406.3 The number of jobs is expected to increase from 29,395 in 2015 to 52,846, an increase of about 78 percent over the next 30 years. Most of the increase is associated with redevelopment of key parcels along the New York Avenue and Bladensburg corridors, and mixed-use development around the Metro stations. Expansion of industrially zoned acreage in the area is not expected. In fact, most of the employment growth will be the result of the planned conversion of former industrial land to new uses, especially near Metro stations, as identified in Small Area Plans such as the Brookland/CUA Small Area Plan and Florida Avenue Market Small Area Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2407** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES {#sec-10-a2407 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2407}

2407.1 This section summarizes the opportunities and challenges residents and stakeholders prioritized during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision. During large community workshops, residents shared their feedback on District-wide and neighborhood specific issues. Since the 2006 community workshops, however, some of the challenges and opportunities facing the community have evolved. The following summary does not reflect new community priorities or feedback from either amendment cycle but summarizes the most important issues during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan revision.

2407.2 Workshops over the course of the Comprehensive Plan Revision provided an opportunity for residents of Upper Northeast to share their views on important planning issues. Input from these workshops was supplemented with feedback from Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners (ANCs), community groups, and individual residents. Many other meetings were held on long-range planning issues in the Upper Northeast Planning area, including workshops for the Northeast Gateway Small Area Plan; Ward 5 summits on transportation and economic development; transportation meetings on the Rhode Island Avenue, New York Avenue, and South Dakota Avenue corridors; and meetings on specific development proposals.

2407.3 Several important messages and priorities were expressed at these meetings:

Upper Northeast neighborhoods take pride as middle-income, family-oriented communities. Although the community’s population declined by 20 percent during the 1980s and 1990s, there is still a strong sense of identity and civic pride in places like Arboretum, North Michigan Park, and Woodridge. Conservation of the existing housing stock is a high priority although there are differences of opinion on the best way to achieve this. Neighborhoods such as Brookland, where about two-thirds of the homes pre-date World War II, have debated the possibility of historic district designation, but have yet to reach a consensus on the best way to preserve the historic character of the community.

Residents of Upper Northeast are feeling the pressure of escalating housing costs. Displacement is a concern in neighborhoods like Ivy City and Trinidad, where one-quarter of the residents live below the poverty line and home prices have tripled in the last five years. Upper Northeast includes many lower-income households, residents on public assistance, and hard working people trapped in low wage jobs. There is anxiety about expiring federal housing subsidies, and the future of large public housing complexes like Langston Dwellings. Residents want assurance that they will not be dislocated if and when these complexes are renovated or replaced. The recent redevelopment of Montana Terrace provides a good example of meeting affordable housing needs while creating opportunities for home ownership for existing residents.

Residents are concerned that they are the location of choice for unwanted municipal land uses, such as trash transfer stations, bus garages, youth detention centers, vehicle maintenance facilities, and halfway houses. While there is an appreciation for the importance of these uses to the District, there are concerns about their continued concentration in Upper Northeast simply because the area has a large supply of industrially zoned land.

Upper Northeast neighborhoods have lived with the heavy truck traffic, noise, and unappealing views that comes with industrial land uses for decades. This is particularly true in Ivy City, Langdon, Brentwood, and the 7th-8th Street NE area southwest of the Brookland Metro station. Residents are especially concerned about large trucks, vibration, dust, air pollution, and the transport of hazardous materials on the railroads. There is also a desire to clean up brownfield sites in the community and return them to productive use. These sites provide an opportunity to apply green development principles, turning environmental liabilities into environmental assets.

Retail choices in Upper Northeast need to be expanded. For 20 years, Hechinger Mall was the only large shopping center in the area. Options have improved with the opening of Home Depot/Giant, and will get better still with a planned new shopping center at Fort Lincoln, but these centers are auto-oriented and are not convenient to everyone in the community. Many of the commercial areas in Upper Northeast are dominated by used car lots, carry-outs, liquor stores, automotive uses, and other activities that are not conducive to neighborhood shopping. More retail districts like Brookland’s 12th Street are desired to meet the day-to-day needs of residents. Rhode Island Avenue, Benning Road, Florida Avenue, Bladensburg Road, and the areas around the Metro stations have the potential to become pedestrian-oriented shopping districts. The Florida Market also has the potential to become a more vital shopping district, serving not only as a wholesale venue but also as a retail center for Ivy City, Trinidad, Eckington, and nearby neighborhoods.

Although seminaries, cemeteries, and institutions provide much greenery, and the community is ringed by the National Arboretum, the Anacostia River, and the Fort Circle Parks, much of Upper Northeast is starved for public parkland. More active recreational areas, playgrounds, athletic fields, and traditional neighborhood parks are needed. Better connections to the Arboretum and Anacostia River are needed. There are also concerns that the large institutional open spaces—particularly the great lawns and wooded glades of the area’s religious orders—may someday be lost to development. These properties are important to the health of the community and should be considered as opportunities for new neighborhood and community parks (as well as housing) if they become available. They are the lungs of the neighborhood.

The area’s major thoroughfares need to be improved. New York Avenue is the gateway to the nation’s capital for over 100,000 vehicles a day and provides the first impression of Upper Northeast (and the District) for many residents, commuters, and visitors. Its motels and fast food joints, used car lots, chop shops, strip clubs, salvage yards, and warehouses do not project a positive image. Moreover, the street is often clogged with traffic, especially around its interchanges with South Dakota Avenue and Florida Avenue. The same is true of Bladensburg Road, and some of the other arterial streets in the area. The community wishes to see these corridors upgraded, without diverting traffic to other thoroughfares and residential streets nearby.

Upper Northeast did not experience the kind of large-scale development experienced elsewhere in Washington, DC between 2000 and 2005, but that is likely to change in the next few years. Proposals to redevelop the Capital City Market as a “new town are being discussed, and a large mixed-use development is also under consideration at the Bladensburg/New York Avenue intersection. Residents are also very interested in proposals for the McMillan Reservoir Sand Filtration Site and the Armed Forces Retirement Home, as development on these sites would challenge the roads, infrastructure, and public services in Upper Northeast. Growth and development should be carefully managed to avoid negative impacts, and should be leveraged to provide benefits for the community.

There is general—though not universal—agreement that the Rhode Island Avenue, Brookland/CUA, and Fort Totten Metrorail stations are logical locations for future development. The stations are currently adjoined by parking lots and industrial uses that do not take advantage of their proximity to Metro. These areas may provide opportunities for apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and other types of moderate and medium-density housing, provided that measures are taken to buffer adjacent lower-density neighborhoods, address parking and traffic issues, and mitigate other community concerns. There are differences of opinion as to the appropriate density of development and the precise mix of uses at each station. Small Area Plans are needed for each area to continue the community dialogue on their future.

More should be done to connect Upper Northeast residents with jobs in the Planning Area. Right now, only 10 percent of those who live in Upper Northeast actually work in Upper Northeast. With 40,000 jobs in the community, that figure should be much higher. The area’s nine percent unemployment rate is high. Trade schools, vocational schools, and apprenticeship programs are needed to strengthen labor force skills and provide more pathways to employment for local residents.

Schools and other public facilities in Upper Northeast should be retained in public ownership, even if they are closed due to under enrollment. Residents attending Comprehensive Plan meetings felt strongly that these facilities should not be sold for development, but should be kept in public ownership and used for the delivery of other community services, such as health care and care for older adults. The need for services for older adults is particularly high, given the high percentage of older adults (over 25 percent of the population in neighborhoods like Woodridge and North Michigan Park). Many of the schools, libraries, recreation centers, and other public facilities in the area are in need of modernization. Crummell School is an example. The modernization of Noyes Elementary and Luke Moore Academy are promising, but there is much more to accomplish.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2408** UNE-1.1 GUIDING GROWTH AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION {#sec-10-a2408 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2408}

2408.1 The following general policies and actions should guide growth and neighborhood conservation decisions in Upper Northeast. These policies and actions should be considered in tandem with those in the Citywide Elements of the Comprehensive Plan.

2408.2 Policy UNE-1.1.1: Neighborhood Conservation

Encourage growth while enhancing the neighborhoods of Upper Northeast, such as Michigan Park, North Michigan Park, University Heights, Woodridge, Brookland, Queens Chapel, South Central, Lamond-Riggs, and Arboretum. The residential character of these areas should be preserved while allowing new housing opportunities for all incomes. Places of historic significance, gateways, parks, and important cultural and social places should likewise be preserved and enhanced.

2408.3 Policy UNE-1.1.2: Compatible Infill

Encourage compatible residential infill development throughout Upper Northeast neighborhoods, especially in Brentwood, Ivy City, and Trinidad, where numerous scattered vacant residentially- zoned properties exist. New and rehabilitated housing in these areas should meet the needs of a diverse community that includes renters and owners; seniors, young adults, and families; and persons of low and very low-income, as well as those of moderate and higher incomes.

2408.4 Policy UNE-1.1.3: Metro Station Development

Capitalize on the presence of the Metro stations at Rhode Island Avenue, Brookland-CUA, and Fort Totten, to provide new transit-oriented housing, community services, and jobs. New development around each of these three stations is strongly supported. Locating higher-density housing near Metro stations minimizes the impact of cars and traffic that would be expected if the residents lived farther from high-capacity transit. The District will coordinate with WMATA to make the design, density, and type of housing or other proposed development at these stations is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods; respects community concerns and feedback; and serves a variety of household incomes. Development shall comply with other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the compatibility of new land uses with established development, such as existing production, distribution, and repair (PDR) uses. Development shall also comply with other Comprehensive Plan guidance regarding the provision of appropriate open space, management of mobility, and public services.

2408.5 Policy UNE-1.1.4: Reinvestment in Public Housing

Continue to reinvest in Upper Northeast’s public housing stock. As public housing complexes are modernized or reconstructed, actions should be taken to minimize displacement and to create homeownership opportunities for current residents.

2408.6 Policy UNE-1.1.5: Vacant and Abandoned Structures

Reduce the number of vacant, abandoned, and boarded up structures in Upper Northeast, particularly in the Ivy City and Trinidad areas.

2408.7 Policy UNE-1.1.6: Neighborhood Shopping

Improve neighborhood shopping areas throughout Upper Northeast. Continue to enhance 12th Street NE in Brookland as a walkable neighborhood shopping street and encourage similar pedestrian-oriented retail development along Rhode Island Avenue, Bladensburg Road, South Dakota Avenue, West Virginia Avenue, Florida Avenue, and Benning Road. New pedestrian-oriented retail activity should also be encouraged around the area’s Metro stations.

2408.8 Policy UNE-1.1.7: Larger-Scale Retail Development

Encourage additional community-serving retail development at the existing Brentwood Shopping Center (Home Depot-Giant), the Rhode Island Avenue Shopping Center (4th and Rhode Island NE), and Hechinger Mall. Encourage new large-scale retail development at Fort Lincoln. Design such development to complement, rather than compete with, the neighborhood-oriented business districts in the area.

2408.9 Policy UNE-1.1.8: Untapped Economic Development Potential

Recognize the significant potential of the area’s commercially and industrially zoned lands, particularly along the New York Avenue corridor, V Street NE, West Virginia Avenue, and Bladensburg Road, and around the Florida Avenue Market, to generate jobs, provide new shopping opportunities, enhance existing businesses, create new business ownership opportunities, and promote the vitality and economic well-being of the Upper Northeast community. The uses, height, and bulk permitted under the existing PDR zones are expected to remain for the foreseeable future.

2408.10 Policy UNE-1.1.9: Production, Distribution, and Repair Uses

Encourage existing PDR uses in Upper Northeast to incorporate higher design standards, landscaping, and improved screening and buffering. Emphasize a mixture of new uses to be co-located with the PDR uses, including retail and office space, that create jobs for Upper Northeast area residents, and that minimize off-site impacts on the surrounding residential areas.

2408.11 Policy UNE-1.1.10: High-Impact Industrial Uses

Strongly discourage the further proliferation of junkyards, scrap yards, and other high-impact industrial uses within the area, since these activities do not enhance the quality of life for residents of the District. Take appropriate action to reduce the potential for these uses to encroach into established residential and commercial areas within Upper Northeast, and to address environmental health and safety issues for those who live or work nearby.

2408.12 Policy UNE-1.1.11: Buffering

Improve the interface between residential neighborhoods, industrial/commercial areas, and the railroad and Metro rail lines. Buffer neighborhoods such as Gateway, South Central, Ivy City, North Michigan Park, Riggs Park, and Brentwood from noise, truck traffic, commuter traffic, odor, and compromised infrastructure, and take steps to reduce the damaging effects of excessive noise and vibration from Metro and commercial train traffic for homes along the CSX and Metro lines in Brookland, Queens Chapel, North Michigan Park, Brentwood, and Gateway.

2408.13 Policy UNE-1.1.12: Truck Traffic

Continue to work with the community and area businesses to reduce heavy truck traffic on residential streets, particularly along W Street, West Virginia Avenue, Taylor Street NE, and 8th Street NE. Assess the circulation needs of businesses in these areas to determine if there are alternate means of access that would reduce impacts on adjacent neighborhoods.

2408.14 Action UNE-1.1.A: Industrial/Residential Buffers

Develop additional solutions to buffer residential and industrial areas from one another, such as the recommendations in the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study and design guidelines.

2408.15 Action UNE-1.1.B: Industrial Land Transformation Study

Implement the recommendations of the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study.

See the Land Use and Economic Development Elements for a description of this study.

2408.16 Action UNE-1.1.C: Traffic Safety Improvements

Improve traffic safety throughout the Upper Northeast area, particularly along Eastern Avenue, Franklin Street, Monroe Street, Brentwood Road, Bladensburg Road, Rhode Island Avenue, South Dakota Avenue, and New York Avenue.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2409** UNE-1.2 CONSERVING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY RESOURCES {#sec-10-a2409 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2409}

2409.1 Policy UNE-1.2.1: Streetscape Improvements

Improve the visual quality of streets in Upper Northeast, especially along North Capitol Street, Rhode Island Avenue, Bladensburg Road, New York Avenue, Eastern Avenue, Michigan Avenue, Maryland Avenue, Florida Avenue, West Virginia Avenue, and Benning Road. Landscaping, street tree planting, street lighting, and other improvements should make these streets more attractive community gateways.

2409.2 Policy UNE-1.2.2: Preserving Local Historic Resources

Preserve historic resources in Upper Northeast, including Gallaudet University, the Brooks Mansion, Crummell School, the homes of Ralph Bunche and Samuel Gompers, the Franciscan Monastery, Langston Terrace housing development, Langston Golf Course, Union Market Terminal, the Hospital for Sick Children, Glenwood Cemetery, and the Fort Circle Parks.

2409.3 Policy UNE-1.2.3: Highlighting Local Cultural Resources

Develop new means to highlight the historic and cultural resources in Upper Northeast, such as improved signage and trails connecting the Fort Circle Parks, organized tours of the area’s religious landmarks, and tours of historic homes in Brookland and other parts of the community.

2409.4 Policy UNE-1.2.4: Linking Residents to Jobs

Improve linkages between residents and jobs within Upper Northeast so that more of the area’s working-age adults fill the jobs located within the Planning Area. Achieve this linkage by developing additional vocational and trade schools within Upper Northeast, such as the streetcar maintenance facility, encouraging apprenticeships and internships, and creating new partnerships between the area’s major employers, the District, the public and charter schools, local churches, and major institutions.

2409.5 Policy UNE-1.2.5: Increasing Economic Opportunity

Create new opportunities for small, local, and minority businesses within the Planning Area, and additional community equity investment opportunities as development takes place along New York Avenue, Bladensburg Road, Benning Road, West Virginia Avenue, and around the Metro stations.

2409.6 Policy UNE-1.2.6: Connecting to the River

Recognize the Anacostia River and the land along its banks as an essential and integral part of the Upper Northeast community. Improve the connections between Upper Northeast neighborhoods and the Anacostia River through trail, path, transit, and road improvements, linking the Gallaudet University campus as an institutional open space with the adjacent open spaces to the east, including the Mt. Olivet Cemetery and the National Arboretum, and extending to the Anacostia River and Riverwalk. Provide amenities and facilities in the planned waterfront parks that meet the needs and promote the resilience of Upper Northeast residents.

2409.7 Policy UNE-1.2.7: Institutional Open Space

Recognize the particular importance of institutional open space to the character of Upper Northeast, particularly in and around Brookland, Woodridge, and Gallaudet University/Trinidad. Opportunities also exist for connections between the Gallaudet campus and the network of open spaces to the west, including the Metropolitan Branch Trail and the Burnham Spine, which lead to Union Station and the National Mall. In the event that large institutional uses are redeveloped in the future, pursue opportunities to dedicate substantial areas as new neighborhood parks and open spaces. Connections between Upper Northeast open spaces and the network of open space between McMillan Reservoir and Fort Totten should also be pursued.

2409.8 Policy UNE-1.2.8: Woodridge Open Space

Encourage the preservation and improvement of existing green space in the Woodridge community and identify opportunities to coordinate with the National Park Service to enhance neighborhood access to green space.

See also Land Use Element and the Park and Open Space Element for policies on institutional uses.

2409.9 Policy UNE-1.2.9: Environmental Quality

Improve environmental quality in Upper Northeast, with particular attention given to the reduction of emissions and particulates from trucks and industrial uses in the area. Increase the tree canopy in Ivy City and other areas where tree cover is limited.

2409.10 Action UNE-1.2.A: Parkland Acquisition

Address the shortage of parkland in the Planning Area, placing a priority on the areas with the most severe deficiencies. According to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, these areas include Edgewood, Ivy City, the Carver/Langston area, and the southwest part of Brookland.

2409.11 Action UNE-1.2.B: Hazardous Materials Transport

Continue to advocate for safeguards and restrictions on the transport of hazardous cargo through the Upper Northeast Planning Area, particularly on the rail lines that abut the community’s residential neighborhoods.

2409.12 Action UNE-1.2.C: Main Streets/Great Streets

Consider the designation of additional commercial areas as DC Main Streets, including portions of Bladensburg Road.

2409.13 Action UNE-1.2.D: Arboretum Bridge

Continue to work with NPS on the development of the Arboretum Bridge and Trail Project that will create a pedestrian connection between the Arboretum and Kenilworth Park North on the east side of the Anacostia River.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2410** UNE-2 POLICY FOCUS AREAS {#sec-10-a2410 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2410}

2410.1 This Area Element includes more detailed policy direction for seven specific areas (see Map 24.1 and Figure 24.3). Each area requires direction and guidance beyond that provided by the Citywide Elements and the earlier part of this Area Element. These areas include:

Northeast Gateway Lower Bladensburg Road/Hechinger Mall

New York Avenue Corridor and Brentwood

Upper Bladensburg Road /Fort Lincoln

Rhode Island Avenue Metro

Brookland Metro Station Area

Fort Totten Metro Station Area.

2410.2 Figure 24.3: Policy Focus Areas Within and Adjacent to Upper Northeast.

Within Upper Northeast

2.1

Northeast Gateway

2.2

Lower Bladensburg Road/Hechinger Mall

2.3

New York Avenue Corridor and Brentwood

2.4

Upper Bladensburg Road/Fort Lincoln

2.5

Rhode Island Ave Metro Station

2.6

Brookland Metro Station Area

2.7

Fort Totten Metro Station Area

Adjacent to Upper Northeast

Armed Forces Retirement Home/Irving Street Hospital Campus

McMillan Sand Filtration Site

Mid-City East (North Capitol St/Florida Ave/New York Ave)

NoMa/Northwest One

H Street/Benning Road (Capitol Hill)

2410.3 Map 24.1: Upper Northeast Policy Focus Areas.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2411** UNE-2.1 NORTHEAST GATEWAY {#sec-10-a2411 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2411}

2411.1 Northeast Gateway includes the neighborhoods of Ivy City and Trinidad, as well as the Florida Avenue Market, Gallaudet University, and the West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus (Carver Terrace, Langston Terrace, Arboretum, and Hechinger Mall are also in the Northeast Gateway area but are addressed in Section UNE-2.2).

2411.2 The residents of Northeast Gateway benefit from proximity to amenities like the Langston Golf Course, the National Arboretum, and the NoMa-Gallaudet U Metro station. However, the community also significantly impacted by the effects of concentrated poverty, community service needs, and affordability concerns underscored by surrounding large-scale development. Trinidad has one of the highest numbers of returning citizens in the District. Residents old and new seek the same quality public services and facilities that other residents of the District receive.

2411.3 The Florida Avenue Market (also known as the Union Terminal Market or the Union Market) is one of the most well-known features of the Northeast Gateway area. The market was initially constructed to house businesses displaced from downtown by construction of the Federal Triangle. Today, it continues to offer one-stop shopping for wholesalers and restaurant suppliers, selling goods ranging from produce, meats, seeds, and seafood to ethnic specialty foods. While the Market is a one-of-a-kind institution, it has been experiencing rapid redevelopment and is transforming from a traditional industrial distribution center into a mixed-use neighborhood. This change has put some current businesses at risk for displacement, particularly wholesalers and restaurant suppliers, even as new businesses spring up. Conversely, changes in Northeast Gateway are also advancing other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the DC Cultural Plan, by enlivening the area through outdoor movie showings and other cultural gatherings.

2411.4 A Master Plan for the West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus, located on the eastern edge of this area, was completed in 2016. The plan focuses on a 19.4-acre District-owned site bordered on the east by Mount Olivet Cemetery and on the northwest by West Virginia Avenue. The site is currently used for a variety of public works activities, including fleet operations, solid waste management, parking enforcement, a tire shop and car wash, and equipment storage. The District intends to consolidate operations from scattered sites to this property, while modernizing the entire complex to be a state-of-the-art public works campus. Nearly 300,000 square feet of new floor space is planned, including 123,000 square feet of new offices and a 165,000-square-foot maintenance facility.

2411.5 One of the major themes of the West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus Master Plan is to improve connections between the campus and surrounding neighborhoods, including streetscape investments, pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements, and a more welcoming street presence along West Virginia Avenue. New amenities such as a park, plaza, and local-serving retail space are planned, providing essential assets to a community that presently lacks public gathering space and parkland. The West Virginia Avenue campus is envisioned as a showcase for sustainability, with renewable energy, water conservation, zero waste, and green building measures used to reduce its environmental footprint.

2411.6 Policy UNE-2.1.1: Ivy City Infill Development

Prepare a small area plan or other appropriate planning studies for Ivy City, with community engagement, to consider the reuse of Crummel School, community facilities, green space, and housing among other items. Support the development of additional infill housing in Ivy City, including loft-style and live-work housing that blends with the industrial character of the neighborhood. Support a range of housing designs that fosters affordability and accommodates a mix of household types, including families. Rehabilitation and renovation of the existing housing stock should also be strongly encouraged.

2411.7 Policy UNE-2.1.2: Florida Avenue Market

Redevelop the Florida Avenue Market into a regional destination that may include residential, dining, entertainment, office, hotel, maker, and wholesale food uses. The wholesale market and the adjacent DC Farmers Market are historic amenities that should be preserved, upgraded, and more effectively marketed.

2411.8 Policy UNE-2.1.3: Consolidating District Government Operations

Make more efficient use of the District government-owned properties in the Northeast Gateway area and undertake improvements that make these properties a more attractive, integral, and positive part of adjacent neighborhoods .

2411.9 Policy UNE-2.1.4: Northeast Gateway Urban Design Improvements

Improve the image and appearance of the Northeast Gateway area by creating landscaped gateways into the community, creating new parks and open spaces, upgrading key streets, and improving conditions for pedestrians along Florida Avenue and other neighborhood streets.

2411.10 Policy UNE-2.1.5 Green Spaces in Ivy City

Encourage the preservation and improvement of existing green space in the Ivy City community and identify opportunities to coordinate between public and private landowners to enhance neighborhood access to green space.

2411.11 Action UNE-2.1.A: Florida Avenue Market

Implement recommendations in the Florida Avenue Market Small Area Plan for the revitalization and development of the Florida Avenue Market into a mixed-use residential, commercial, and wholesale industrial destination, centered around a low-rise core of historic buildings. Implementation of redevelopment plans for the site shall be achieved through a collaborative process that involves the landowners and tenants, the project developers, the District government, and the community.

2411.12 Action UNE-2.1.B: Northeast Gateway Open Space

Develop additional and interconnected public open spaces in the Ivy City and Trinidad areas, including a public plaza and park on the West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus, and improved open space at the Trinidad Recreation Center, Lewis Crowe Park and the Crummell School and its grounds.

2411.13 Action UNE-2.1.C: Crummell School Reuse

A high priority should be given to the rehabilitation of the historic Crummell School as a community or recreation center, with a mix of uses for community benefit, such as affordable and moderate-income housing, jobs training, or meeting space. Crummell School was built in 1911 and educated Black children from that time until 1972. The structure, which is a designated historic landmark, has been vacant for more than 40 years.

2411.14 Action UNE-2.1.D: Transformation of West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus

Encourage the advancement of the recommendations of the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study related to the 2015 Department of Public Works Campus Master Plan to transform the District government operations and properties at West Virginia Avenue and Okie Street into a world-class, mixed-use campus that includes public open space, public amenities, and maker/production space. The campus should be a model of sustainable design and public works operations and a catalyst for local community development.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2412** UNE-2.2 LOWER BLADENSBURG ROAD/HECHINGER MALL {#sec-10-a2412 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2412}

2412.1 Bladensburg Road extends from the starburst intersection at H Street and Benning Road approximately 2.7 miles northeast to the District/Maryland border. The road is an important community gateway, providing access to the National Arboretum and residential neighborhoods in Upper Northeast, as well as a commuter route for suburban communities in Prince Georges County. The road contains two distinct segments: the lower portion (addressed here) is south of New York Avenue. The upper portion (addressed in Section 2.4) is north of New York Avenue and is part of the South Central/Gateway and Fort Lincoln neighborhoods.

2412.2 Hechinger Mall anchors the lower end of the Bladensburg corridor. The mall was developed in 1982, in part to help bring retail back to Northeast Washington, DC following the period of economic hardship of H Street NE after the unrest in 1968. At one time, the 190,000-square-foot mall had one of the largest stores in the Hechinger chain, but today it serves as a community shopping center anchored by a supermarket, a pharmacy, and several national discount retailers. The adjacent Benning Road NE and Bladensburg Road NE are part of the H Street Main Street service area.

2412.3 The area immediately to the east includes the Langston Terrace and Carver Terrace public housing developments, historic Langston Golf Course, and the Schools on the Hill campus comprised of the former Spingarn Senior High School, Brown Junior High School, and Charles Young Elementary. The area has played an important role in the history of the District’s Black community. Langston Terrace Dwellings was the District’s first public housing complex and was designed by renowned Black architect Hilyard Robinson. When it opened in 1938, prospective residents had to be gainfully employed Black residents with children. The federally owned Langston Golf Course shares a similar history: when it opened in 1939, it was the only golf course in the city open to Black residents. The nearby 42-acre Schools on the Hill campus offers a scenic academic environment above the Anacostia River and is one of the largest complexes of public-school buildings in Washington, DC.

2412.4 The Hechinger Mall and Benning Road corridor is experiencing significant change, driven in part by the revival of northeast Capitol Hill, the H Street corridor, and the Anacostia waterfront area. Approximately 257 units of housing were delivered at Arboretum Place just north of Hechinger Mall. The mall itself offers long-term opportunities for redevelopment as a more pedestrian-friendly and urban mixed-use center, with additional square footage and possibly new uses, such as housing. Pedestrian-oriented retail storefronts along Bladensburg Road hold the potential for revival and restoration. The historic 42-acre Schools on the Hill campus has also been considered as the showpiece for a dedicated academic environment, with new educational facilities, mixed-use development, and services that are integrated with the adjacent neighborhood. The H Street/Benning Road NE streetcar line started passenger service in 2016. The Spingarn streetcar and training facility was also completed at that time and includes space for light vehicle maintenance and a community room.

2412.5 Policy UNE-2.2.1: Mixed-Use Development Along Benning and Bladensburg

Improve the overall appearance of Benning and Bladensburg Roads in the vicinity of Hechinger Mall. Pursue opportunities for additional pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development fronting on these streets, including ground-floor retail uses and upper-floor housing. Housing opportunities should accommodate a mix of incomes, families, and other household units. Such development should be linked to transportation investments along these streets, including the streetcar along H Street/Benning Road NE.

2412.6 Policy UNE-2.2.2: Hechinger Mall

Promote continued reinvestment in Hechinger Mall as a community shopping center. Support additional development on the Hechinger site, creating a more urban and safer pedestrian-oriented streetscape and adding new uses, such as housing. Housing opportunities should accommodate a mix of incomes, families, and other household units.

2412.7 Policy UNE-2.2.3: Arboretum Gateway

Improve the visual quality of Bladensburg Road and enhance its function as a gateway to the National Arboretum.

2412.8 Policy UNE-2.2.4: Langston and Carver Terrace

Sustain the Langston Terrace and Carver Terrace developments as essential housing resources for lower-income families. Historic Langston Terrace should be preserved.

2412.9 Policy UNE-2.2.5: Schools on the Hill Campus

Improve the integration of the Schools on the Hill Campus (former Spingarn, Brown, Phelps, and Young Schools) with the adjacent Carver/Langston neighborhood.

2412.10 Policy UNE-2.2.6: Extension of H Street NE Arts District

Work with area stakeholders to develop a strategy for promoting development of an arts district along the eastern end of Florida Avenue NE by considering linkages with the H Street NE arts and entertainment district and planned development on lower Bladensburg Road. Support additional development and visual improvements on the corridor.

2412.11 Action UNE-2.2.A: Crime Prevention

Implement the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) plans outlined in the Benning Road Corridor Redevelopment Framework.

2412.12 Action UNE-2.2.B: Bladensburg Road Corridor

Explore a tailored planning effort for the Bladensburg Road corridor that provides analysis and guidance for land use and urban design.

2412.13 Action UNE-2.2.C: Langston Golf Course

Continue to work with the federal government to transform the Langston Golf Course into an appealing amenity for the surrounding neighborhoods.

2412.14 Action UNE-2.2.D: Connectivity

Leverage the existing streetcar and continue to explore transit options to improve connectivity to RFK Stadium to the south and the Anacostia River to the east.

See the Capitol Hill Area Element for additional information.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2413** UNE-2.3 NEW YORK AVENUE CORRIDOR AND BRENTWOOD {#sec-10-a2413 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2413}

2413.1 The New York Avenue corridor/Brentwood area includes the expansive industrial and commercial area on both sides of New York Avenue between Florida Avenue and the Maryland state line. On the north, the corridor abuts the Brentwood and Langdon communities. On the south, it abuts Ivy City and the National Arboretum. Brentwood is home to the 633,000-square-foot U.S. Postal facility. Other large uses in the area include a Metro maintenance facility, the Ivy City railyards, the WMATA Bladensburg Bus Division, and the historic art deco Hecht’s warehouse, now converted to apartments. New York Avenue itself is lined by strip commercial uses, such as hotels, fast food restaurants, and gas stations.

2413.2 The corridor faces land use, transportation, and urban design challenges. Some of the industrial uses are considered underused by today’s market standards and are being considered for additional uses, such as retail development. The physical environment along the New York Avenue corridor is indicative of auto-oriented uses, with tall pole-mounted signs and complex intersection configurations. New York Avenue itself is a major commuter corridor and truck route poised for a multimodal transformation. In August 2013, the Gateway Wings sculpture was integrated into the New York Avenue Bridge, just east of Florida Avenue. The 50-foot high steel structure, which is illuminated at night, signifies this important entrance to the center of the District.

2413.3 In 2014 the District’s Department of Transportation completed moveDC, the District’s multimodal long-range transportation plan, which includes multiple recommendations for New York Avenue. The plan recognizes the significant transportation pressures New York Avenue faces from daily commuters and as a primary freight corridor. It recommends improvements to New York Avenue to help meet these needs, including managed lanes from I-395 to the District line, as well as freight capacity improvements. The plan also recognizes that safety enhancements are needed along the corridor at major intersections with North Capitol Street, Florida Avenue, 4th Street, and Bladensburg Road. In addition, the plan suggests building a trail and associated streetscape improvements along New York Avenue from Mt. Vernon Square connecting to the Arboretum, Fort Lincoln, and the Anacostia River.

2413.4 Additional land use recommendations for the New York Avenue industrial area are contained in the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study. These recommendations include strengthening and enhancing light industrial PDR activities along the north side of the avenue between Montana and South Dakota Avenues, retaining the area’s municipal-industrial functions (bus garages, road maintenance facilities, etc.), and considering the addition of other uses (such as retail) on strategic sites.

2413.5 Policy UNE-2.3.1: New York Avenue Corridor

Improve the appearance of New York Avenue as a gateway to Washington, DC. Support road design changes and streetscape improvements, that improve traffic flow and enhance the road’s operation as a multimodal corridor that meets both regional and local needs.

2413.6 Policy UNE-2.3.2: Production, Distribution, and Repair Land Uses

Retain the concentration of PDR land uses in the New York Avenue corridor. While some industrial land was converted to other uses on select sites, such as the Bladensburg/Montana/New York triangle, these changes should not diminish the area’s ability to function as an industrial district meeting the needs of government and District businesses and residents. Mixed-use redevelopment should complement PDR uses within the building envelope as a primary use when PDR zoned.

2413.7 Policy UNE-2.3.3: Infill Development

Support infill development and redevelopment on underused commercial sites along New York Avenue. Particularly encourage retail development that would provide better access to goods and services for residents, and sales tax dollars for the District.

2413.8 Policy UNE-2.3.4: Consolidate and Formalize Auto-Related Uses

Use zoning, enforcement, and other regulatory mechanisms to address nuisance and operational issues of some existing auto-related businesses on Bladensburg Road. Create a more pedestrian friendly environment along Bladensburg Road, possibly placing the dealerships within an enclosed showroom.

2413.9 Action UNE-2.3.A: Business Improvement District

Consider the creation of a Business Improvement District (BID) serving the New York Avenue corridor.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2414** UNE-2.4 UPPER BLADENSBURG ROAD/FORT LINCOLN {#sec-10-a2414 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2414}

2414.1 The Upper Bladensburg corridor has experienced disinvestment for many years. While still dominated by automotive repair shops, auto parts shops, car lots, and vacant businesses, there has been some retail activity in recent years, including one of the first craft breweries to open in Upper Northeast.

2414.2 The opportunity to improve Upper Bladensburg Road is tied to plans for Fort Lincoln, which is located northeast of the Bladensburg/South Dakota Avenue intersection. Plans to build out the remaining vacant land at Fort Lincoln are now approved and under construction, with more than two phases of construction completed. Additional townhomes, a shopping center, and offices or distribution facilities should follow in the coming years. The increased population presents an opportunity to revitalize the adjacent Bladensburg corridor, and bring back some of the neighborhood-oriented shopping that disappeared from the corridor years ago.

2414.3 Policy UNE-2.4.1: Fort Lincoln New Town

Support the continued development of Fort Lincoln New Town compatible with approved plans for the site. Fort Lincoln should be recognized as an important opportunity for family-oriented, owner-occupied housing, large-scale retail development, and additional employment.

2414.4 Policy UNE-2.4.2: Upper Bladensburg Corridor

Support additional neighborhood-serving retail uses along the Upper Bladensburg Road corridor (from South Dakota Avenue to Eastern Avenue). Encourage the gradual transformation of this area from an auto-oriented industrial strip to a more pedestrian-oriented mixed-use area, providing services to the adjacent Woodridge, South Central, and Fort Lincoln neighborhoods, while retaining PDR uses.

2414.5 Action UNE-2.4.A: Streetscape and Façade Improvements

Develop programs to improve the streetscape and commercial facades along Bladensburg Road from Eastern Avenue to South Dakota Avenue.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2415** UNE-2.5 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE METRO STATION {#sec-10-a2415 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2415}

2415.1 This focus area includes the Metro station vicinity and the 2.7-mile corridor extending from North Capitol Street east to the Maryland line. The Rhode Island Avenue-Brentwood Metro station opened in 1976 and was one of the first stations in the system. Despite the fact that the station is just one mile from Downtown Washington, DC, its current configuration has a suburban design. The station is adjoined by one of the largest surface parking lots in the District on its southeast and by an aging shopping center on the northwest. Other uses in the vicinity include the big box retail center on Brentwood Road, light industrial uses, and strip commercial uses on Rhode Island Avenue.

2415.2 Land around the Rhode Island Avenue Metro station is underused, but there are development plans and infrastructure investments to create a community focal point . The WMATA parking lot was redeveloped into Rhode Island Row, a mixed-use development at the foot of the Metro station, east of the tracks. Over time, additional properties may transition to new uses. Medium- to high-density housing is strongly encouraged in this area, and traffic improvements are recommended to make the station more accessible for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Improvements to the Metropolitan Branch Trail have been made through this area, including a pedestrian bridge over the railroad, and there are opportunities for trail-oriented development at the Rhode Island Shopping Center west of the tracks. The Rhode Island Shopping Center offers another opportunity for improved pedestrian connectivity and transit-oriented development.

2415.3 Extending east from the station, Rhode Island Avenue is a wide tree-lined street with maintained homes and apartments, scattered commercial businesses and churches, and public uses like fire stations and parks. A walkable shopping district between 20th and 24th Streets NE serves as the retail heart of the Woodridge community and the home of the Rhode Island Avenue Main Street.

2415.4 The general character of the avenue is expected to change as infill development occurs near the Metro station and in several locations along the corridor. Filling in gaps in the street wall would be desirable in the commercial areas, creating a more pedestrian-friendly environment. While most of the street is zoned for commercial uses, development that includes ground-floor retail uses or maker spaces, including space for artists and creatives, and upper-story housing would be desirable. The surrounding area is underserved by retail uses and would benefit from new restaurants, local-serving stores, and other services.

2415.5 Policy UNE-2.5.1: Brookland’s 12th Street Corridor

In consultation with property owners, community groups, and residents, use zoning, incentives, and other tools to facilitate mixed-use projects . Create productive synergies between 12th Street and planned adjacent economic development projects, assist with connectivity and parking policies, encourage quality project designs, and encourage voluntary preservation of buildings on 12th Street, which is most emblematic of Brookland’s history and character.

2415.6 Policy UNE-2.5.2: Rhode Island Avenue-Brentwood Metro Station

Encourage the development of additional medium- to high-density mixed-use, pedestrian and multimodal-friendly development around the Rhode Island Avenue Metro station, particularly on the surface parking lots in the station vicinity. Review the Rhode Island properties west of and proximate to the Rhode Island Avenue Metro station for transit connections and appropriate land use recommendations.

2415.7 Policy UNE-2.5.3: Redevelopment of Older Commercial and Industrial Sites

Encourage the long-term reuse of older commercial and industrial sites in the Rhode Island Avenue Metro station vicinity with mixed uses, including housing and PDR uses. Future mixed-use development should be pedestrian-oriented, with design features that encourage walking to the Metro station and nearby shopping.

2415.8 Policy UNE-2.5.4: Pedestrian Improvements

Enhance pedestrian connections between the neighborhoods around the Rhode Island Avenue Metro station and the station itself. This should include improvements to the public realm along Rhode Island Avenue, with safer pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other amenities that make the street more attractive.

2415.9 Policy UNE-2.5.5: Rhode Island Avenue Corridor

Strengthen the Rhode Island Avenue corridor from 13th to 24th Street NE as a pedestrian-oriented mixed-use district that better meets the needs of residents in the Brentwood, Brookland, Woodridge, and South Central neighborhoods. Infill development that combines ground-floor retail and upper-story office and/or housing should be encouraged, along with retention of historic significant structures and the Main Street character.

2415.10 Action UNE-2.5.A: Rhode Island Avenue Station Area Planning

Work with WMATA, the local ANC, local businesses, and the community to encourage plans for the Rhode Island Avenue Metro area to enhance the surrounding neighborhoods and address issues such as traffic, parking, and station access. Acknowledge the site’s former use and history as the Colombian Harmony Cemetery in the station area design through art, displays, or other features.

2415.11 Action UNE-2.5.B: Further Density Requests at Brookland Manor

Requests for increased zoning and/or density that create residential units and result from the higher FLUM designation at the area bounded by Rhode Island Avenue, Montana Avenue and Saratoga Streets NE (Brookland Manor) shall include the following: a minimum of 30 percent of all units created through this additional increase in density must be affordable, with all of these units available to households earning no more than 60 percent of the regional MFI and available for vouchers with rent caps. In addition, at least 20 percent of all affordable units shall be family sized units with a mix of three, four and five bedrooms.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2416** UNE-2.6 BROOKLAND METRO STATION AREA {#sec-10-a2416 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2416}

2416.1 The Brookland-CUA Metro station is located between the Brookland commercial district (12th Street NE) on the east and the CUA/Trinity University campuses on the west. The station is abutted by low-density residential uses on the east and a mix of light industrial, commercial, and institutional uses on the north, south, and west. Despite the presence of the Metro station, much of the vacant land in the station vicinity is zoned for industrial uses and is currently underused. Major property owners include WMATA and CUA.

2416.2 The D.C. Council approved the Brookland-CUA Metro Station Small Area Plan in 2009. The plan assessed land use and zoning, the retail environment, transit/traffic safety, urban design, cultural tourism, and heritage development. The goal was to guide future development in the station vicinity in a manner that respects the nearby residential area (particularly the area along 10th Street NE and east of 10th Street NE), mitigates parking and traffic impacts, and improves connections to nearby institutions and shopping areas. The plan also laid the groundwork for the vibrant, transit-oriented town center on the west side of the metro station abutting the CUA campus.

2416.3 Policy UNE-2.6.1: Brookland/CUA Metro Station Area

Encourage mixed-use development on vacant and underused property in the vicinity of the Brookland-CUA Metro station, including the parking lot east of the station. Special care should be taken to preserve the existing low-scale residential uses along and east of 10thStreet NE, retain the number of bus bays at the station, and develop strategies to deal with overflow parking and cut-through traffic in the station vicinity.

2416.4 Policy UNE-2.6.2: Pedestrian and Bicyclist Access

Improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety and access to the Metropolitan Branch Trail and the Brookland-CUA Metro station, particularly eastward along Monroe Street (linking to the 12th Street NE shopping area) and Michigan Avenue (linking to CUA).

2416.5 Policy UNE-2.6.3: Long-Term Land Use Changes

Support long-term land use changes on industrially zoned land in the station vicinity, particularly in the area immediately north of Michigan Avenue and in the area to the southwest along 8th Street, consistent with the recommendations in the Brookland-CUA Metro Station Small Area Plan. Consistent with the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study, the industrially zoned areas within a quarter of a mile of the Metro station may be considered appropriate for long-term transition to more intense uses, including housing, live-work lofts, artists’ studios, and similar uses.

2416.6 Action UNE-2.6.A: Brookland-CUA Metro Small Area Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Brookland/CUA Metro Small Area Plan.

2416.7 Action UNE-2.6.B: Parking Strategy

Develop a strategy for shared parking and carsharing programs in new development so that it addresses the area’s transit and pedestrian orientation, the need for adequate parking to serve area businesses and residents, and to prevent spillover into the surrounding neighborhoods.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2417** UNE 2.7 FORT TOTTEN METRO STATION AREA {#sec-10-a2417 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2417}

2417.1 The Fort Totten Station is served by the Metro’s Yellow, Green, and Red lines. As the transfer point between two intersecting lines, the station area has strategic importance in plans for the District’s growth. Presently, Fort Totten is adjoined by large surface parking lots, industrial uses, and garden apartments. New residential development is taking place east of the station, and several development projects are in different phases of review or construction. The station itself sits within the boundary of the Fort Circle Parks. Fort Totten Park, immediately west of the station, is an important District historic site and contains the remnants of one of the most important Civil War fortifications in the Fort Circle chain.

2417.2 The large parcels owned by WMATA, located on the east and west sides of the station, present an opportunity for transit-oriented, mixed-use development. A strong emphasis should be placed on housing and local-serving retail uses on these sites, with an orientation to the station and connecting bus lines.

2417.3 The intersection of Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue is located about a quarter of a mile northeast of the station. The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) has reconstructed the intersection to improve safety conditions for pedestrians and vehicles and made more efficient use of the very large right-of-way. The reconfigured intersection has facilitated the redevelopment of adjacent commercial and residential uses along Riggs Road, including the Walmart Supercenter between 3rd Street NE and Chillum Place.

2417.4 Policy UNE-2.7.1: Fort Totten Metro Station

Encourage the reuse of WMATA-owned land and other underused property in the immediate vicinity of the Fort Totten Metro station, focusing on the area bounded by the Fort Circle Parks on the west and south, Riggs Road on the north, and South Dakota Avenue on the east. This area is envisioned as a transit village, combining housing, ground-floor retail, local-serving office space, new parkland and civic uses, and structured parking. Redevelopment should occur in a way that conserves the lower density residences in the nearby Manor South, Michigan Park, and Queens Chapel neighborhoods, and addresses traffic congestion and other development impacts.

2417.5 Policy UNE-2.7.2: Traffic Patterns and Pedestrian Safety

Improve pedestrian access to the Fort Totten Metro station, with a particular emphasis on pedestrian and vehicle safety improvements at the South Dakota/Riggs intersection.

2417.6 Policy UNE-2.7.3: Municipal/Industrial Uses

Retain the established municipal/industrial land uses located to the south of the Fort Totten station (including the Trash Transfer Station on the west side of the tracks and salt dome on the east side). Guide future development in the vicinity of these activities in a way that does not impede their ability to function.

2417.7 Action UNE-2.7.A: Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area Final Development Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area Final Development Plan.

See the Rock Creek East Area Element for additional information.

### **10-A25** IMPLEMENTATION

##### **10-A DCMR § 2500** OVERVIEW {#sec-10-a2500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2500}

2500.1 The Implementation Element describes how the policies and actions in the Comprehensive Plan should be carried out. The element provides recommendations on improving the long-range planning process, enhancing links between the Comprehensive Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), reporting on Comprehensive Plan progress, and updating and amending the Comprehensive Plan in the future. It also identifies recommended Comprehensive Plan actions, with links to zoning regulations to facilitate making zoning “not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan”, as required by District Code.

2500.2 This element is divided into three sections:

Administration of the Planning Process;

Strengthening Linkages to Capital Programming and Zoning; and

Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Comprehensive Plan.

2500.3 The Implementation Element also includes an “Action Plan” (Table 25.1, or the Implementation Table) summarizing all actions in the Comprehensive Plan. All of the actions listed in Table 25.1 are excerpted from Chapters 1-24 of the Comprehensive Plan; the reader is advised to consult the relevant chapter for more information and additional context for each action listed.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2501** IM-1 ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS {#sec-10-a2501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2501}

2501.1 This section of the Implementation Element addresses the manner in which land use planning policies are interpreted and applied on a day-to-day basis. This includes the development review, small area planning, zoning, long-range planning, and community involvement activities used to carry out Comprehensive Plan policies. These policies effectively define “standard operating procedures” (SOPs) for planning administration in Washington, DC.

2501.2 An equitable District is one in which all residents have the same opportunities to thrive and prosper, where health outcomes are improved for all racial and ethnic groups, and environmental benefits are shared by everyone. Equity is critically important to achieving positive outcomes within the District’s communities. The goal of equity must go beyond closing the gap between different populations to establish conditions of well-being for all groups of people.

2501.3 The Office of Planning (OP) will synthesize and align policies throughout the Comprehensive Plan that explicitly focus on advancing equity and present these in the form of an Equity Crosswalk. The crosswalk will highlight those occurrences where equity (both directly and indirectly) appears within each chapter to better understand existing Comprehensive Plan policies through a stronger equity focus and determine what is missing or needs to be strengthened.

2501.4 Throughout the Comprehensive Plan elements, the term “racial equity lens” is used for activities ranging from preparing small area plans to evaluating development decisions. The intent is for District agencies to develop processes and tools tailored to various programs, activities, and decisions, that center and account for the needs of residents of color, to achieve these outcomes:

Identify and consider past and current systemic racial inequities;

Identify who benefits or is burdened from a decision;

Disaggregate data by race, and analyze data considering different impacts and outcomes by race; and

Evaluate the program, activity or decisions to identify measures, such as policies, plans, or requirements, that reduce systemic racial inequities, eliminate race as a predictor of results, and promote equitable development outcomes.

2501.5 The Comprehensive Plan and specifically the Implementation Element includes various strategies that will be used by the District to incorporate equity, and particularly racial equity, considerations to prioritize and target public investments, policies, and programs, and make decisions that create measurable improvements in the lives of District residents, particularly those who have been most marginalized by systemic racism and structural inequity. A racial equity lens should be applied in these efforts that is explicit in naming and considering each representative community of color in the District, including African Americans, Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders, Asians, Indigenous populations, or members of the Latinx community. Further, implementation strategies should be targeted in proportion to the historical trauma and disproportionate outcomes experienced by those communities. This can best be accomplished by disaggregating data to track and analyze specific outcomes for each racial and ethnic group.

2501.6 Along with consideration of the defining language on equity and racial equity in the Framework Element, guidance in the Citywide Elements on District-wide equity objectives, and the Area Elements should be used as a tool to help guide the equity interests and needs of different areas of the District.

2501.7 Action IM-1.A: Equity Crosswalk

Prepare and maintain an Equity Crosswalk document that compiles, analyzes, and presents text, policies and actions that advance equity in the Comprehensive Plan as an accessible, publicly available document. Prepare other topical crosswalk documents as appropriate.

2501.8 Action: IM-1.B: Equity Tools for District Agencies, including the Zoning Commission

Prepare and implement tools, including training, to assist District agencies in evaluating and implementing the Comprehensive Plan’s policies and actions through an equity, particularly a racial equity lens. This includes tools to use as part of the development review process, preparation of plans, zoning code updates, and preparation of the capital improvement program, that consider how to apply an equity analysis in these processes, including any information needed. This shall specifically include a process for the Zoning Commission to evaluate all actions through a racial equity lens as part of its Comprehensive Plan consistency analysis.

2501.9 Action IM-1.C: Equity and Resilience Training

Provide regular training on equity, racial equity and resilience to development review decision makers and related staff, including the Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Adjustment, and the Historic Preservation Review Board.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2502** IM-1.1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW {#sec-10-a2502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2502}

2502.1 The development review process provides one of the most effective means of carrying out Comprehensive Plan policies. Projects requiring review by the Office of Planning or Zoning staff, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, and the Zoning Commission may be tied to findings of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, or at least to evaluations that consider relevant Comprehensive Plan policies. Reviews by other agencies of development proposals also provides a means of evaluating the impacts of major projects on public services and the natural environment, consistency with policies related to achieving resilience and equity, including racial equity, and assessing the compatibility of proposed design with adjacent uses and neighborhood character. The latter assessment is particularly important in historic districts, where review by the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) also may be required. In their areas of expertise, the views and recommendations of District agencies should be carefully considered, and, where called for by law or regulation, given great weight. As specified in DC code, the issues and concerns of ANCs should also be given great weight by the appropriate decision-making bodies.

2502.2 Not all projects are subject to review prior to filing an application for a building permit. Much of Washington, DC’s development is permitted as a matter-of-right under existing zoning, affording few opportunities for OP to review it for Comprehensive Plan consistency. In the future, increased scrutiny of matter-of-right projects will be needed, particularly with respect to urban design, environmental impacts, racial equity, and affordability. This could be included through adjustments to the thresholds for projects requiring Large Tract Review, implementation of a Site Plan Review process, changes to the District’s Environmental Impact Screening Forms, and additional standards to ensure that new development addresses broader civic issues, including the District’s commitments to housing and affordable housing, equity, and resilience, as well as open space, the transportation network, arts and culture, parking, infrastructure, the natural environment, public service needs, and affordability.

2502.3 A variety of tools, which could include regulatory measures, incentives, or more efficient processes, should be explored and implemented to attract and encourage developers and property owners to provide development consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals that offer benefits to address District-wide and neighborhood needs. Recent zoning regulation proposals to expand inclusionary zoning - IZ Plus – are an example of carefully crafted regulations that expand applicability while offering incentives to provide more affordable housing. As public policy choices expand development potential, the benefits of development should be widely shared. At the same time, these tools should reflect the interest in keeping the District an attractive, competitive location for development and to conduct business.

2502.4 Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) were originally conceived as a way to develop large tracts of land more creatively than was allowed by matter-of-right zoning. Creative design has been further incentivized through the granting of additional building height and density by the Zoning Commission in exchange for public benefits, such as affordable housing and open space. The zoning regulations establish minimum lot area standards for PUDs, ranging from two acres in low- and moderate-density residential districts to 10,000 square feet in high-density and mixed-use zoning districts, with provisions for a smaller area under certain circumstances. Public benefits are generally provided on-site but may sometimes be provided in the surrounding area, subject to specific provisions set forth by zoning.

2502.5 While the PUD process allows for significant public input, and often results in superior design, benefits, and amenities, concerns are sometimes expressed about the location and extent of the benefit and amenities, the level of additional density that may be granted, and a perceived lack of predictability. Evaluation of the PUD thresholds, standards, and waiver conditions were considered as part of the review and update to the zoning regulations in 2016.

2502.6 Policy IM-1.1.1: Development Impacts

To the greatest extent feasible, use the development review process to ensure that potential positive impacts are maximized and potential negative impacts on neighborhoods, the transportation network, parking, environmental quality, and other issues, including construction impacts, are assessed and adequately mitigated, consistent with the guidance in the Comprehensive Plan and applicable requirements.

2502.7 Policy IM-1.1.2: Review of Development in Surrounding Communities

Increase the District’s participation in the review of development projects located in neighboring jurisdictions along the District’s boundaries to promote land use compatibility, improve access to services and amenities, promote coordinated transportation systems, and more effectively address transportation and parking issues.

2502.8 Policy IM-1.1.3: Relating Development to Infrastructure Capacity

Align development with infrastructure capacity, with the intent of not exceeding capacity. Land use decisions should balance the need to accommodate growth and development with available transportation capacity, including transit, and other travel modes and the availability of water, sewer, drainage, solid waste, and other public services.

2502.9 Policy IM-1.1.4: Incentives for Achieving Goals and Policies

Use zoning incentives, such as increased height and density, in appropriate locations to achieve Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, including advancing equitable development and meaningful racial equity outcomes and increased housing and affordable housing supply. A variety of tools, which could include regulatory measures, incentives, or more efficient processes, should be explored and implemented as appropriate to encourage development consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals that offer benefits to address District-wide and neighborhood needs. These could include flexibility with zoning requirements, entitlement and regulatory relief, permissive design review, reduction of parking requirements, expedited entitlement review, waivers of various fees, and other financing tools.

2502.10 Policy IM-1.1.5: Development Approvals and the Comprehensive Plan

Consider the goals and policies of the District and Citywide Elements, where applicable, in the approval of PUDs, variances, campus plans, special exceptions large tract reviews, and other projects requiring review.

2502.11 Policy IM-1.1.6: Studies Informing Zoning Case Approvals

To the extent the following factors are relevant for consideration, ensure that zoning case reviews on matters such as PUDs are informed by: (1) transportation and infrastructure studies and recommended conditions of approval to mitigate potential impacts; (2) agreements for financing any necessary improvements, including public and private responsibilities; (3) agreements to comply with District employment and hiring requirements and other regulations that provide public benefits to District residents; and (4) racial equity reviews, as identified in Action IM-1..B.

2502.12 Policy IM-1.1.7: Housing as a PUD Amenity

Consider the provision of on-site housing for low-income households, older adults, persons with disabilities, and larger family-sized units to serve growing and multigenerational families as an important, high-priority amenity in PUDs, particularly in areas of high land value, where the provision of affordable housing is otherwise difficult to achieve. In areas where affordable housing goals are achieved, PUD amenities may focus on other identified community needs, such as access to employment, education, health services, and other services and amenities.

2502.13 Policy IM-1.1.8: Location of PUD Amenities

A substantial part of the amenities proposed in PUDs shall accrue to the community in which the PUD could have an impact.

2502.14 Policy IM-1.1.9: Monitor Development Requirements, Benefits, Amenities, and Other Commitments

Monitor and ensure commitments made through the development review process are implemented, including development requirements, benefits, amenities, or actions offered for incentives.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2503** IM-1.2 SMALL AREA PLANNING {#sec-10-a2503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2503}

2503.1 Small Area Plans cover defined geographic areas that require more focused direction than can be provided by the Comprehensive Plan. The intent of such plans is to guide long-range development, improve neighborhoods, achieve District-wide goals, and attain economic and community benefits. The Comprehensive Plan Area Elements identify recommended locations for Small Area Plans, with an emphasis on the Land Use Change Areas, Enhancement Areas, and business districts shown on the Comprehensive Plan’s Generalized Policy Map. A Small Area Plan provides supplemental guidance to the Comprehensive Plan, unless incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan by a D.C. Council act. In exceptional cases, it may be appropriate to prepare a Small Area Plan for an area not called for in the Comprehensive Plan. Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and public involvement in the development of Small Area Plans is desired and expected.

2503.2 Further, the Generalized Policy Map identifies Future Planning Analysis Areas and describes them as follows: “Areas of large tracts or corridors where future analysis is anticipated to ensure adequate planning for equitable development. Boundaries shown are for illustrative purposes. Final boundaries will be determined as part of the future planning analyses process for each area. Planning analyses generally establish guiding documents. Such analyses shall precede any zoning changes in this area. The planning process should evaluate current infrastructure and utility capacity against full build out and projected population and employment growth. Planning should also focus on issues most relevant to the community that can be effectively addressed through a planning process. Individual planning analyses may study smaller areas than the Analysis Area. For the purposes of determining whether a planning analysis is needed before a zoning change, the boundaries of the Future Planning Analysis Areas shall be considered as drawn. The evaluation of current infrastructure and utility capacity should specify the physical or operational capacity both inside the boundaries and any relevant District-wide infrastructure available.”

2503.3 Notwithstanding 2503.2, re-zoning proposals received prior to planning studies in these Future Planning Analysis Areas may be considered if the following occur or have occurred: a Small Area Plan, development framework, technical study, design guidelines, Planned Unit Development, master plan already approved by the National Capital Planning Commission, or the re-zoning proposal would have been consistent with the 2012 Future Land Use Map. The intent is that both steps of the two-step process must occur: planning analyses and then appropriate rezoning, although in the case of a Planned Unit Development the planning analyses and rezoning may be combined. To advance deeply affordable housing production, proposals that reserve at least one third (33 percent) of housing units as affordable to very-low- and extremely-low-income households for the life of the building in Future Planning Analysis Areas with high housing costs and few affordable housing options may proceed in advance of planning analyses.

2503.4 Policy IM-1.2.1: Small Area Plans

Prepare Small Area Plans and other planning studies for parts of Washington, DC where detailed direction or standards are needed to guide land use, transportation, housing, urban design, equitable development and other future physical planning decisions. These plans must be conducted using a racial equity lens and consider use of a racial equity impact analysis or similar tools. The focus should be on areas that offer opportunities for new residential, commercial, and mixed-use development, or areas with challenges or characteristics requiring place-specific planning actions.

2503.5 Policy IM-1.2.2: Prioritizing Small Area Plans and Other Planning Studies

Use the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements, the Generalized Policy Map and land use monitoring activities to identify areas where Small Area Plans or other appropriate planning studies should be conducted. Prioritize planning study resources and efforts in locations specified in the Area Elements, within the Future Planning Analysis Areas and Resilience Areas, Land Use Change areas, Enhancement areas, or business areas downtown. A Small Area Plan or other planning study may also be appropriate in response to community requests that demonstrate a clear purpose and need and aligns with these priorities to the greatest extent possible. In exceptional cases, it may be appropriate to prepare a Small Area Plan for an area not called for in the Comprehensive Plan.

2503.6 Policy IM-1.2.3: Protocol for Small Area Plans

Ensure that Small Area Plans and other studies take a form appropriate to the needs of both the community and the District, reflecting community and District-wide needs, District-wide and neighborhood economic development policies and priorities, market conditions, and implementation requirements. As with any other commitment of public resources, Small Area Plan work should consider competing demands, available staffing and time, and available funding. Such plans must be shaped using a racial equity lens and address topics such as neighborhood revitalization and conservation needs and strategies, achieving housing and affordable housing targets, addressing displacement, aesthetic and public space improvements, circulation improvements and transportation management, capital improvement requirements and financing strategies, the need for zoning changes or special zoning requirements, and other implementation techniques necessary to achieve plan objectives. Small Area Plans are typically approved by resolution of the D.C. Council, and information from these plans may be subsequently incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Elements. If approved by D.C. Council resolution, the Small Area Plans should be used as supplemental guidance by the Zoning Commission where not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. A Small Area Plan can be incorporated into, and given the same force as, the Comprehensive Plan by D.C. Council act.

2503.7 Action IM-1.2.A: Implementation of Small Area Plans

As needed, amend the Comprehensive Plan to reflect Small Area Plan policies that are inconsistent with or not appropriately specified in the Comprehensive Plan.

2503.8 Action IM-1.2.B Small Area Plan Activities

Provide a list of completed, in-progress, and proposed Small Area Plans and other planning studies through the Comprehensive Plan Progress Reports, as discussed in Action IM-3.1.A.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2504** IM-1.3 ZONING REGULATIONS AND CONSISTENCY {#sec-10-a2504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2504}

2504.1 The importance of zoning as a tool for implementing the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Future Land Use Map, is discussed in several places in the Comprehensive Plan. The Home Rule Charter requires that zoning “shall not be inconsistent” with the Comprehensive Plan. Consequently, revisions to the Comprehensive Plan should be followed by revisions to the Zone Map or text, with an emphasis on eliminating clear inconsistencies.

2504.2 However, the zoning impact of the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan is broad and is not limited to areas of conflict between the Comprehensive Plan and Zone Map. Additional zoning map amendments may be needed to achieve neighborhood revitalization or conservation goals, greater housing availability, and access to public transit. A major revision to the zoning regulations was completed in 2016. Action items throughout the Comprehensive Plan were considered during this effort, eventually enabling zoning to work more effectively as a Comprehensive Plan implementation tool. Table 25.1 highlights all zoning-related actions that are included in the Comprehensive Plan.

2504.3 Policy IM-1.3.1: Updating Land Use Controls

Regularly review and update the District’s land use controls and building codes to eliminate obsolete regulations and develop new regulations that address emerging issues, land uses, building types, and technologies.

2504.4 Policy IM-1.3.2: Zone Map Consistency

Consistent with the Home Rule Charter, ensure that the Zone Map is “not inconsistent” with the Comprehensive Plan, including the text and the Future Land Use Map. Make appropriate revisions to the Zone Map or zoning text to improve its alignment with the Comprehensive Plan text and the Future Land Use Map and to eliminate clear inconsistencies.

2504.5 Policy IM-1.3.3: Consultation of Comprehensive Plan in Zoning Decisions

The Board of Zoning Adjustment, the Zoning Commission, and other District agencies or decision-making bodies regulating land use, shall, when required by law or regulation, look to the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan and its accompanying maps. Decisions on requests for rezoning shall be guided by the Future Land Use and Generalized Policy Maps read in conjunction with the text of the Comprehensive Plan (Citywide and Area Elements), as well as Small Area Plans pertaining to the area proposed for rezoning.

2504.6 Policy IM-1.3.4: Interpretation of the District Elements

Recognize the overlapping nature of the Comprehensive Plan Elements as they are interpreted and applied. An element may be tempered by one or more of the other elements. As noted in Section 300.3, because the Land Use Element integrates the policies of all other District Elements, it should be given greater weight than the other elements.

2504.7 Policy IM-1.3.5: District Government Compliance

Improve and ensure continued compliance by the District government with the provisions and standards of its building and zoning regulations in all parts of Washington, DC.

2504.8 Action IM-1.3.A: Monitor and Review New Zoning Regulations

Regularly monitor and review the zoning regulations to verify that they are working to achieve their purpose and submit corrections, changes, and amendments as necessary.

2504.9 Action IM-1.3.B: Adoption of Future Land Use Map and Policy Map

Adopt the Future Land Use Map and Generalized Policy Map by Act. Any inconsistencies in land use map designations between the illustration on the map and the textual description of the map designation that is contained in the adopted Comprehensive Plan legislation shall be resolved in favor of the text.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2505** IM-1.4 LONG-RANGE PLANNING {#sec-10-a2505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2505}

2505.1 A long-range planning program is essential to implementing and maintaining the Comprehensive Plan, monitoring its effectiveness, and collecting and analyzing data to guide land use decisions. Other sections of the Comprehensive Plan speak to the importance of using long-range planning to guide the capital improvement process, public facilities plans, and transportation, housing, arts and culture, and economic development efforts. Good plans require good data that is disaggregated by race; their success should be measurable through quantifiable benchmarks. Part of the function of long-range planning is to verify that such benchmarks are realistic and based on accurate sources, research, and analysis.

2505.2 A robust long-range planning program is also critical to advocate for the District’s goals at the regional level. Successful implementation of the Comprehensive Plan will require additional regional planning initiatives and significant collaboration with adjacent state, county, and city governments. The District should lead the way in discussions about regional housing, transportation, social, and environmental issues. It should advocate for greater equity and racial equity at the regional level, stronger measures to balance jobs and housing across the region, and transit improvements to enhance regional mobility, improve environmental quality, and reduce urban sprawl.

2505.3 Continued collaboration with federal agencies to advance a shared long-range planning program for Washington, DC is critical to meet District and federal interests. Areas for specific coordination are identified throughout the Comprehensive Plan and should aim to address shared stewardship responsibilities and seamless planning across federal and non-federal properties. As proposals for statehood are advanced, seek to identify and address planning and land development issues.

2505.3 Policy IM-1.4.1: Long-Range Planning Program

Using the recommendations of this Comprehensive Plan, including in Section IM-3 (entitled, Monitoring, Evaluating, and Amending the Comprehensive Plan), continue an ongoing planning process that provides for updating and amending the Comprehensive Plan, periodic progress reports, and collection and dissemination of long-range planning data.

2505.4 Policy IM-1.4.2: Monitoring Neighborhood Trends

Monitor social, economic, community, and real estate trends that might require land use actions or policy modifications. Incorporate current, reliable data in Washington, DC’s land use planning efforts, and use that data consistently across District agencies. This data must be disaggregated by race.

2505.5 Policy IM-1.4.3: Regional Planning

Actively participate in regional planning initiatives and recognize the link between these initiatives and broader District goals relating to housing, transportation, economic growth, equity and racial equity, and environmental quality. Encourage jurisdictions across the region to do their part to meet regional housing demand for residents at all income levels, accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities, contribute to transportation improvements, and make equitable and sustainable land use and transportation decisions.

2505.6 Action IM-1.4.B: Policy Development

Use data collection and progress monitoring to actively review and formulate new policies that respond to the changes affecting Washington, DC to further the goal of an inclusive District.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2506** IM-1.5 PUBLIC INPUT {#sec-10-a2506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2506}

2506.1 Washington, DC is committed to public involvement in local government affairs, particularly those relating to land use decisions. The District has one of the most extensive networks of resident and civic organizations, neighborhood organizations, advocacy groups, and special interest groups in the country. Its 40 ANCs provide a unique forum for seeking local input and expressing priorities on a range of land use issues. The Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Adjustment, and the D.C. Council itself provide formalized opportunities for public discourse on land use matters. The internet, e-mail, social media, and other technologies have made information instantly accessible to thousands of residents, enabling unprecedented levels of participation in community meetings, summits, and forums.

2506.2 Policy IM-1.5.1 Equitable Public Participation

Throughout the Comprehensive Plan, policies and actions describe various planning activities. District-led planning activities shall provide meaningful, accessible, and equitable opportunities for public participation early and throughout these planning activities. Planning activities led by other federal, regional, non-profit, or private entities will be encouraged to follow this policy guidance. Public outreach and engagement tools and practices should be developed appropriate to the needs of the communities included in the study, reflecting the geographic area, scale, and type of planning study. Partner with and involve the community in developing plans and studies, including the comprehensive plan, small area plans, and other District-sponsored plans. Use virtual public engagement options to expand public participation opportunities. To promote full, transparent, and equitable participation, public engagement must be undertaken that enables low-income households, communities of color, older adults, and individuals with disabilities to participate fully and equitably, recognizing potential disparities in access to information and technology, availability of time and resources, and other issues.

2506.3 Policy IM-1.5.2: ANC Involvement

Include ANCs and area residents in the review of development to assist the District in responding to resident concerns. Consistent with requirements of District Code, ANC issues and concerns, as embodied in resolutions, should be given great weight as land use decisions are made.

2506.4 Policy IM-1.5.3: Promoting Community Involvement

Encourage the community to take a more proactive role in planning and development review, and to be involved in Comprehensive Plan development, amendment, and implementation. A variety of means should be used to secure community input, including advisory and technical committees, community workshops, review of draft texts, public forums and hearings, and other means of discussion and communication.

2506.5 Policy IM-1.5.4: Faith-Based Institutions

Recognize the importance of faith-based institutions to neighborhood life in Washington, DC, including their role as neighborhood centers, social service providers, and community anchors. Work collaboratively with local faith-based institutions in neighborhood planning and development initiatives to address community needs, and to reach residents who might not otherwise participate in local planning initiatives. Encourage partnerships with faith-based institutions to develop affordable housing and community services.

2506.6 Policy IM-1.5.5: Transparency in Decision-Making

Strongly encourage transparent decision-making in all land use and development matters, making information available and accessible to residents, and maintaining open lines of communication with the public as plans are developed.

2506.7 Policy IM-1.5.6: Electronic Media

Enhance communication between residents, organizations, and the District government by providing access to information through electronic media and other methods.

2506.8 Policy: IM-1.5.7: Language Access

Consistent with the District’s Language Access Act, provide equal access and participatory opportunities for District residents who cannot (or have limited capacity to) speak, read, or write English in planning processes and initiatives.

2506.9 Action IM-1.5.A: Planning Publications

Continue the development of easy-to-understand written and electronic guides to help residents navigate the planning and building processes, comprehend land use planning and zoning regulations, and follow the standards, procedures, and expectations used in local planning activities.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2507** IM-2.1 LINK TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING {#sec-10-a2507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2507}

2507.1 This section addresses the need to strengthen the links between the Comprehensive Plan and the capital improvement and zoning processes. The CIP is a multi-year plan identifying capital projects to be funded during the planning period. Capital improvement planning provides one of the most important means to establish the Comprehensive Plan as the guiding document for future public investments. The CIP provides government with a process for the planning and budgeting of capital needs. It answers questions such as what and when to buy, build, or repair. The basic function of a CIP is to provide a formal mechanism for decision-making, a link to the Comprehensive Plan, and a financial management tool for setting priorities for capital projects.

2507.2 The CIP identifies each proposed capital project to be undertaken, the year the improvements or assets will be acquired, or the project will be started, the amount of funds to be expended each year, and the way the expenditure will be funded. The CIP is not a static document; it is reviewed and updated on a regular basis to reflect changing priorities, unexpected events, and new opportunities. The CIP includes investments in the repair and rehabilitation of existing infrastructure and facilities, as well as the construction of new infrastructure and facilities. It can include capital items, such as buildings, utility systems, roadways, bridges, and parks, and other large investments, such as land.

2507.3 All capital budget requests should be reviewed and considered for their consistency with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Since 2006, the District government has strengthened the links between the Comprehensive Plan and the CIP. OP established a Capital Planning Unit to support coordinated capital planning across agencies, and the administrative budget process has incorporated criteria relating to the Comprehensive Plan. Budget forums are held each spring to share direction and afford opportunities for feedback. In line with these accomplishments, the District government produces publications that help enhance the way the District allocates capital dollars (e.g., transportation, education, moderate-income housing). The development of a multi-year CIP that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s policies, actions, and priorities will generally allow the District to make investments where they are needed most and provide a more logical allocation of funds. The CIP must use a racial equity lens to evaluate how the District’s major capital projects advance or detract from the goal of advancing equitable development District-wide.

2507.4 Policy IM-2.1.1: Capital Improvement Linkages

Link the District’s CIP to the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan priorities should be embedded within the CIP to promote the efficient and effective expenditure of public funds.

2507.5 Action IM-2.1.A: Enhanced CIP Process

Develop an enhanced CIP process that:

Uses the Comprehensive Plan as the key guide to capital investments;

Includes a Public Facilities Master Plan, including an ongoing Master Public Facilities coordination program that assesses facility needs and coordinates the public improvement plans of multiple District agencies;

Encourages use of the same data sources for efficiency and effectiveness across agencies.

Develops criteria for the review of capital projects for inclusion in the CIP that allows for an objective and transparent evaluation process;

Establishes and uses tools that provide an equity and racial equity lens to evaluate projects;

Includes an itemized allocation in the capital budget for implementation priorities that are specifically called for in the Comprehensive Plan;

Clarifies the role of OP in the CIP process;

Is adequately staffed and available to support the CIP process;

Reflects the data and direction of a school Master Facility Plan, as approved by the D.C. Council; and

Develops and maintains a multi-year capital improvements planning process based on the Comprehensive Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2508** IM-2.2 RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO ZONING REGULATIONS {#sec-10-a2508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2508}

2508.1 As noted in Section IM-1.3, zoning regulations are a primary vehicle for implementing the Comprehensive Plan. The responsibility for zoning in Washington, DC rests with the Zoning Commission. The Commission must give great weight to OP’s recommendations and to the issues and concerns raised by the ANCs on zoning cases. The Commission has its own staff support in the Office of Zoning.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2509** IM-3 MONITORING, EVALUATING, AND AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN {#sec-10-a2509 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2509}

2509.1 This section describes how and when monitoring and evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan should occur and how regular reporting can foster more accountability and openness in the Comprehensive Planning process. It also makes recommendations on the process and schedule for updating and amending the Comprehensive Plan in the future.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2510** IM-3.1 MONITORING AND EVALUATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-a2510 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2510}

2510.1 The District needs to be able to measure successes and challenges in Comprehensive Plan implementation. Working with the Office of Budget and Performance Management (OBPM), OP should make available to the public, on a regular basis, the status of all Comprehensive Plan actions and shall submit a progress report to the D.C. Council every four years per District Code requirements. OP shall publicize the report through all applicable communication channels. This is a vital part of keeping the planning process open, transparent, and responsive.

2510.2 Action IM-3.1.A Progress Reports

Every four years, prepare a Comprehensive Plan Progress Report to submit to the Council that documents the progress being made on the implementation of the District Elements. The progress report will include monitoring data, activity and impact information that is disaggregated by age, gender, race, and income levels to assess whether goals around inclusivity, racial equity, and resilience are met, and whether commitments in the Framework Element are fulfilled. The Progress Report should include appropriate metrics to evaluate progress towards equity, racial equity and resilience goals. It should include information regarding existing and emerging trends shaping land use and other selected comprehensive plan topics. The next progress report should discuss the impacts of the global pandemic and concurrent economic downturn, and efforts to address systemic inequality. The progress report should include a list of current and proposed planning studies, including Small Area Plans.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2511** IM-3.2 UPDATING AND AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN {#sec-10-a2511 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2511}

2511.1 District law calls for the Comprehensive Plan to be amended not less frequently than once every four years. That target has not consistently been achieved. In addition, when the amendment process did occur, it has taken years—even for small, incremental amendments.

2511.2 The amendment process should be used to evaluate, and as appropriate incorporate, amendments to the plan text and maps proposed by the public. Other District agencies may also submit proposed amendments, which could reflect emerging issues, outdated actions, or map changes. This should include amendments based on new Small Area Plans and other planning studies, and to incorporate information and policies from initiatives by District agencies and other regional entities (for example, a new District-wide transportation plan). If a significant number of amendments are submitted or multiple, major policy updates are proposed, it may be appropriate to pivot to a plan rewrite.

2511.3 A typical amendment process includes the following steps. OP provides broad public outreach and public comment opportunities, including to other District agencies, to solicit amendments. Each party submitting an amendment should provide information explaining the proposed change and its purpose. OP screens amendments to ensure they are appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan (e.g. not a budget or legislative request.) OP also prepares its own proposed amendments. OP then prepares a report identifying amendments it recommends for inclusion. OP distributes this report for ANC and public review and comment for a minimum of 60 days, after which OP revises the report.

2511.4 The Mayor prepares a final draft of the amendments and submits this to the Council of the District of Columbia as a bill. The Council conducts hearings, marks up the bill, and takes action. These amendments are forwarded to NCPC for a 60-day federal interest review, which could result in additional revisions. The Mayor takes action to approve or veto the legislation. The District-approved amendments are forwarded to Congress for a 30-day review.

2511.5 A major revision and a full rewrite should be treated as similar undertakings that require earlier, extensive, and iterative public participation; evaluation of overarching goals and principles; and comprehensive data collection and analysis. This results in an extensively redrafted document. A public participation strategy should be identified at the start of the process. Formal public comment periods should be used to solicit early input, review, and comment on the draft document prepared by OP. Once OP prepares a revised document, the Mayor submits the major revision or rewrite to the Council as a bill. A similar process as described above occurs.

2511.6 The public participation process for a major revision, full rewrite or an amendment should use a broad array of tools and practices and provide meaningful engagement and opportunities for participation for ANCs and the public.

2511.7 Planning and implementation are iterative processes. Amending the Comprehensive Plan is necessary to have a plan that reflects changing conditions, policies, and priorities. The basic Comprehensive Plan amendment process, including public submittal and review of proposed amendments, and the Mayor’s preparation and Council’s approval of an amendment, is governed by District law. This process should be concise, transparent, and grounded in the analysis of the need for, or impact of, amendments. Given the scope and complexity of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, it may be beneficial to consider whether changes to the process would help the District best achieve its planning goals.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2512** IM-3.2.1 THE AMENDMENT TIMELINE {#sec-10-a2512 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2512}

2512.1 It is recommended that the Comprehensive Plan be amended at least every four years and that a major revision or update of the Comprehensive Plan be completed every 12 years. The review of the practices of other major cities completed as part of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Assessment suggests that a 10- to 15-year cycle for major revisions to the Comprehensive Plan is appropriate. The major revision would reassess all Comprehensive Plan policies, including Citywide and Area Element policies. It would not necessarily include a total rewrite of each element but would focus instead on deleting outdated or irrelevant policies and actions and editing or adding policies and actions to reflect emerging issues. The current provision that the Mayor can also submit amendments at other times should be retained.

2512.2 When considering the opportunities for amending or fully rewriting the Comprehensive Plan, the following timeline is an example for an amendment cycle and major revision or rewrite:

Year 0: Plan Adoption

Years 3-4: Progress Report and Plan Amendment

Years 7-8: Progress Report and Plan Amendment

Years 11-12: Progress Report and Major Plan Revision/Rewrite

Year 14: Plan Adoption (repeat cycle)

2512.3 The following is intended to guide subsequent amendments and rewrites to the Comprehensive Plan. The Mayor shall commence public outreach and an engagement process for a Comprehensive Plan rewrite proposal at least 12 months in advance of submitting a rewrite proposal to the Council, and no later than nine months in advance of submitting an amendment proposal to the Council. Amendments or rewrites to the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan submitted to the Council by the Mayor shall contain all proposed amendments for simultaneous approval.

2512.4 The Mayor shall begin the process for a full rewrite of the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan no later than January 7, 2025 for submission to Council by June 6, 2027. The rewrite shall address the following issues:

The District Elements should be informed by the 2020 Census and analysis of the impacts of the global pandemic to Washington, DC.

The District Elements should be clear, concise, accessible, and usable, significantly reduced in length, redundancy, and detail from the current version.

The Future Land Use Map and Generalized Policy Map should be evaluated for effectiveness in achieving District goals, appropriateness of categories, clarity, and ease of use. The granularity of the maps should be evaluated to distinguish them from zoning maps.

The rewrite shall be centered around equity, particularly racial equity, resilience, and affordability.

The rewrite should evaluate and as needed, set new regional and District housing production targets.

Prior to starting the rewrite, the Mayor shall provide to the Council and make available to the public a short paper describing the proposed rewrite process and timeline, including how it will evaluate the issues identified above. The public participation and comment process shall be clearly identified at the start of the rewrite, and consistent with policies in Section IM-1.5 Public Input of this element.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2513** IM-3.3 ACTION PLANNING {#sec-10-a2513 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2513}

2513.1 This section rolls up all the actions included in the text of the Comprehensive Plan into an overall Action Plan (Table 25.1). The Action Plan includes:

The District agencies or other bodies that have the responsibilities for carrying out each Comprehensive Plan action (a list of agencies and abbreviations can be found in the glossary);

The recommended implementation time frame (see further explanation below); and

Those actions that will require capital funds for implementation.

2513.2 The recommended implementation time frame classifies actions as follows:

Ongoing actions are continuous activities that should be occurring now and on a regular basis into the future;

Immediate actions are actions that are about to commence;

Short-term actions are actions that should be initiated by the first or second year after adoption (Some short-term actions may take several years to complete.);

Mid-term actions should be initiated by the third or fourth year after adoption (Some mid-term actions may begin sooner, depending on funding and available staff resources.); and

Long-term actions include actions that may take many years to implement, and actions that may not begin until the fourth year after adoption due to funding and staff constraints or other factors.

2513.3 It is recognized that, when this Comprehensive Plan is adopted, there may not be complete agreement between the time frames set here and the District’s approved CIP. Over time, a stronger link should be established so that the two documents are synchronized and eventually are in full agreement. Similarly, it should also be recognized that the actions listed in the Implementation Table (Table 25.1) should not be interpreted as budgetary mandates. The intent is to convey a roster of priorities that should guide the Mayor and D.C. Council as they develop, approve, and execute annual operating and capital budgets.

2513.4 As noted, Table 25.1 is a rollup of all the actions contained in the elements of this Comprehensive Plan.

##### **10-A DCMR § 2514** IM-3.4 COMMERCIAL LINKAGE {#sec-10-a2514 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2514}

2514.1 The housing linkage objective requires applicants who obtain an increase of non-residential square footage -- as a result of providing habitable non-residential penthouse space, of obtaining a discretionary street or alley closing, or of obtaining a discretionary zoning density increase--to produce housing or contribute funds to the HPTF. The amount based on a formula tied to the amount or value of the additional square footage obtained.

2514.2a Text Box: The District’s Commercial Linkage Requirement

In 1994, the District adopted zoning provisions that linked the granting of bonus density in commercial development projects to requirements for affordable housing. The linkage recognized that the demand for housing in Washington, DC was driven in part by new commercial development and rising land values. The linkage provisions are currently triggered by:

The approval of a discretionary and otherwise appropriate street or alley closing, which results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage by the D.C. Council;

The provision of habitable, non-residential penthouse space; or

The approval of a discretionary and otherwise appropriate zoning density increase, which results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage by the Zoning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment.

2514.2b In such cases, applicants are required to construct or rehabilitate housing that remains affordable to low-income households for at least 40 years, or pay into the District’s HPTF. If the applicant agrees to construct or rehabilitate affordable housing, the square footage of housing that must be built varies from 25 to 50 percent of the density increase being granted, depending on if the housing is provided on-site, off-site, or in a high housing cost area. Applicants can use any of a number of tools to build the housing, such as partnerships and joint ventures. If the applicant agrees to pay into the HPTF, the payment must equal at least half of the assessed value of the square footage of the density increase being granted, plus the square footage of any preexisting housing demolished as a result of the non-residential development. Additional provisions relating to the timing and valuation of the improvements apply.

2514.2c The linkage requirements include several exemptions, such as projects that are already subject to housing, retail, arts, or historic preservation requirements; projects approved prior to 1994; and projects located in enhanced/new neighborhood or enhanced/new multi-neighborhood centers. The Zoning Commission also has the authority to grant exemptions from this requirement based on certain findings relating to Comprehensive Plan consistency.

2514.3 In establishing the housing linkage objective, the District sets forth the following purposes:

Encourage the construction and rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to low-income households throughout Washington, DC;

Reduce a shortage of affordable housing in the District and mitigate the impact of increased demand for affordable housing from employees of new non-residential development who compete with current residents over scarce, available affordable housing, and by high land values that raise the cost of housing and are partly a function of the demand for additional non-residential square footage in Washington, DC; and

Increase the income tax base and labor force in the District by providing a mechanism to stimulate the development and expansion of housing for people working in the District who cannot afford to reside in Washington, DC.

2514.4 Except as provided in 2514.12 of this section, whenever the D.C. Council approves a discretionary and otherwise appropriate street or alley closing that results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage, or whenever the Zoning Commission or Board of Zoning Adjustment approves a discretionary, and otherwise appropriate zoning density increase, that results in the provision of additional non-residential square footage, the applicant who obtains the additional square footage shall be required to comply with the following housing requirement:

The applicant shall construct or rehabilitate housing that is affordable to low-income households. The minimum amount shall be calculated by the formula set forth in 2514.7 of this section and shall be dedicated as affordable housing for no fewer than 40 years. It shall also be developed in accordance with the schedule set forth in 2514.13 of this section; or

(b) The applicant shall contribute funds to the HPTF, the minimum amount shall be calculated by the formula set forth in 2514.8 of this section and shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth in 2514.14 of this section.

2514.5 The requirement to build affordable housing or contribute to the HPTF shall be based on the amount of increase in non-residential square footage achieved, plus the total square footage of any pre-existing housing on the site that was removed within one year prior to the filing of the application for a street or alley closing or a discretionary increase in square footage.

2514.6 If the applicant agrees to construct or rehabilitate affordable housing pursuant to 2514.4(a), the applicant may satisfy this agreement in any manner chosen by the applicant, including but not limited to, a joint venture, partnership, contract, or arrangement with another party to develop the required housing.

2514.7 If the applicant agrees to construct or rehabilitate the affordable housing, then the total square footage of the affordable housing that the applicant shall be required to construct or rehabilitate shall be as follows:

Not less than one-fourth of the total square footage, as established by 2514.5, if the required affordable housing is located on or adjacent to the site of the additional commercial office space;

Not less than one-third of the total square footage, as established by 2515.4, if the required housing is located off or not adjacent to the site of the additional non-residential space, but is located within the same ANC, or is within an area designated by DHCD as a high-cost/high-opportunity area; or

(c) Not less than one-half of the total square footage, as established by 2514.5, if the required affordable housing is located in any other area of the District.

2514.8 If an applicant agrees to contribute funds to the HPTF, the total funds shall equal one-half of the assessed value of the land for the non-residential square footage development at the time of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy (COO); divided by the maximum permitted gross square feet of non-residential development to determine a value per square foot; and then multiplied by the total square footage requirement as established by 2514.5.

2514.9 Nothing in this section shall supplant any requirement of the Zoning Regulations or require the Zoning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment to grant or deny an application for a zoning density increase.

2514.10 Nothing in this section shall obviate the requirement that zoning shall not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Zoning Commission, or Board of Zoning Adjustment, and the OP each shall consider an applicant’s compliance with the requirements of this section as supportive of the Comprehensive Plan and as providing required mitigation of the impacts on the demand for affordable housing associated with an applicant’s project and the increase in square footage.

2514.11 The provisions of this section shall not apply to the following street or alley closing. Zoning Commission, or Board of Zoning Adjustment applicants:

An applicant who obtains a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase for a development that includes, on or adjacent to the site of the development, an amount of housing that is equal to the amount that would be calculated pursuant to the formula set forth in 2514.5;

(b) An applicant whose development obtains no additional non-residential square footage as a result of obtaining a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase;

(c) An applicant for a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase who represents a federal government agency or the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation;

(d) An applicant for a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase who represents the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority constructing a building for its own use;

(e) An applicant whose approved street or alley closing was decided by the D.C. Council, or whose approved zoning density increase was decided by the Zoning Commission, prior to October 6, 1994;

(f) An applicant who obtains a zoning density increase for a development that already is subject to a housing, retail, arts, or historic preservation requirement pursuant to the zoning regulations set forth in the Downtown Development District; or

(g) An applicant who obtains a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase for a development about which the D.C. Council, in its legislation that approves of the street or alley closing, or the Zoning Commission or Board of Zoning Adjustment, in its order that approves of the zoning density increase, makes all of the following findings after a public hearing, for which prior notice of a request for this exemption was provided to each affected ANC and in the District of Columbia Register, and during which the burden of proof is upon the applicant to justify granting this: exemption:

The development associated with the street or alley closing or zoning density increase is located within an enhanced/new neighborhood or enhanced/new multi-neighborhood center; and

(2) Imposition of no housing requirement or a housing requirement that is less stringent than the requirement imposed by this section is necessary to implement objectives and policies set forth in this Comprehensive Plan for that designated area, which otherwise would likely not be achieved.

2514.12 An applicant who obtains a street or alley closing or a zoning density increase who is required to construct or rehabilitate affordable housing pursuant to this section shall not be issued a building permit for the applicant’s non-residential development until the applicant certifies to the District that either a building permit has been issued for the required amount of affordable housing and an appropriate covenant documenting the affordability requirements has been executed for the benefit of the District and recorded in the Land Records of the District, or that the applicant has contributed sufficient funds no less than the amount determined in 2514.8 as applied to the square footage determined by 2514.5 to a housing provider to construct or rehabilitate the required amount of affordable housing.

2514.13 An applicant who contributes funds to the HPTF pursuant to this section shall proceed in accordance with the following schedule:

Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the non-residential development, not less than one-half of the required total contribution shall be made based on an estimate using the assessed value of the land at the time of the building permit application; and

(b) The remaining balance of the required total contribution as determined by 2514.8 based on the assessment at the time of issuance of the COO shall be made prior to the issuance of a COO for any of the non-residential development.

2514.14 Prior to the issuance of a building permit or COO for the non-residential development (whichever is applicable) the applicant shall certify to the District that the provisions of this section have been satisfied.

2514.15 The Zoning Commission and all other agencies that have authority to adopt regulations to implement the housing linkage policies shall adopt regulations to implement the provisions of this section.

Action

Responsible Agency(ies)

Timeframe

Immediate

Ongoing

Short-term

Mid-term

Long-term

Completed

Obsolete

Capital Funds Needed

(Y/N)

Land Use Element

LU-1.1 Supporting Growth

Action LU-1.1.A: Resilience Equity and Land Use

DDOT, DOEE

Long-Term

LU-1.2 Strengthening the Core

Action LU-1.2.A: CEA Boundary

DMPED, OP

Short-Term

Action LU 1.2.B Explore Alternative CEA Approaches

OP, DMPED, GSA, NCPC

Long-Term

Action LU-1.2.C: Center City Action Agenda

Mid-Term

Action LU-1.2D: Development of Air Rights

OP, DHCD

Mid-Term

Action LU-1.2.E: Development on Former Federal Sites

Long-Term

Action LU-1.2.F Reuse of Existing Buildings

Long-term

LU-1.3 Large Sites and the District Fabric

Action LU-1.3.A: Federal Land Transfer

DMPED, OP

Long-Term

Action LU-1.3.B: Encouraging Livability of Former Federal Lands

DMPED, OP

Long-Term

LU-1.4 Transit-Oriented and Corridor Development

Action LU-1.4.A: Station Area and Corridor Planning

OP, DDOT, WMATA

Long-Term

Action LU-1.4.B: Zoning Around Transit

OP, DDOT, WMATA

Long-Term

Action LU-1.4.C: Metro Station and Inclusionary Zoning

Encourage developments in and around Metro station areas to exceed the affordable units required by the Inclusionary Zoning Program, with appropriate bonus density and height allowances.

OP, WMATA

Long-Term

Action LU-1.4.D: Co-Location Opportunity Evaluation

District-wide, encourage the co-location of new development, such as housing or retail, as part of public facilities’ modernization, expansion, and new construction.

OP, OP3

Long-Term

LU-2.1 A District of Neighborhoods

Action LU-2.1.A: Residential Rezoning

Provide a better match between zoning and existing land uses in residential areas, with a particular focus on:

Blocks of well-established, single-family and semi detached homes that are zoned R-3 or higher;

Blocks that consist primarily of row houses that are zoned R-5-B or higher; and

Historic districts where the zoning does not match the predominant contributing properties on the block face.

In all three of these instances, consider rezoning to appropriate densities to protect the predominant architectural character and scale of the neighborhood.

Ongoing

Action LU-2.1.B: Study of Neighborhood Indicators

Short-Term

Action LU-2.1.C Study of Land Use Inequalities

DDOT

Short-Term

LU-2.2 Maintaining Community Standards

Action LU-2.2.A: Vacant Building Inventories

Maintain and continuously update data on vacant and abandoned buildings, follow up on public reports of vacant buildings, and regularly assess the potential for such buildings to support new uses and activities. This should include periodic assessment of vacant building monitoring and taxation programs and exploring creative ways to deal with vacant properties and long-term vacant sites. Strategically purchase such properties at tax delinquency sales when such properties could be put to use for affordable housing.

DCRA, OTR

Ongoing

Action LU-2.2.B: Education and Outreach on Public Space Maintenance

Develop a public outreach campaign on the District’s public space regulations (including the use of such space for announcements, campaign signs, and advertising) and resident/District responsibilities for maintenance of public space, including streets, planting strips, sidewalks, and front yards.

DPR

Ongoing

LU-2.3 Residential Land Use Compatibility

Action LU-2.3.A: Analysis of Nonconforming Uses

OZ, OP, DCRA, ANC

Mid-Term

Action LU-2.3.B Short-Term Rental Studies

Conduct periodic studies of short-term rental locations and numbers and examine their impact on neighborhood livability and affordable housing.

OP, DCRA, OZ

Long term

LU-3.2 Taking a Hard Look at the District’s Industrial Lands

Action LU-3.2.A: Industrial Zoning Use Changes

Provide a new zoning framework for industrial land, including:

Prohibiting high-impact heavy industries in low intensity PDR zones to reduce the possibility of land use conflicts;

Prohibiting certain civic uses that detract from the industrial character of exclusively PDR areas and that could ultimately interfere with business operations;

Limiting non-industrial uses in high-intensity PDR areas to avoid encroachment by uses that could impair existing industrial and public works activities (such as trash transfer); and

Creating a mixed-use district where residential, commercial, and lesser-impact PDR uses are permitted, thereby accommodating live-work space, artisans and studios, and more intensive commercial uses.

OP, OZ, ZC, BZA

Mid-Term

Action LU-3.2.B: Joint Facility Development

DPR, DPW, WMATA

Long-Term

Action LU-3.2.C: Inventory of Housing in Industrial Areas

OP, DHCD

Ongoing

Action LU-3.2.D: DPW Co-location and Campus

Actively pursue funding resources or allocation for the implementation of the West Virginia Avenue DPW Campus Master Plan study that was conducted by District agencies in 2015.

DPW

Ongoing

Action LU-3.2.E: Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study

Implement the recommendations provided in the Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study released in 2014.

OP, DPW, DDOT, DOEE, DMPED, OCA

Ongoing

Action: LU-3.2.F PDR Land Use Retention Study

OP, DPW, DDOT, DMPED

Short Term

LU-3.4 Foreign Missions

Action LU-3.4.A: Foreign Mission Mapping Improvements

On an ongoing basis, accurately inventory foreign mission locations, distinguishing, chanceries, ambassador’s residences, and institutional land uses.

OP, NCPC

Ongoing

Transportation Element

T-1.1 Land Use: Transportation Coordination

Action T-1.1.A: Transportation Measures of Effectiveness

DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-1.1.B: Transportation Improvements

DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action T-1.1.C: Create Regional Network of Transportation Support Facilities

DDOT, WMATA, OP

Ongoing

Action T-1.1.D: Land Use—Transportation Coordination

DDOT, surrounding jurisdictions, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-1.1.E Update Zoning Regulations Regarding Mass Transit

DDOT, WMATA

Mid-Term

T-1.2 Transforming Corridors

Action T-1.2.A: Crosstown Corridors

Implement the recommendations of the Crosstown Multimodal Transportation Study and the Florida Avenue Multimodal Transportation Study to improve mobility across town for all users of those corridors.

DDOT

Short-Term

T-1.3 Regional Smart Growth Solutions

Action T-1.3.A: Regional Jobs/Housing Balance

OP, CC, EOM, MWCOG

Ongoing

Action T-1.3.B: Regional Transportation Infrastructure Study

Actively participate in efforts by MWCOG and other regional organizations that address long-term transportation infrastructure needs in greater Washington, DC. Participate in the preparation of the 30-year Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan, which takes a broad-based look at these needs, taking into account expected growth patterns and emerging technologies.

OP, DDOT, MWCOG

Ongoing

T-1.4 Placemaking in Public Space

Action T-1.4.A: Develop a Placemaking in Public Space Program

OP, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-1.4.B: Tree Planting and Removal

Develop further guidance on tree planting and removal.

DDOT, DOEE

Mid-Term

T-2.1 Transit Accessibility

Action T-2.1.A: New High-Capacity Transit Corridors

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.1.B: Eight-Car Trains

Increase Metrorail train lengths from six cars to eight cars when justified by demand to meet service guidelines and passenger levels.

WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.1.C: Circulator Buses

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.1.D: Bus Stop Improvements

Improve key bus stop locations through such actions as:

Extending bus stop curbs to facilitate reentry into the traffic stream;

Moving bus stops to the far side of signalized or signed intersections where feasible;

Adding bus stop amenities, such as user-friendly, real-time transit schedule information, benches, shade, and shelters;

Improving access to bus stops via well-lit, accessible sidewalks and street crossings; and

Using global positioning system (GPS) and other technologies to inform bus riders who are waiting for buses when the next bus will arrive.

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.1.E: College Student Metro Passes

DDOT, WMATA

Short-Term

Action T-2.1.F: Transit Amenities

Seek opportunities to dedicate space in the right-of-way for surface transit amenities, such as bus stops, signage, shelters, passenger information, and off-board fare collection. Follow best practices in bus-stop siting (most often on the far side of an intersection) yet evaluate each case separately. Consider opportunities for enhanced stops and amenities with large-scale developments and redevelopments.

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.1.G: Performance Measures

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

T-2.2 Making Multimodal Connections

Action T-2.2.A: Intermodal Centers

Support the role of Washington Union Station as an intermodal hub with regional importance. Identify other locations with the potential to serve as intermodal hubs within the District.

DDOT, DPMED, EOM, OP, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.2.B: Pedestrian Connections

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.2.C: Bicycle and Carpool Parking

Increase investment in bicycle parking and provide more visible parking for carsharing operations at Metrorail stations, key transit stops, and future streetcar stations.

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.2.D: Commuter Rail and Bus Connections

DDOT, WMATA, VDRPT, MTA

Mid-Term

Action T-2.2.E: Transit Connections

Promote crosstown transit services and new transit routes that connect neighborhoods to one another and to transit stations and stops.

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

T-2.3 Bicycle Access, Facilities, and Safety

Action T-2.3.A: Capital Bikeshare Community Partners

DDOT, MWCOG, OP

On-going

Action T-2.3.B: Bicycle Facilities

DDOT, DPR, NCPC, DCRA

Ongoing

Action T-2.3.C: moveDC Bicycle Element

Implement the recommendations of the Vision Zero DC Action Plan and the Bicycle Element of moveDC to:

Build more and better bicycle facilities;

Enact more bicycle-friendly policies; and

Provide more bicycle-related education, promotion, and enforcement.

DDOT, DPR

Ongoing

Action T-2.3.D: Performance Measures

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-2.3.E: Dockless Sharing Programs

DDOT

Ongoing

T-2.4 Pedestrian Access, Facilities, and Safety

Action T-2.4.A: Pedestrian Signal Timings

Review timing on pedestrian signals to ensure that adequate time is provided for crossing, in particular for locations with a large older adult population

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.4.B: Sidewalks

DDOT, ANC, NPS

Ongoing

Action T-2.4.C: Innovative Technologies for Pedestrian Movement

Explore the use of innovative technology to improve pedestrian movement and safety for all users, such as personal transportation systems and enhanced sidewalk materials.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.4.D: Pedestrian Access on Bridges and Underpasses

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.4.E: Pedestrian Master Plan

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.4.F: Pedestrian and Bike Events

Support events in public spaces and streets that encourage bicycling and walking.

DDOT, OP

Ongoing

T-2.5 Roadway System and Auto Movement

Action T-2.5.A: Maintenance Funds

DDOT, CC, OCFO

Ongoing

Action T-2.5.B: Signal Timing Adjustment

Regularly evaluate the need for adjustments to traffic signal timing to prioritize pedestrians, surface transit, and bicyclists.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.5.C: Update the Functional Classification System

DDOT

Ongoing

T-2.6 Addressing Accessibility for All Residents

Action T-2.6.A: Public Improvements

Invest in public improvements, such as curb inclines, aimed at increasing pedestrian mobility, particularly for older adults and persons with disabilities.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-2.6.B: Shuttle Services

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-2.6.C: Transportation Access and Service

Conduct an analysis of the impacts transportation access and service has on underserved and low-income communities.

DDOT

Ongoing

T-3.1 Transportation Demand Management

Action T-3.1.A: TDM Strategies

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-3.1.B: Roadway Pricing and Management

The recommendations in moveDC should be explored and implemented, where feasible, in three phases:

Phase 1: Continuously monitor direct and external roadway costs to gain a more accurate estimate of the true cost of driving for motorists;

DDOT, EOM, OCA, CC

Mid-Term

Action T-3.1.C: Private Shuttle Services

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-3.1.D: Transit Ridership Programs

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-4.1.E: Implement the TDM Strategic Plan

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-4.1.F: Analytic Tools to Measure Performance

Plan and implement the development of advanced analytic tools to measure the performance of the transportation network in support of the District Mobility Project.

DDOT

Short-Term

T-3.2 Curbside Management and Parking

Action T-3.2.A: Short-Term Parking

DDOT, BIDs

Ongoing

Action T-3.2.B: Carshare Parking

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action T-3.2.C: Curbside Management Techniques

Revise curbside management and on-street parking policies to:

Adjust parking pricing to reflect the demand for, and value of, curb space;

Adjust the boundaries for residential parking zones;

Establish parking policies that respond to the different parking needs of different types of areas;

Expand the times and days for meter parking enforcement in commercial areas;

Promote management of parking facilities that serve multiple uses (e.g., commuters, shoppers, recreation, entertainment, churches, special events );

Improve the flexibility and management of parking through mid-block meters, provided that such meters are reasonably spaced and located to accommodate persons with disabilities;

Preserve, manage, and increase alley space or similar off-street loading space;

Explore increasing curbside access for EV supply equipment.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action T-3.2.D: Unbundle Parking Cost

OP, DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-3.2.E: Manage Off-Street Parking Supply

OP, DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-3.2.F: Encourage Shared-Use Parking

Collaborate with private, off-street parking facilities to encourage shared-use parking arrangements with nearby adjacent uses to maximize the use of off-street parking facilities.

DDOT, BIDs

Ongoing

T-3.3 Goods Movement

Action T-3.3.A: Enhance the Loading Zone Program

Enhance the loading zone program with policies and programs including automated and more targeted enforcement, complete user data collection, data evaluation to inform enforcement and future program decisions, and dynamic loading zone pricing. Provide freight zones on streets in office districts and expanded curbside space available for loading.

DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-3.3.B: Freight Trip Generation Study

Complete the freight trip generation study and develop an off-peak delivery program.

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-3.3.C: Implement Last-Mile Delivery/Pickup

Develop a strategy to allow for the implementation of last-mile delivery/pickup using bikes and other small mobility devices.

DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-3.3.D: Improve Truck Safety

DDOT

Short-Term

Action T-3.3.E: Address Personal Goods Delivery Devices

Develop policies to address small goods delivery through autonomous devices on sidewalks to promote the safety of pedestrians on sidewalks as these services are deployed.

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-3.3.F: Freight Advisory Committee

DDOT

Mid-Term

T-3.4 Traveler Information

Action T-3.4.A: Transit Directional Signs

WMATA, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-3.4.B: Regional Efforts

DDOT, WMATA, MWCOG

Ongoing

T-3.8 Intercity Bus Operations

Action T-3.8.1.A: Motor Coach Management Initiative

DDOT, NCPC

Short-Term

Action T-3.8.B: Manage Layover and Staging Zones

Maximize the efficiency of existing layover and staging zones. Coordinate with WMATA and District agencies to identify areas of shared use for on-street and off-street layover and staging zones.

DDOT, WMATA

Short-Term

Action T-3.8.C: Shuttle and Sightseeing Bus Staging

DDOT, WMATA, NPS

Mid-Term

Action T-3.8.D: Motor Coach Off-Street Parking Initiative

Coordinate with District and federal agencies and stakeholders to create a plan to build an off-street bus parking facility for short-term, long-term, and staging needs of all motor coaches.

DDOT, NPS, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action T-3.8.E: Consolidate Intercity Buses at Union Station

DDOT, DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

T-4.1 Emergency Preparedness, Transportation, and Security

Action T-4.1.A: Pennsylvania Avenue Closure

DDOT, EOM, CC, NCPC, NPS

Ongoing

Action T-4.1.B: Coordination with the Federal Government

Continue to work with the federal government to assess the impacts of security measures on the quality of life of District residents and businesses.

DDOT, OP, EOM, NCPC

Ongoing

Action T-4.1.C: Emergency Evacuation Plan

Continue to refine an emergency evacuation plan that not only describes evacuation procedures and routes, but also defines the modes of transportation to use in the event that certain modes, such as the Metrorail system, become unavailable. Increase public education and awareness of local emergency management plans, and make information on evacuation routes and procedures more accessible and understandable to residents, employees, and visitors.

DDOT, FEMS, DCEMA

Ongoing

T-4.2 Safety for All Travelers

Action T-4.2.A: Vision Zero Action Plan

Implement the strategies recommended in the District’s Vision Zero Action Plan.

DDOT, DPW, OP, DFHV

Ongoing

T-4.4 Climate Resiliency

Action T-4.4.A: Climate Adaptation Guidelines for Transportation Projects

DDOT, DOEE

Short-Term

Action T-4.4.B: Research Resilient Transportation Design Best Practices

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action T-4.4.C: Climate-Ready Evacuation Routes

Identify alternate evacuation routes for roads and bridges identified as vulnerable to flooding and/or sea level rise.

DDOT

Mid-Term

T-5.1 Autonomous Vehicles

Action T-5.1.A: AV Working Group

DDOT, DMPED, OP, DFHV

Mid-Term

Action T-5.1.B: Continued Research

DDOT, OP, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action T-5.1.C: Data Sharing

DDOT, OCTO, DFHV

Mid-Term

Action T-5.1.D: Enhance Access to Transit

DDOT, WMATA

Mid-Term

Action T-5.1.E: Parking and Curbside Access

DDOT, DFHV

Mid-Term

T-5.2 Electric Vehicles

Action T-5.2.A: Expand Charging Infrastructure

Install publicly accessible electric charging stations throughout the District to expand EV infrastructure and lead the market, in keeping with demand for and encouraging the conversion to EVs.

DDOT, DPW

Mid-Term

Action T-5.2.B: EV Supply Equipment

Encourage the siting of EV supply equipment in curbside public space, multi-dwelling unit garages, commercial facilities and residential areas, where appropriate.

DDOT, DPW

Ongoing

Housing Element

H-1.1 Expanding Housing Supply

Action H-1.1.A: Annual Housing Reports and Monitoring Efforts

Develop an annual State of the District Housing Report, which improves the quality of information on which to make housing policy decisions. Include information on current conditions, trends and needs, such as the availability and affordability of units by income, tenure, building type, number of bedrooms, and production patterns and capacity by Planning Area and other characteristics. Include information on the demand for, housing for low, very low and extremely low-income households. Assess the availability of housing for Black communities and other communities of color, seniors, families, people with disabilities, and vulnerable communities. The report should also include a framework for evaluating progress toward measurable goals. Create a Housing Oversight Board composed of residents representing different incomes and household types, and for profit and nonprofit developers, that would review this report and provide an assessment each year on the effectiveness and outcomes of the District’s housing programs.

DMPED, DHCD, OP

Ongoing

Action H.1.1.B: Regional Planning for Expanding the Supply of Housing

OP, DHCD, DMPED

Ongoing

Action H.1.1.C: Research New Ways to Expand Housing

OP, DHCD, DMPED

Ongoing

Action H-1.1.D: Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice

OP, DMPED, DHCD

Ongoing

H-1.2 Ensuring Housing Affordability

Action H-1.2.A: Commercial Linkage Assessment

Review the District’s existing commercial linkage requirements to improve the effectiveness of this program and assess its impacts, advantages, and disadvantages, such as how and when linkage fees are paid. Based on findings, adjust the linkage requirements as needed.

OP, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.B: New Revenue Sources

Continue to identify and tap new sources of revenue for programs such as the HPTF to produce affordable housing and keep rental and owned housing affordable. These new sources should add to the portion of the deed and recordation taxes dedicated to the HPTF, such as the feasibility of earmarking a portion of residential property tax revenue increases for the fund.

OCFO, CC, OCA, DHCD, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.C: Property Acquisition and Disposition Division Program

Continue the District’s Property Acquisition and Disposition Division (PADD) Program, which acquires property and provides for long-term leaseback or low-cost terms to private developers that produce affordable homeownership and rental housing.

DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-1.2.D: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits

Expand for-profit builders’ use of Low-Income Housing Tax Credits as one tool to provide new or rehabilitated affordable housing in the District.

DHCD, HFA, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.E: Leveraging Inclusionary Zoning

Review and consider expansion of the Inclusionary Zoning program as needed to encourage additional affordable housing production throughout the District. Examine and propose greater IZ requirements when zoning actions permit greater density or change in use. Factors supporting a greater requirement may include high-cost areas, proximity to transit stations or high-capacity surface transit corridors, and when increases in density or use changes from production, distribution, and repair (PDR) to residential or mixed-use. Consider requirements that potentially leverage financial subsidies, such as tax-exempt bonds.

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.F: Establish Affordability Goals by Area Element

Establish measurable housing production goals by Planning Area through an analysis of best practices, housing conditions, impediments, unit and building typology, and forecasts of need. Include a minimum share of 15 percent affordable housing by 2050, along with recommendations for incentives and financing tools to create affordable housing opportunities to meet fair housing requirements, particularly in high housing cost areas.

OP, DHCD, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.G: Continuum of Housing

Conduct a periodic review, at least every four years, of private development and federal and local housing programs in conjunction with a needs assessment to ensure that programs target the applicable gaps in the supply of housing by unit and building type, location, and affordability and include racial equity evaluations.

DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-1.2.H: Priority of Affordable Housing Goals

To advance racial equity in housing, prioritize public investment toward housing production and preservation serving very-low and extremely-low income households. Prioritize public investment in the new construction of, or conversion to, affordable housing in Planning Areas with high housing costs and few affordable housing options. Consider land use, zoning, and financial incentives where the supply of affordable units is below a minimum of 15 percent of all units within each area.

OP, DHCD, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-1.2.I: Land Trusts

Support community land trusts (CLTs) in their ongoing efforts to produce, secure, and steward rental and ownership housing and commercial spaces that would remain affordable in perpetuity. Preventing the displacement of current and future low- and moderate-income District residents and businesses should be the focus of CLTs.

OP, DHCD, DMPED

Ongoing

Action H-1.2.J: Affordable Housing and Nonprofit and Faith-Based Institutions

District agencies should work collaboratively with nonprofits and the faith community to investigate zoning options to reduce procedural burdens and facilitate the development of affordable housing and community services on properties under their control, particularly sites in lower density neighborhoods.

OP, DHCD, DMPED, Mayor’s Office of Religious Affairs

Ongoing

H-1.3 Diversity of Housing Types

Action H-1.3.A: Create Tools for the Production and Retention of Larger Family-Sized Units in Multi-Family Housing

Research land use tools and techniques, including development standards, to encourage the development of residential units that meet the needs of larger families, with a focus on financing affordable units in high-cost areas.

OP, DHCD

Mid-Term

Action H-1.3.B: Technical Assistance for Condominiums and Cooperatives

Develop technical assistance and innovative management models to assist in the long-term maintenance and sustainability of condominiums and cooperatives.

DHCD

Mid-Term

H-1.4 Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization

Action H-1.4.A: Renovation and Rehabilitation of Public Affordable Housing

DCHA, HFA, DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-1.4.B: Home Again Initiative/PADD

DHCD

Short-Term

Action H-1.4.C: DCHA Improvements

DCHA

Ongoing

Action H-1.4.D: Tax Abatement

DCHA, DMPED, OCFO

Short-Term

Action H-1.4.E: Additional Public Housing

Support DCHA’s planning goals for its public housing units by developing strategies to meet the needs of existing units and create additional units. Use subsidies from HUD under the public housing Annual Contributions Contract (ACC), RAD, and other sources. Identify methods to use DCHA and HUD programs and resources to acquire or develop additional publicly assisted housing dedicated to extremely low-income households for the life of the building or in perpetuity.

DCHA, DMPED, DHCD

Short-Term

Action H-1.4.F: Non-Housing Investment in Areas of Concentrated Poverty

DHCD, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action H-1.4.G: Co-Location of Housing with Public Facilities

DMPED, DGS, OP

Mid-Term

H-1.5 Reducing Barriers to Production

Action H-1.5.A: Smart Housing Codes

OP, DCRA

Short-Term

Action H-1.5.B: Data Management

OP, OCTO, DMPED, DHCD

Short-Term

Action H-1.5.D: Support of Accessory Dwelling Units

DHCD, HFA

Short-Term

Action H-1.5.E: Remove Regulatory Obstacles

DCRA, OP, DMPED, DHCD

Short-Term

Action H-1.6.A: Monitoring and Updating Data to Support Recovery from 2020 Health Emergency

DMPED, DHCD, OP

Short-Term

H-2.1 Preservation of Affordable Housing

Action H-2.1.A: Rehabilitation Grants

DMPED, DHCD, HFA

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.B: Local Rent Supplement

DMPED, OCFO, OCA, DCHA

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.C: Purchase of Expiring Subsidized Housing and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing

Implement and use DOPA to acquire, preserve, and dedicate new affordable housing through a process that will maintain the properties with long-term affordability requirements

DMEPD, HFA, CC, DCHA

Ongoing

Action H-2.1.D: Affordable Set-Asides in Condo Conversions

DCRA, CC, DMPED, OAG

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.E: Housing Registry

Maintain a registry of affordable or accessible housing units in the District and a program to match these units with qualifying low-income households.

DHCD, DMPED, DCHA

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.F: Affordable Housing Preservation Unit

DHCD

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.G: Expand Acquisition Funding for Preservation

Continue funding for public-private partnerships to facilitate acquisition and early investments to leverage greater amounts of private capital for the preservation of affordable housing.

DHCD, CC

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.H: Improve Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Program

DHCD, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-2.1.I: Anti-Displacement Strategy

Track neighborhood change, development, and housing costs to identify areas of Washington, DC that have experienced, are experiencing, or are likely to experience, displacement pressures. Collect, disaggregate, and monitor data to consider income and racial characteristics of the neighborhoods and households affected by or at risk of displacement. Conduct racial equity analyses that identify the policies and underlying forces contributing to any inequities. Such analyses must consider different sources of displacement pressures, including a lack of new housing in high-demand neighborhoods and affects new development may have on housing costs in adjacent areas. Monitor best practices and identify new strategies for displacement prevention. Use the information to create a District-wide anti-displacement strategy, prepare reoccurring reports, improve program performance and identify targeted areas within which to deploy resources to prevent minimize displacement and help residents with the highest displacement risks stay in their neighborhoods. Examine ways to support low-income residents in areas that have already experienced rapid displacement, such as those in Mid-City and Near Northwest.

OP, DHCD

Short-Term

H-2.2 Housing Conservation and Maintenance

Action H-2.2.A: Housing Code Enforcement

DCRA

On-going

Action H-2.2.B: Sale of Persistent Problem Properties

DMPED, DHCD, DCRA

On-going

Action H-2.2.C: Tax Relief

OCFO, OTR

Short-Term

Action H-2.2.D: Program Assistance for Low- and Moderate-Income Owners

DHCD, DCRA

Ongoing

H-3.1 Encouraging Homeownership

Action H-3.1.A: HPAP Program

Maintain and expand the District’s HPAP by periodically reviewing and establishing appropriate amounts of assistance to continue advancing affordable homeownership for low-income households.

DHCD, DMPED

Ongoing

Action H-3.1.B: District Employer Assisted Housing Program

DHCD, DMPED

Short-Term

Action H-3.1.C: New EAH Programs

Encourage major employers in Washington, DC to develop EAH programs for moderate- and middle-income housing, including:

• Private sector employee benefit packages that include grants, forgivable loans, and on-site homeownership seminars for first-time buyers;

• Federal programs that would assist income-eligible federal workers who currently rent in the District;

• Programs designed to encourage employees to live close to their work to reduce travel time and cost and increase their quality of life; and

• Linking EAH efforts with performance-based incentives for attracting new employers.

DHCD, DMPED, OP

Ongoing

Action H-3.1.D: Individual Development Accounts

Invest in programs that support Individual Development Accounts that assist low-income persons to save for first-time home purchases.

DMPED, HFA, DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-3.1.E: Neighborhood Housing Finance

Expand housing finance and counseling services for very low-, low-, and moderate-income homeowners, and improve the oversight and management of these services.

FHA, DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-3.1.F: Foreclosure Prevention

Develop public-private partnerships to raise awareness of foreclosure prevention efforts and to offer assistance to households facing foreclosure.

DHCD, DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

Action H-3.1.G: Protect Homeowner Equity

DMPED, DHCD

Mid-Term

H-3.2 Housing Access

Action H-3.2.A: Cultural Sensitivity

Require all District agencies that deal with housing and housing services to be culturally and linguistically competent.

OHR

Ongoing

Action H-3.2.B: Fair Housing Education

Undertake a Fair Housing Act education program for all relevant staff persons and public officials so they are familiar with the Act and their responsibilities in its enforcement. Maintain programs that raise the public’s awareness of fair housing rights and responsibilities, including educational events, compliance training, affirmative marketing training, and other outreach efforts that further fair housing and eliminate discrimination.

DHCD

Ongoing

Action H-3.2.C: Lending Practices

Continue to monitor private sector lending practices for their impact on the stability of neighborhoods, and develop responses if instability is identified.

DHCD, DMPED, OP, DISB

Mid-Term

Action H-3.2.D: Overcoming Impediments to Fair Housing

Develop strategies to overcome impediments and obstacles to the delivery of affordable housing in high-cost areas, such as rapid site acquisition, risk reduction, and expedited project selection and processing.

DHCD, OP

Short-Term

H-4.2 Ending Homelessness

Action H-4.2.A: Homeward DC

DHCD, DCHA, DHS, DMH, DMCFYE

Short-Term

Action H-4.2.B: Emergency Assistance

DHCD, DCHA, DHS, DMCFYE

Short-Term

Action H-4.2.C: Ending Youth Homelessness

DCHA, DHS, DHCD, ICH

Short-Term

Action H-4.2.D: Discharge Coordination

Maintain discharge programs from the foster care, health care, and the criminal justice systems that prevent homelessness and provide a safe transition to independent living.

DCHA, DHS, DHCD, ICH

Short-Term

Action H-4.2.E: Landlord Recruitment

DCHA, DHS, DHCD, ICH

Short-Term

H-4.3 Meeting the Needs of Specific Groups

Action H- 4.3.A: Incentives for Accessible Units

DMPED, DHCD, OCFO

Mid-Term

Action H- 4.3.B: Incentives for Older Adult Housing

DHCD, OP, OCFO, DCOA

Mid-Term

Action H-4.3.C: University Partnerships and Older Adults

Explore partnerships with local universities to develop intergenerational student living arrangements with older adults living near campus.

OP, DCOA

Mid-Term

Action H-4.3.D: Aging in Community

DCHA, DCOA, DHCD,

Mid-Term

Environmental Protection Element

E-1 Adapting to and Mitigating Climate Change

Action E-1.1.A: Update Regulations for Resilience

DOEE, OP

Mid-Term

Action E-1.1.B: Development in Floodplains

OP, DOEE, HSEMA, DCRA, DMPED

Short-Term

Action E-1.1.C: Waterfront Setbacks

Ensure that waterfront setbacks and buffers account for future sea level rise, changes in precipitation patterns, and greater use of nature-based and adaptive flood defenses.

OP, DOEE, HSEMA, DCRA

Short-Term

Action E-1.1.D: Covenant for Climate and Energy

DOEE

Long-Term

Action E-1.1.E: Update Floodplain Regulations

Update flood hazard rules to reflect the increased risk of flooding due to climate-related sea level rise, increasingly frequent and severe precipitation events, and coastal storms.

DOEE, HSEMA, DCRA

Short-Term

Action E-1.1.F: Comprehensive and Integrated Flood Modeling

DOEE, HSEMA, OCTO, OP, DGS

On-going

Action E-1.1.G: Design Guidelines for Resilience

DOEE, HSEMA, OP

Short-Term

Action E-1.1.H: Update Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment

DOEE, DDOT, HSEMA, DC Water, DOH

Short-Term

Action: E-1.1.I: Resiliency Evaluation

Review projects including Washington, DC capital projects and large scale developments, for potential climate risks and adaptation strategies.

OCA, OP, DOEE, HSEMA

Short-Term

Action: E-1.1.J: Resiliency Incentives

DOEE, OP, DCRA

On-going

Action:E-1.1.K: Interagency Temperature Management Strategy

Develop an interagency heat management strategy to minimize the adverse health impacts associated with extreme cold and heat temperature days. The District government will work to ensure that residents can prepare for these events by more broadly communicating extreme heat and cold response plans that clearly define specific roles and responsibilities of government and nongovernmental organizations before and during these events. Plans should identify local populations at high risk for extreme temperature-related illness and death, and determine the strategies that will be used to support such individuals during emergencies, particularly in underserved communities. Furthermore, explore strategies, including the use of technology, to help build communities’ adaptive capacity before, during, and after extreme temperature days.

DOEE, HSEMA, DOH, OP, DDOT, DPR

On-going

E-2.1 Conserving and Expanding Washington, DC’s Urban Forests

Action E-2.1.A: Tree Replacement Program

Continue working toward a goal of planting 10,500 trees on public and private open space each year.

DDOT, other

On-going

Action E-2.1.B: Street Tree Standards

Continue to formalize the planting, pruning, removal, and construction guidelines in use by the District’s Urban Forestry Division These standards provide further direction for tree selection based on such factors as traffic volumes, street width, shade and sunlight conditions, soil conditions, disease and drought resistance, and the space available for tree wells. They also include provisions to increase the size of tree boxes to improve tree health and longevity, and standards for soils and planting, as well improve upon existing tree boxes through impervious surface removal, increasing soil volumes, undergrounding power lines, and installing bio-retention tree boxes.

DDOT, DOEE, OP

Mid-Term

Action E-2.1.C: Tree Inventories

DDOT, DPR, other

On-going

Action E-2.1.D: Operating Procedures for Utility and Roadwork

Develop standard operating procedures to minimize tree damage by public utility and road crews. All activities that involve invasive work around street trees should be reviewed by Urban Forestry Administration personnel. . Promote the expansion of the urban tree canopy, while planting the right tree in the right place in consideration with overhead utility lines.

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action E-2.1.E: Urban Forest Management

DOEE, DDOT, NPS

Short-Term

E-2.2 Conservation of Rivers, Wetlands, and Riparian Areas

Action E-2.2.A: Potomac and Anacostia River Habitat Improvements

Work collaboratively with federal agencies, upstream jurisdictions, and environmental advocacy groups to implement conservation measures for Washington, DC’s waterways by:

Installing stormwater management best practices upland of tributary streams;

Creating new stormwater wetlands along tributary streams;

Restoring degraded streams in Washington, DC and, where possible, daylighting streams by removing them from pipes to let them flow uncovered;

Removing bulkheads and seawalls and replacing them with natural shoreline and fringe wetlands, where possible, to provide protection from flooding and erosion;

Restoring degraded gullies downstream of stormwater outfalls;

Preventing litter and trash from entering waterways and removing it when it is present;

Encouraging natural buffers compatible with the recommendations of the AWI Framework Plan; and

Preventing the net loss of parkland and improving access to the waterfront and river trails.

USEPA, USFWS, NPS, DOEE, AWC, other

On-going

Action E-2.2.B: Wetland Setback Standards

DOEE, DCRA

Short-Term

Action E-2.2.C: Wetland Planting and Maintenance

DOEE, NPS

Short-Term

Action E-2.2.D: Anacostia River Sedimentation Project

Develop and implement an Anacostia River remediation work plan that restores fish and wildlife habitats while improving public access to the river.

DOEE, USACE, NPS

Ongoing

E-2.4 Preserving Steep Slopes and Stream Valleys

Action E-2.4.A: Expand Tree and Slope Protection

Work with neighborhood and community groups, homeowners and other landowners, and Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) to identify additional areas where the Tree and Slope Protection (TSP) areas should be mapped. Such areas should generally abut streams or public open spaces and should have steep slopes, significant natural tree cover, and some potential for future development. Particular attention should be given to mapping the TSP areas on lands in Wards 7 and 8.

OP, DOEE, OZ

Mid-Term

Action E-2.4.B: Hillside Conservation Easements

Explore land trusts, conservation easements, and other tools for preserving steep slopes and hillside areas.

OP, OZ, DOEE

Ongoing

E-2.5 Sustaining Wildlife

Action E-2.5.A: Implementation of the Wildlife Action Plan

Implement the 2015 Wildlife Management Plan , including programs to increase meadow habitats in the District, restore tidal wetlands, propagate native plants, and create vernal pools, artificial nesting structures, wildlife crossings and corridors, and resident science projects.

DOEE

On-going

Action E-2.5.B: Data Improvements

Improve the collection and monitoring of data on plant and animal life within Washington, DC , particularly data on rare, endangered, threatened, and candidate species, and species of greatest conservation need.

DOEE

On-going

Action E-2.5.C: Pollinator Pathways

DOEE, DDOT, DPR, NPS

Mid-Term

Action E-2.5.D: Landscape Practices

DOEE, DGS, DDOT

Short-Term

E-3.1 Conserving Water

Action E-3.1.A: Leak Detection and Repair Program

DC Water

On-going

Action E-3.1.B: Building Code Review

DCRA, DOEE

On-going

Action E-3.1.C: Water Conservation Education

Work collaboratively with DC Water and other partners to launch a large-scale marketing and educational campaign, bringing greater awareness to the need for water conservation and to the savings achievable through conservation and use of efficient technology, and to achieve a reduction in the daily per capita consumption of water resources. This per capita reduction is needed to maintain Washington, DC’s total water consumption level as the District grows. Special efforts should be made to reach low-income customers and institutional users. .

DC Water, DOEE

On-going

Action E-3.1.D: Water Conservation Financial Incentive Program

DC Water

Mid-Term

Action E-3.1.E: Distributed Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Recycling

Explore the use of distributed rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling to reduce demand on potable water systems during shortages or disruptions.

DC Water, DOEE

Mid-Term

E-3.2 Conserving Energy and Reducing GHG Emissions

Action E-3.2.A: Energy Conservation Measures

DOEE

On-going

Action E-3.2.B: Assistance Programs for Lower-Income Households

Implement Clean Energy DC Plan programs to reduce energy costs for lower-income households, including the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and additional measures to reduce monthly energy.

DOEE, OCA, OCFO

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.C: Consumer Education on Energy

Increase education and public awareness around energy issues, including school curricula, awards programs, demonstration projects, websites, and multimedia production.

DOEE

On-going

Action E-3.2.D: Energy Regulatory Reforms

OAG, DOEE, DCPSC

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.E: Energy Assurance Plan

DOEE, HCEMA, DCPAS, MWCOG

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.F: Energy Conservation Area

DOEE, OP, DCRA

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.G: Energy Supply

Explore and adopt policies that allow for every District resident to have a cost-competitive option for the purchase of a 100 percent clean and renewable energy supply.

DOEE

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.H: Solar Easements

Continue to review and modify, as needed, zoning regulations and other relevant District regulations.

OP, DOEE, ZC, OZ, DCRA

Short-Term

Action E-3.2.I Building Energy Performance Standard

DOEE, DCRA

Medium-Term

Action E-3.2.J: Neighborhood-Scale Energy

DOEE

Short term

E-3.3 Reducing Solid Waste Disposal Needs

Action E-3.3.A: Expanding District Recycling Programs

DPW

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.B: Expand Recycling Efforts in District Institutions

DPW, DCPS

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.C: Revisions to Planning and Building Standards for Solid Waste

Review building code standards for solid waste collection to ensure that new structures are designed to encourage and accommodate recycling and convenient trash pickup

DCRA, DPW, OP

Mid-Term

Action E-3.3.D: Installation of Sidewalk Recycling Receptacles

DPW

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.E: E-Cycling Program

Continue to operate drop-off e-cycling programs and other measures to promote the recycling of computers and other electronic products in an environmentally sound manner.

DPW

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.F: Commercial and Industrial Waste Reduction

DPW, DOEE

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.G: Zero Waste Plan

DPW, DOEE, OP

Mid-Term

Action E-3.3.H: Product Stewardship Requirements

DPW, DOEE

Mid-Term

Action E-3.3.I: Increase Residential Recycling and Composting

Design and launch new incentive programs to encourage residents to increase their recycling and composting rates, which is necessary to achieve the District’s 80 percent diversion goal.

DPW, DOEE

Ongoing

Action E-3.3.J: Reduce Organic Waste

Develop and launch a curbside composting program for residential customers, and require commercial customers to separate and compost food and other organic waste.

DPW

Mid-Term

Action E-3.3.K: Organics Processing Facility

Explore creating a new organics processing facility (composting, anaerobic digestion, or co-digestion preprocessing) in the District to capture food and other organic waste.

DPW, DOEE, OP, DGS

On-going

Action E-3.3.L: Reduce Residential Construction and Demolition Waste

DPW, DCRA, DGS, DOEE

On-going

Action E-3.3.M: Source Reduction

Explore innovative source reduction programs and policies to find ways to keep items out of the waste stream.

DPW, DOEE, DGS, DPR

On-going

E-4.1 Promoting Environmental Sustainability

Action E-4.1.A: GI Criteria

Support continued refinement of GI provisions for new development, such as the GAR. Explore provisions for expanded use of elements such as porous pavement, bioretention facilities, and green roofs.

OP, OZ, DOEE, DCRA, DDOT

Short-Term

Action E-4.1.B: GI Demonstration Projects

DOEE

On-going

Action E-4.1.C: Road Construction Standards

DDOT, DOEE

Mid-Term

E-4.2 Promoting Green Building

Action E-4.2.A: Building Code Revisions

DCRA, DOEE

Mid-Term

Action E-4.2.B: Green Building Incentives

Continue green building incentive programs to encourage green new construction and the rehabilitation of existing structures that go beyond the baseline code requirements.

DOEE, DCRA

Mid-Term

E-4.3 Enhancing Urban Food Production and Community Gardening

Action E-4.3.A: Community Gardens and Urban Farms in Wards 7 and 8

DPR, NPS, DOEE, OP

On-going

Action E-4.3.B: Support for UDC Cooperative Extension

CC, EOM, UDC, OP

Mid-Term

Action E-4.3.C: Support for Sustainable Agriculture

DOEE, OP, UDC, DPR

Ongoing

E-4.4 Reducing the Environmental Impacts of Development

Action E-4.4.A: District-wide Natural Resource Inventory

DOEE

On-going

Action E-4.4.B: Environmental Enforcement

DOEE, DPW, MPD, DMPSJ

Short-Term

E-5.1 Reducing Air Pollution

Action E-5.1.A: SIP

Cooperate with appropriate state, regional, and federal agencies to carry out the federally mandated SIP in order to attain federal standards for ground level ozone by the end of 2021.

DOEE, DDOT, MWCOG

On-going

Action E-5.1.B: Control of Bus and Truck Emissions

DDOT, OPM, WMATA

On-going

Action E-5.1.C: Motor Vehicle Inspection Programs

DMV

On-going

Action E-5.1.D: Air Quality Monitoring

Continue to operate a system of air quality monitors around the District, and take corrective actions in the event the monitors detect emissions or pollution that exceeds federal standards.

DOH, DOEE

On-going

E-6.1 Reducing Water Pollution

Action E-6.1A: Stormwater Management Program

DOEE, DC Water, DPW

Mid-Term

Action E-6.1.B: Funding

DOEE, DC Water, EOM, CC

On-going

Action E-6.1.C: Monitoring and Enforcement

Maintain a District water pollution control program that enforces water quality standards, regulates land-disturbing activities (to reduce sediment), inspects and controls sources of pollution in the District, , and comprehensively monitors District waters to identify and eliminate sources of pollution . This program should be adequately staffed to carry out its mission and to implement innovative stormwater management programs. Other environmental programs—including underground storage tank (UST) regulation, contaminated site remediation, and pesticide control programs—must take groundwater impacts into account in their regulatory and enforcement activities.

DC Water, DOEE

On-going

Action E-6.1.D: Clean Water Education

Working with DC Water, DOEE, DCPS, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE), and local universities, increase public information, education, and outreach efforts on stormwater pollution. These efforts could include such measures as community clean ups storm drain marking , school curricula, demonstration projects, signage, and advertisement and media campaigns.

DC Water, DPW, DOEE

On-going

Action E-6.1.E: Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation

DOEE, DC Water,

Mid-Term

Action E-6.1.F: Houseboat Regulations

Improve regulation of houseboats and other floating structures in the Washington Channel, Anacostia River, and Potomac River to reduce water pollution.

DOEE, AWC, USEPA

On-going

Action E-6.1.G: Clean Marinas

Promote the Clean Marinas Program , encouraging boat clubs and marinas to voluntarily change their operating procedures to reduce pollution to District waters.

DOEE, AWC

On-going

Action E-6.1.H: Rainwater and Greywater

DOEE, DC Water, DCRA, DOH

Short-Term

E-6.2 Controlling Noise

Action E-6.2.A: Evaluation of Noise Control Measures

DCRA

Long-Term

Action E-6.2.B: Enforcement of Noise Regulations

DCRA

Long-Term

Action E-6.2.C: Aviation Improvements to Reduce Noise

DCRA, MWCOG

On-going

Action E-6.2.D: Reduction of Helicopter Noise

Encourage the federal government to reduce noise from the operation of helicopters, especially over residential areas along the Potomac and Anacostia rivers during nighttime and early morning hours.

DCRA, MWCOG

On-going

Action E-6.2.E: Measuring Noise Impacts

Require evaluations of noise impacts and noise exposure when large-scale development is proposed, and when capital improvements and transportation facility changes are proposed.

DCRA, OP

On-going

Action E-6.2.F: I-295 Freeway Noise Buffering

DDOT, USFHWA, USDOT

On-going

E-6.3 Managing Hazardous Substances and Materials

Action E-6.3.A: Household Hazardous Waste Disposal

Expand the District’s education and outreach programs on the dangers of household hazardous wastes, and continue to sponsor and publicize household hazardous waste collection events. Provide additional sites and regularly scheduled events for the safe collection and disposal of such wastes. Explore options for addressing the collection and disposal of hazardous waste from businesses that are classified as conditionally exempt small quantity generators.

DPW, DOEE

On-going

Action E-6.3.B: Compliance with Hazardous Substance Regulations

DOEE, FEMS

On-going

Action E-6.3.C: Reducing Exposure to Hazardous Building Materials

DOEE, FEMS

On-going

Action E-6.3.D: UST Management

DOEE

On-going

Action E-6.3.E: Reductions in Pesticide Use

Maintain a pesticide management program that complies with the District’s Municipal Regulations for pesticide registration, operator/applicator certification, and handling/use. Implement new programs to promote integrated pest management by the public and private sectors, and discourage the use of harmful pesticides by District residents, institutions, and businesses. Encourage household practices that limit mosquito breeding areas by draining standing water in such places as clogged drain pipes, flower pot trays, and discarded tires.

DOH, DPR, OMP, DDOT

On-going

Action E-6.3.F: Hazardous Substance Response and Water Pollution Control Plans

DOEE, DOH

On-going

Action E-6.3.G: Water Pollution Control Contingency Plan

DOEE, DC Water, MWCOG, HSEMA

Short-Term

E-6.4 Drinking Water Safety

Action E-6.4.A: Lead Pipe Testing and Replacement

DC Water, DPW, USEPA

On-going

Action E-6.4.B: Source Water Conservation

Implement measures to buffer natural systems and abate pollution sources in the Potomac Basin that could potentially harm the District’s drinking water quality.

DOEE, MWCOG

On-going

Action E-6.4.C: Interagency Working Group

Create an interagency working group on safe drinking water to address drinking water emergencies. Coordinate with DC Water and DC Health to expand public education on water supply.

DC Water, DOH, DOEE, OCA

Mid-Term

E-6.5 Sanitation, Litter, and Environmental Health

Action E-6.5.A: Expanded Trash Collection and Street Sweeping

DPW

Short-Term

Action E-6.5.B: Trash Collection in District Waterbodies

DC Water, MWCOG, DOEE

Medium-Term

Action E-6.5.C: Neighborhood Clean Ups

DPW, DOEE

On-Going

Action E-6.5.D: Strengthening and Enforcing Dumping Laws

Take measures to strengthen and enforce the District’s littering, rodent and disease vector control, and illegal dumping laws. These measures should include:

Providing adequate funding to carry out anti-littering programs;

Empowering the community to report illegal dumping activities;

Increasing public education on dumping laws, including posting of signs where appropriate; and

Expanding surveying and enforcement activities.

DPW, OAG, MPD

Short-Term

Action E-6.5.E: Publicizing and Expanding Bulk Waste Disposal and Recycling Options

DPW

On-going

Action E-6.5.F Single-Use Bottles

DPW, DOEE

On-going

Action E-6.5.G Vacant and Underused Properties

DCRA

On-going

E-6.6 Other Hazards and Pollutants

Action E-6.6.4: Managing Backlight, Uplight, and Glare

Work to reduce backlight, uplight, and glare and identify programmatic improvements such as increased education and outreach on light standards and requirements.

E-6.7 Achieving Environmental Justice

Action E-6.7.A: Clean and Reuse Contaminated Properties

Clean up brownfields and Superfund sites so that these sites can be reused for commercial and industrial activities, housing, parks, and other community facilities that can boost local economies and improve quality of life.

DOEE, USEPA

On-going

Action E-6.7.B: Environmental Health Threats in Affordable Housing

DHCD, DCHA, DOEE, DOH

On-going

E-7.1 Greening the Government

Action E-7.1.A: Green Building Legislation

Update legislation to increase green standards for projects constructed by the District or receiving funding assistance from the District . Strive for higher levels of energy efficiency, renewable energy requirements, net-zero standards for new construction, and broader sustainability metrics for public projects, using 2019 as the baseline year.

DOEE, OP, DCRA, EOM

Short-Term

Action E-7.1.B: Energy Management Plans

DOEE, DCPSC

On-going

Action E-7.1.C: Sustainable DC

All District Agencies

Ongoing

Action E-7.1.D: Sustainable DC Innovation Challenge

Fully launch the Sustainable DC Innovation Challenge to help District agencies test new innovations and technology with the goal of increasing the use of renewable energy.

DOEE, OP

Ongoing

Action E-7.1.E Reduce Energy Use in District Government-Owned Buildings

Retrofit and maintain District government-owned buildings to minimize energy use. Install renewable energy technology to minimize energy use.

DGS, DOEE

Ongoing

Action E-7.1.F Environmental Partnerships

Continue to leverage the local business and environmental advocacy communities by collaborating on sustainability initiatives.

DOEE, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action E-7.1.G Environmental Audits

Evaluate existing and proposed new District government facilities to guide decisions about retrofits and other conservation measures. Audits should include analysis with regard to resilience and energy efficiency and also be required anytime the District leases space for government use. Resilience audits should support Washington, DC’s capacity to thrive amidst challenging conditions by preparing and planning to absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to adverse events.

DOEE, DGS

Ongoing

E-7.2 Sustainability Education and Stewardship

Action E-7.2.A: Partnerships for Environmental Education

DOEE, OP, DCPS, SEO

On-going

Action E-7.2.B: Production of Green Guide

Continue to update guidance aimed at homeowners, builders, contractors, and the community-at-large with guidelines and information on green building and GI.

OP, DOEE

Short-Term

Action E-7.2.C: Sustainability in Schools, Recreation Centers, and Libraries

When modernizing all public school buildings, recreation centers, and libraries, reduce their environmental footprint and integrate sustainable and healthy practices into their operations. Continue to support District-wide schoolyard greening efforts and related programs, and encourage public and charter schools to participate in schoolyard greening efforts.

DPR, DGS

On-going

E-7.3 Environment and the Economy

Action E-7.3.A: Voluntary Clean Up Program

Continue the District’s Voluntary Clean Up Program . The program is designed to encourage the investigation and remediation of contamination on any site that is not on the EPA’s National Priority List and that is not the subject of a current clean up effort.

USEPA, DOEE

On-going

Action E-7.3.B: Sustainable Business Program

Develop a more robust, voluntary sustainable business program that partners with businesses to help them operate sustainably.

DOEE, DOES, DSLBD

Long-Term

Action E-7.3.C: Green-Collar Job Corps

DOEE, DOES, DSLBD

Long-Term

Action E-7.4.A: DOEE

Provide the necessary staff resources, funding, and regulatory authority for the DOEE to achieve its mission and successfully implement the District’s key environmental protection programs.

DOEE

Ongoing

Economic Development Element

ED-1.1 Diversifying the Economic Base

Action ED-1.1.A: Economic Development Strategic Plan

DMPED, OP, DOES

Short-Term

Action ED-1.1.B: Data Tracking

Maintain and regularly update statistical data on employment in core sectors, wages and salaries, forecasts by sector, and opportunities for future employment growth.

DOES, OP

On-going

Action ED-1.1.C: Monitoring and Updating Data to Support Recovery from 2020 Public Health Emergency

OP, DMPED, DHCD

On-going

Action ED-1.1.D: Business Support Structures

Streamline processes and create a more centralized system that assists businesses in meeting regulatory requirements quickly and efficiently, with a particular focus on serving small businesses, businesses that show the promise to create many jobs, and businesses that help the District meet goals, such as its commitment to reduce greenhouse gasses. Continue centralizing information and assistance to small and local businesses on starting a new business, the business permitting processes, zoning, fees and regulations, incentives, financing, unique programs, and opportunities. Create and maintain a fast-track permits and approvals system for businesses interested in opening or expanding in priority, underserved neighborhoods.

DMPED, DSLBD, DCRA

Short-Term

Action ED-1.1.E: Improve Access to Capital and Financing Opportunities

DMPED, DISB, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action ED-1.1.F: Identify Underused Sites

OP, FMPED

Ongoing

Action ED-1.1.G: Monitor Opportunity Zones

Monitor effects of the federal Opportunity Zones incentive in DC’s Qualified Opportunity Zones to identify adverse community impacts. If significant impacts are identified, recommend program and policy changes to mitigate the impacts.

DMPED, OP, DHCD, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action ED-1.1.H: Stabilize Business Occupancy Costs

DMPED, OP

Short-Term

Action ED-1.1.I: Increasing Exports

DMPED

Ongoing

ED-1.2 Sustaining the Federal Presence

Action ED-1.2.A: Retention and Recruitment Programs

Work with private sector economic development organizations and through the Office of Federal and Regional Affairs (OFRA) to discourage federal jobs and agencies from leaving Washington, DC, and to enhance the District’s ability to capitalize on federal procurement opportunities.

DMPED, DOES, DCWICDPR, DCPS, DGS

Ongoing

Action ED-1.2.B: Technical Assistance

Through the Department of Small and Local Business Development (DSLBD), provide local firms with technical assistance in bidding on District and federal procurement contracts so that the District’s companies and workers may capture a larger share of this economic activity. Periodically evaluate the success of local technical assistance programs, and make adjustments as needed to achieve higher rates of success. When practical, collect data and publish informational resources detailing opportunities to participate in District and federal government contracting.

DOES, DMPED, DCWIC, DSLBD

DGS, DDOT

Ongoing

Action ED-1.2.C: Study Federal Employment

Conduct a study in coordination with NCPC to identify updated approaches to retain and attract federal jobs as well as related federal activities in Washington, DC. This study should respond to the changing needs of the federal workplace, identify federal uses best aligned with the District’s workforce and economic development priorities, building types and locations compatible with those federal activities.

NCPC, DMPED, OP

Ongoing

ED-1.3 Supporting Innovation in the Economy

Action ED-1.3.A: Branding Washington, DC as a Creative Hub

DMPED, DOES, Events DC, DSLBD, other

Ongoing

Action ED-1.3.B: Link Federal Research and Enterprises

DMPED, DSLBD, OP, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action ED-1.3.C: Support Emerging Entrepreneurs

DMPED, DSLBD, OP

Mid-Term

Action ED-1.3.D: Foster Technology Careers for District Students

DMPED, DME, UDC

Mid-Term

Action ED-1.3.E: Support and Promote Inclusive Technology Business and Workforce Opportunities

Support and promote inclusivity in the District’s technology economy through workforce development, business development, and public-private sector collaboration. These efforts should emphasize increasing the diversity of the workforce serving technology industries, as well as the ownership of technology-oriented businesses.

DMPED, DOES

Ongoing

Action ED-1.3.F: Planning for Technology-Based Businesses

Explore the benefits of aligning business attraction for technology-based firms with next-generation information technology infrastructure, such as 5G telecommunications networks.

DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

Action ED-1.3.G: Monitor Changes in Technology

DOES, OP, DSLBD, DMPED

Ongoing

Action ED-1.3H Gig Economy Workers

OP, DMPED, DOES

Mid-Term

Action ED-1.3.I Assess Incentives

DMPED, DOES, OCFO

Ongoing

Action ED-1.3.J Racial Equity Toolkit

Develop a racial equity toolkit to assist in reviewing existing small business and workforce development programs through a racial equity lens.

DMPED, Mayor’s Office of Racial Equity

Short-Term

ED-2.1 The Office Economy

Action ED-2.1.A: Marketing Programs

DMPED, Other

Mid-Term

Action ED-2.1.B: Support Low-Cost Office Space

OP, DMPED

Short-Term

Action ED-2.1.C: Supporting Entrepreneurship

DMPED, DSLBD

Short-Term

Action ED-2.1.D: Anchor Commercial Expansion

DGS, DMPED, OP

Ongoing

ED-2.2 The Retail Economy

Action ED-2.2.A: Update Retail Action Agenda

Update the District-wide Retail Action Agenda. The agenda should include an evaluation of the current and projected amount of market-supportable retail, strategies for increasing retail offerings in historically underserved communities, , submarket-specific retail positioning strategies , and an analysis of how changing retail trends and technologies, such as online retailing and automation, are likely to impact retail businesses and employment in the District. .

OP, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action ED-2.2.B: Retail Ceiling Heights

Determine the feasibility of developing zoning amendments that would permit higher ground floor retail ceiling heights in neighborhood commercial areas . Through processes including ZR-16, many zones have been revised to better accommodate the national standards for retail space, which has higher ceiling limits than typical office or residential uses. However, there may be an additional opportunity to make similar adjustments to zones used in neighborhood commercial areas. If these adjustments are feasible, better accommodating national retail space standards would help improve the District’s economic resilience.

OP, DMPED, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action ED-2.2.C: Update the 2005 Retail Leakage Study

Mid-Term

ED-2.3 The Tourism and Hospitality Economy

Action ED-2.3.A: Promote Unique Assets

Destination DC, Events DC, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action ED-2.3.B: Economic Development Financing Tools

DMPED

Short-Term

Action ED-2.3.C: Test Challenge-Based Procurement

OCP, DMPED, and others

Short-Term

ED-2.4 The Institutional Economy

Action ED-2.4.A: Institutional Spin-off Business

DMPED

Ongoing

ED-2.5 The Production, Distribution, and Repair Economy

Action ED-2.5.A: Industrial Business Association

Explore the formation of an Industrial Business Association ) , to promote industrial tenant attraction and retention.

DMPED, OP

Short-Term

Action ED-2.5.B: Municipal PDR Needs Study

OP, DPW, DGS

Mid-Term

Action ED-2.5.C: Siting of Food Aggregation, Processing, and Production Facilities

DCFPC

Short-Term

Action ED2.5.D: Assess Innovations in PDR Uses

DMPED, OP

Short-Term

ED-3.1 Strengthening Retail Districts

Action ED-3.1.A: Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization

DMPED

Ongoing

Action ED-3.1.B: Integrating Cultural Events and Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization

Promote the vitality and diversity of the District’s neighborhood commercial corridors through heritage and cultural tours, festivals, and other events.

OP, DMPED, DSLBD

Ongoing

ED-3.2 Small and Locally Owned Businesses

Action ED-3.2.A: Anti-Displacement Strategies

Complete an analysis of alternative regulatory and financial measures to mitigate the impacts of demographic and economic market changes on small and local businesses. Measures to be assessed should include, but not be limited to, technical assistance, building purchase assistance, income and property tax incentives, historic tax credits, direct financial assistance, commercial land trusts, relocation assistance programs, and zoning strategies, such as maximum floor area allowances for particular commercial activities.

OP, DMPED, DSLBD, DOES

Short-Term

Action ED-3.2.B: Business Incentives

DMPED, DOES, DSLBD, DOES

Ongoing

Action ED-3.2.C: Temporary Retail

Support temporary retail opportunities that would enable entrepreneurs and small businesses to open a shop in vacant commercial space at reduced costs.

DMPED, DSLBD, DCWIC, DOES

Ongoing

Action ED-3.2.D: Small Business Needs Assessment

DOES, DSLBD

Short-Term

Action ED-3.2.E: Neighborhood Commercial District Resilience Toolkit

DMPED, OP, DSLBD

Mid-Term

Action ED-3.2.F: Study Employee-Owned and Controlled Businesses

DMPED

Mid-Term

ED-4.1 Linking Education and Employment

Action ED-4.1.A: Master Education Plan

Support implementation of the Master Education Plan and the DC Public Schools Strategic Plan to improve the performance of Washington, DC schools and the expanded capacity of all District youth to successfully join the future workforce and access career pathways.

DCPS, CC, EOM, OCA, SE

Ongoing

Action ED-4.1.B: Expanded Youth Services

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.1.C: Partnerships for Outside-the-Classroom Learning

Track the outcomes of mentoring, internship, and tutoring programs offered by the District’s institutional and nonprofit organizations to better understand where there may be duplication and where there may be gaps. Gather qualitative feedback, in addition to quantitative program results, directly from mentees, interns, or program attendees to receive first-hand accounts on the needs for these programs.

DOES, DCPS

Short-Term

Action ED-4.1.D: UDC Certification as a Training Provider

Encourage UDC to be fully certified to provide workforce development training that will help more District residents gain the qualifications required to reach career pathways.

UDC, DOES

Short-Term

Action ED-4.1.E: Expand Job Center Services for Youth

Expand DOES job center services to effectively serve youth customers. These expanded programs will help increase youth employment and long-term participation in the labor market.

DOES

Short-Term

ED-4.2 Increasing Workforce Development Skills

Action ED-4.2.A: Alliances with External Organizations and Entities

DOES, OCA, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.B: Labor Market Monitoring

DOES

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.C: Employer Needs Assessments

DOES, DCWIC, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.D: Outreach to Residents and Employers

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.E: Workforce Investment Act

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.F: Training Program Tracking

Track the effectiveness of job training programs. Use assessments of such programs to modify and improve them.

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.G: Good Practices Report

DOES, DCWIC

Short-Term

Action ED-4.2.H: Incentive Programs

Continue to offer incentive-based programs that encourage District businesses to hire job seekers who are disadvantaged and have barriers to employment. .

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.I: Wages and Working Conditions

Continue advancing programs, including apprenticeships and employer training, that help increase wages for lower-income residents while improving working conditions.

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.J: Employment Barriers

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.K: Improved Training

Provide on-the-job training, customized training, incumbent worker training, and cohort-based training to promote existing employees, which produces new entry-level openings.

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.L: Increase Access to On-The-Job Training and Workforce Development

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

Action ED-4.2.M: DC Housing Authority Employment Opportunities

DOES, DCWIC

Ongoing

ED-4.3 Getting to Work

Action ED-4.3.A: Regional Initiatives

DMPED, DOES

Ongoing

Action ED-4.3.B: Increasing Access to Employment

Pursue opportunities to develop high-capacity transit corridors that connect low-income communities to major employment areas, both in the District and region.

DDOT

Long-Term

Action ED-4.3.C: Housing a Thriving Workforce

DMPED, OP, DHCD

Ongoing

Action ED-4.3.D: Align Housing and Transportation Planning Regionally

OP, DDOT, MWCOG

Ongoing

Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element

PROS-1.1 Developing a Park Classification System

Action PROS-1.1.A: Park Classification

Complete the classification of each of the District’s 375 properties using Figure 8.1. Identify suggested (advisory only) classifications for federal parks as part of this process.

DPR, NPS, NCPC

Short-Term

Action PROS-1.1.B: Parks Master Plan

Implement the Parks Master Plan for the District of Columbia Parks System. Update the plan at least once every five years or as needed to reflect changing conditions and needs. Use the Parks Master Plan as the basis for the annual Capital Improvement Program request for park and recreational facilities.

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.1.C: Master Plans for Individual Parks

Prepare master plans for large individual parks (such as regional parks) prior to major capital improvements as funding allows, and use these plans to guide capital improvement and implementation processes.

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.1.D: Quality of Existing Park Spaces

Develop an enhanced maintenance and improvement schedule to upgrade the quality of passive and active parklands and outdoor facilities, to make the most of existing District parks.

DPR, DGS

Ongoing

PROS-1.2 Closing the Gaps 805

Action PROS-1.2.A: Bus Routing

DDOT, WMATA, DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.2.B: Public Involvement

Consult with Advisory Neighborhood Commissions (ANCs) and local community groups on park planning and development to understand and better address resident priorities.

DPR, DCPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.2.C: Park Spaces on District Properties

Encourage shared-use agreements for green spaces owned by District government and DCPS so that these areas are available and accessible to residents for recreational purposes.

DPR, DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action PROS-1.2.D: Temporary Activation of Underutilized Spaces

OP, DPR, DOEE, NCPC, NPS

Mid-Term

Action PROS-1.2.E: Open Space Plan

Evaluate the need for a District-wide open space plan focusing on improving physical access to green space and the rivers.

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.2.F: Promoting Access

DPR

Short-Term

PROS-1.3 Preserving the Value of Parkland

Action PROS-1.3.A: Transfer of Small Open Spaces to DPR

DPR, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action PROS-1.3.B: Site Plan Review

Plans for the redesign of individual parks or the development of park facilities should be reviewed by appropriate District agencies so that they advance the District’s goals for better public recreation facilities, environmental protection, open space preservation, historic preservation, public safety, accessibility, and resilience.

DPR, DOEE, OP, DCRA, MPD

Ongoing

Action PROS-1.3.C: District-wide Ecosystem

Support a District-wide ecosystem consortium that will work to increase wildlife habitat and connectivity, especially among parks. The consortium can collectively identify, map, and protect wildlife and natural resources so that wildlife have access to high-quality habitat throughout Washington, DC.

DOEE, DPR, OP

Mid-Term

PROS-1.4 Meeting the Needs of a Growing District

Action PROS-1.4.A: New Parkland or Park Dedication Fee

DPR, OP, OAG, OCA

Mid-Term

PROS-2.1 Assessing Recreational Facilities

Action PROS-2.1.A: Capital Improvements

Regularly identify and update the cost of improvements needed to meet service delivery standards, including those for recreation centers, aquatic facilities, and outdoor facilities. Provide systematic and continuing funds for park improvements through the annual Capital Improvement Program, with investments prioritized for the facilities and communities that are most in need.

DPR, OCA, OCFO

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.1.B: Needs Assessments and Demographic Analysis

Conduct periodic needs assessments, surveys, and demographic studies to better understand the current preferences and future needs of District residents regarding parks and recreation.

DPR, OP

Ongoing

Action PROS 2.1.C: Parks Restroom Inventory

Conduct an assessment of the existing parks restroom inventory, considering park size and usage to determine the needs for additional public restrooms.

DPR

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.1.D: Level-of-Service and Classification Systems

Evaluate existing level-of-service standards by type of facility and amenity, and where deemed necessary, develop facility-specific classification systems.

DPR

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.1.E: Improvement of Outdoor Recreational Facilities

Systematically evaluate existing outdoor recreational facilities based on the Parks Master Plan design guidelines. Implement plans to eliminate deficiencies and close gaps through capital improvements. Typical capital projects might include turf restoration, addition of lighting and seating at sports fields, playground renovation, and resurfacing of basketball and tennis courts.

DPR, DGS, OP

Short-Term

PROS-2.2 Providing Quality Service to All Residents

Action PROS-2.2.A: Facility Assessments

Conduct regular facility condition and utilization studies, and use this data to determine if there is a need for improvement, reconstruction, closure, or expansion. A comprehensive facility condition assessment should be performed for each recreation center at least once every five years.

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.B: Maintenance Standards

DPR, DPW, OPM, DGS

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.2.C: Adopt-a-Park

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.D: Data Tracking

DPR, OCTO

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.E: Marketing and Branding

Develop a marketing plan to increase public awareness of programs and to more firmly establish an identity for Washington DC, parks.

DPR, NPS, Events DC

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.F: Integration of Federal and District Athletic Fields

Better integrate federal and District athletic fields under the jurisdictions of NPS, DPR, and DCPS.

NPS, DPR, DCPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.G: Design Standards

Create District-wide parks and recreation facility design standards for outdoor facilities. Design parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities to reflect the preferences and culture of the local population, to accommodate a range of age groups and abilities, and to improve the safety of visitors and staff. When renovating playgrounds and parks, design new infrastructure for active recreation, including workout equipment, for all ages and abilities.

DPR, DGS, OP

Ongoing

Action PROS-2.2.H: Hospital and Clinic Partnerships

Explore partnerships with hospitals and clinics to increase the number of doctors prescribing parks and recreational activities to patients of every age.

DPR, DOH

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.2.I: Performance Monitoring

DPR, OCTO, DGS

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.2.J: Recreation Program Action Plan

DPR

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.2.K: Public-Private Partnerships

When using a public-private partnership model to fund park acquisitions or improvements, incorporate programming and maintenance plans.

DPR, DGS, OCA

Short-Term

Action PROS-2.2.L: New Kiosk Development

Amend the zoning regulations to allow temporary (and permanent) kiosks at residentially zoned parks, where appropriate. Kiosks would be owned by the District and revenue from the kiosks would be used to support park maintenance and operations.

DPR, DGS, OP, OZ, ZC, DCRA

Short-Term

PROS-3.1 Sustaining and Enhancing the Federal Open Space Systems

Action PROS-3.1.A: Participation in Federal Planning Park Efforts

Support and participate in NPS and NCPC efforts to plan for parks and open spaces in, and adjacent to, the Monumental Core. Encourage resident participation in these efforts.

DPR, NCPC, NPS, OP

Short-Term

Action PROS-3.1.B: Monument and Memorial Siting

OP, DPR, NPS, NCPC, CFA

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.1.C: Implementation of General Management Plans

Support federal efforts to implement the Comprehensive Design Plan for the White House and President’s Park and the GMPs for Rock Creek Park and the Fort Circle Parks .

OP, DPR, NPS, NCPC

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.1.D: Fort Circle Park Trail

Use land acquisition and/or easements to complete the Fort Circle Park Hiker-Biker Trail and to provide additional Fort Circle Park signage and historic markers.

NPS, DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.1.E: Fort Circle Partnerships

Actively participate in interjurisdictional and public-private partnerships to preserve, enhance, restore, and complete the Fort Circle Parks.

NPS, DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.1.F: Park Land Transfers

NCPC, NPS, DPR, OCA

Ongoing

PROS-3.2 Reclaiming the Waterfront

Action PROS-3.2.A: Anacostia River Park Improvements

Work collaboratively with the federal government, the private sector, and community and nonprofit groups to implement the open space improvement plans of the AWI. Planned improvements include:

A major destination park at Poplar Point;

Restored natural areas at Kingman and Heritage islands;

New parks, including recreational fields, around RFK Stadium;

Continuous bicycle and pedestrian trails along the waterfront and new pedestrian crossings on the upper reaches of the river;

New neighborhood parks and athletic fields within redeveloping areas along the waterfront, including the Southwest Waterfront, Buzzard Point, Near Southeast, and Hill East; and

Enhancements to the existing waterfront parks.

DPR, DOEE, NPS, NCPC, OP

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.2.B: Signage and Branding

Work with NPS to develop and implement a consistent system of signage and markers for the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts.

DPR, OP, NPS, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action PROS-3.2.C: Anacostia River Boating

Develop additional marine facilities, including rowing centers, appropriately scaled boathouses, boat slips, and piers along the banks of the Anacostia River as recommended in the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan. All new marinas should become Clean Marina Partners. Implement boating access improvements utilizing the Boating Access grants from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration Program.

DPR, OP, DOEE, NPS, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action PROS-3.2.D: Anacostia Riverwalk

Construct new sections of the Anacostia Riverwalk according to the Buzzard Point Vision Framework’s riverwalk design guidelines. Work with Fort McNair to extend the Anacostia Riverwalk along the Washington Channel and design it to include co-benefits, such as enhanced security and flood protection for the base and ecological restoration features, thereby completing a key piece of the District-wide riverwalk system.

DPR, DDOT, DOEE, OP, NPS, NCPC, USACE

Mid-Term

PROS-3.3 Other Significant Open Space Networks

Action PROS-3.3.A: Creating Washington, DC’s Central Park

Work with the federal government and institutional and open space landowners to create a linear system of parks and open space extending from Bryant Street on the south to Fort Totten on the north. This system should be created from existing large publicly-owned and institutional tracts, as well as adjacent triangle parks, cemeteries, and rights-of-way.

DPR, OP, NCPC, NPS

Mid-Term

Action PROS-3.3.B: Boulevards and Parkways

Preserve and maintain boulevards and parkways as elements of the larger park and open space system. Proposed improvements and maintenance projects along trails and parkways should minimize impacts on viewsheds and are sensitive to the natural and historic qualities that make them significant.

DDOT, NCPC, NPS, OP, DPR

Ongoing

PROS-3.4 Connecting the District Through Trails

Action PROS-3.4.A: Bicycle Trail Implementation

DDOT, DPR, NCPC, NPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.4.B: District-wide Bicycle Network

In support of Sustainable DC, continue to develop a District-wide 100-mile bicycle lane network. Prioritize bicycle connections to parks and recreation facilities.

DDOT, DPR, OP, NCPC, NPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.4.C: Signage and Parking

Provide more consistent and unified signage along the District’s trails to improve their identity and accessibility. Provide secure bike parking at trailheads and key destinations.

DDOT, DPR, NPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-3.4.D: Water Trails

Continue to develop designated water trails and water access points in the Potomac and Anacostia rivers for travel by canoe, kayak, and other paddlecraft.

DPR, NOS, DDOT, DOEE, other

Short-Term

PROS-4.1 Maximizing Access Through Partnerships

Action PROS-4.1.A: CapitalSpace

Complete implementation of the CapitalSpace Initiative, which provides a coordinated strategy for open space and park management between the District and federal government.

NCPC, DPR, OP, NPS

Short-Term

Action PROS-4.1.B: Expanding Partnerships

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-4.1.C: Sponsorships and Foundations

Explore opportunities for financial sponsorship of park and recreation facilities by corporate and nonprofit partners, foundations, and “friends” organizations.

DPR

Ongoing

Action PROS-4.1.D: Joint-Use Partnerships

Consider alternative joint-use partnership models with DCPS and nonprofit service providers, and select and implement the most effective approaches.

DPR, DCPS

Ongoing

Action PROS-4.1.E: Cooperative Management Agreements

Develop a District-wide strategy for securing cooperative management agreements with NPS and other federal partners to update, operate, and maintain federally controlled parks in Washington, DC.

DPR, NPS, NCPC, OP, DGS

Short-Term

Urban Design Element

UD-1.1 Building on Washington, DC’s Historic Plan

Action UD-1.1.A: Siting of Commemorative Works

Enhance the District government’s approach to the siting and review of both local and national commemorative works, and establish processes for better coordination among District and federal agencies and review bodies; develop a District-wide master plan for creating commemorative sculptures and events throughout Washington, DC. .

CFA, NCPC, OP

On-going

Action UD-1.1.B: Review of Public Parking Regulations

DDOT

Short-Term

Action UD-1.1.C: Alley Greening

Investigate the adoption of regulations that allow for resident greening and controlled vehicular access of alleyways to promote neighborhood community life.

Short-Term

Action UD-1.1.D: District-Wide Urban Design Vision

Short-Term

Action UD-1.1.E: View Corridor Study and Guidelines

Conduct one or more studies, in coordination with NCPC, to inventory, analyze, and categorize important viewsheds to and from major public open spaces and important view corridors; and develop design guidance for preserving and enhancing views, strengthening the image of the capital city and the District, improving the pedestrian experience.

OP, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action UD-1.1.F: Small Open Spaces Inventory and Design Guidelines

Document the existing small open spaces and reservations, under both federal and District-control and, develop guidelines for restoring greenspace and enhancing their usability as recreation and community spaces.

Mid-Term

UD-1.2 Designing in Harmony with Natural Topography and Landforms

Action UD-1.2.A: Public Space Regulations for Grading

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action UD-1.2.B: Creating View Plane Regulations

OP, OZ

Mid-Term

UD-1.3 Designing the Waterfront for the Next Century

Action UD-1.3.A: Anacostia Waterfront Initiative

Continue to implement the Framework Plan for the Anacostia River, restoring Washington, DC’s identity as a waterfront city and bridging the east and west sides of the river.

DDOE, DDOT, OP

Ongoing

Action UD-1.3.B: Waterfront Barriers

Continue to explore ways to address freeway and highway barriers along the Anacostia and Potomac waterfronts. Study options for addressing the visual barrier presented by the Whitehurst Freeway and the physical barrier presented by the waterfront CSX rail line, and I-295’s physical and visual barriers.

NCPC, DDOT, OP

Ongoing

Action UD-1.3.C: Natural Shorelines

Identify and map waterfront areas with potential to be converted to natural shorelines.

DOEE, OP

Short-Term

UD-1.4 Enhancing Thoroughfares and Gateways

Action UD-1.4.A: Zoning and Views

OP, OZ

Short-Term

Action UD-1.4.B: Boundary Streets and Entrances

OP, NCPC, DDOT

Long-Term

UD-2.1 Streets For People

Action UD-2.1.A: Retail Ceiling Heights

Develop zoning regulations to require higher first-floor ceiling heights in new buildings along main streets and other commercial/mixed-use areas.

DMPED, DBID, OP

Completed

Action UD-2.1.B: Streetscape Design by Neighborhood Type

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action UD-2.1.C: Standards for Street Furniture

DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action UD-2.1.D: Public Space Permitting of Street Furniture

Explore process improvements to the public space permitting process to reduce the time and complexity of reviewing and approving District-standard street furniture.

DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action UD- 2.1.E: Public Restrooms in Streetscapes

Map the location of publicly accessible restrooms in the District, and develop location recommendations for the installations of new restrooms. Investigate opportunities to install attractive, clean, and safe standalone public restrooms that are accessible at all hours.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action UD-2.1.F: Sidewalk Widening

Conduct a corridor study to investigate widening sidewalks through a variety of means including the establishment of building restriction lines, reducing cartway width, or pedestrian bulb-outs.

OP, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action UD-2.1.G: Placemaking and Vision Zero

Establish a pilot initiative to enhance roadway safety through placemaking at intersections at three locations. Incorporate green infrastructure, low-impact design, and public life design principles.

DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action UD-2.1.H: Resilient Public Life Guide

Study and develop design guidance for how public spaces can be managed and designed to be more resilient during times of natural, security, and public health emergencies.

OP, DDOT

Short-Term

UD-2.2 Designing for Vibrant Neighborhoods

Action UD-2.2.A: Scale Transition Study

Shot-Term

Action UD-2.2.B: Use Zoning and Other Regulatory Tools to Achieve Design Goals

Mid-Term

Action UD-2.2.C: High-Quality Affordable Housing Review

DCRA, DHCD, OP

Mid-Term

Action UD-2.2.D: Urban Design Strategies for Resilient Communities

Research best practices and develop recommendations and urban design and biophilic guidelines to help the District mitigate hazards, such as flooding and climate threats (e.g., sea level rise and extreme heat), while meeting its other urban design goals.

DDOE, OP

Ongoing

Action UD-2.2.E: Design Guidelines for Large Sites

Ongoing

Action UD-4.2.F: Design Guidelines

Mid-Term

UD-2.3 Play Everywhere

Action UD-2.3.A: Play Streets Guidelines

Develop guidelines for resident and civic organization activation of streets and other public spaces as temporary or permanent safe play spaces, and investigate regulatory changes necessary to enable play streets.

OP, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action UD-2.3.B: Playable Art

Complete permanent artistic play structures in small parks, street corners, or civic buildings to pilot the concept of playable streets.

OP, DDOT, DPR

Mid-Term

UD 2.4 The Equitable District

Action UD-2.4.A: Design Guidelines for Higher-Density, Family-Sized Housing

DHCD, OP

Short-Term

Action UD-2.4.B: Design Standards for Universal Wayfinding

DDOT, DCRA, DCCAH

Short-Term

Action UD-2.4.C: Toolkit for Inclusive and Intergenerational Public Space Design

Research and compile a set of engagement strategies and design guidelines for inclusive and intergenerational public spaces in neighborhoods. These guidelines should include best practices for how to encourage community-led design efforts, successful ways to encourage community and cultural self-expression in the public realm (which includes streets, sidewalks, parks, plazas, and other public spaces), and incorporate accessible design principles, such as deaf space.

DPR, NPS, OP

Mid-Term

UD-3.1 Public Life For All

Action UD-3.1.A: Street Vending

Assess street vending, sidewalk café, and parklet usage to be responsive to the goals of creating lively and animated neighborhood streets and also adequately protect public safety and movement.

DCRA, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action UD-3.1.B: Reduce Barriers to Permitting of Public Space

EOM, FEMS, MPD, HSEMA, DDOT, OP

Short-Term

Action UD-3.1.C: State of Public Life Report

Create a report benchmarking the progress in expanding public life across Washington, DC as part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle. The report would track aspects of public life, including the annual number of community and special events, outdoor café seating, free speech activities, vending licenses, and use counts of major public spaces and streets. See Figure 9.20 for an example of public life event data.

OP, OCTO, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action UD-3.1.D: Digital Public Realm Initiative

OCTO, DDOT, DPR

Short-Term

UD-3.2 Designing the Active District

Action UD-3.2.A: Security-Related Design Guidelines

OP, NCPC, CFA

Completed

UD-3.3 Places For Lingering

Action UD-3.3.A: Cross-Agency Small Parks Partnership Program

OP, DPR, DDOT, DGS

Short-Term

Action UD-3.3.B: Transfer of NPS Triangle Parks to the District

Work with NPS to transfer, lease, exchange, and/or enter into cooperative agreements or partnerships of key small parks in NPS’s jurisdiction as well as the District’s jurisdiction to enhance community use, programming, and stewardship.

EOM, NPS, DDOT, DPR, DGS

Mid-Term

Action UD-3.3.C: Design Standards for Public Space Design

Create public space design guidelines for District-controlled parks and plazas that highlight designing for diverse cultural uses, placemaking, and socializing.

OP, DPR, DGS, DDOT

Short-Term

UD-4.1 The Design of Public Buildings, Public Spaces, and Infrastructure

Action UD-4.1.A: Design Excellence Program for District Facilities

OP, DGS

Short-Term

Action UD-4.1.B: Commission of Fine Arts Review of District Government Capital Projects

OP, CFA, DGS

Short-Term

Action UD-4.1.C: Excellence in Urban Design Initiative

OP, DGS, DCAIA

Short-Term

UD-4.2 Designing Architecture for People

Action UD-4.2.A: Designing the District for the People Reference Guide

Short-Term

UD-4.3 Celebrate Washington, DC’s Unique Design Legacy

Action UD-4.3.A: Washington, DC Urban Design Guide

Prepare an Urban Design Guide for Washington, DC that compiles the existing codes and regulations that play a role in creating the District’s urban design legacy.

Long-Term

Action UD-4.3.B: Update of the Projection Code

Conduct a comprehensive study and subsequent building code update to address issues of large projections on long building facades that detract from the public realm and monumental character of the District’s streets. The study should consider the role projections have played in shaping the form of Washington, DC and assess their intent and how they have evolved over time.

OP, DCRA, DDOT

Short-Term

Action UD-4.3.C: Review Zoning Height Restrictions

Review the zoning code to determine where it may be more restrictive than the Height Act to identify the potential capacity for more affordable housing and opportunities to expand inclusive neighborhoods (see Figure 9.25).

OP, OZ, DHCD

Short-Term

Historic Preservation Element

HP-1.1 Preservation Planning

Action HP-1.1.A: Inclusive Preservation Planning

OP, DMPED, OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-1.1.B: Local Significance of Historic Federal Properties

Recognize that the District’s historic federal properties define Washington, DC’s center for local Washingtonians and are important for local history. Locally significant characteristics or qualities should be maintained.

OP-HPO, NCPC, HPRB, CFA

Ongoing

HP-1.2 The District’s Historic Preservation Program 1004

Action HP-1.2.A: Governmental Coordination

Strengthen collaborative working relationships with federal agencies, including the CFA, NCPC, ACHP, NPS, and others involved in the stewardship of historic properties. Reinforce coordination between the HPO and other District agencies, and establish new relationships as needed to address historic preservation concerns.

OP-HPO, NCPC, HPRB, CFA

Ongoing

HP-1.3 Identifying Potential Historic Properties

Action HP-1.3.A: Database of Building Permits

OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-1.3.B: Survey of Existing Historic Districts

Complete comprehensive surveys of Anacostia, Capitol Hill, Cleveland Park, Georgetown, LeDroit Park, Takoma Park, and other historic districts where building-by-building information is incomplete.

OP-HPO

Mid-term

HP-1.4 Evaluating Historic Significance

Action 1.4.A: District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites

OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

HP-1.5 Designating Historic Landmarks and Districts

Action HP-1.5.A: Nomination of Properties

OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

Action HP-1.5.B: Nomination of National Register Properties

Nominate for historic landmark or historic district designation any National Register properties not yet listed in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites.

OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

Action HP-1.5.C: Nomination of Federal Properties

OP-HPO, NCPC, HPRB

Ongoing

Action HP-1.5.D: Inclusiveness in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites

Nominate properties to the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites that recognize the significance of underrepresented District communities and all aspects of local history

OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

HP-2.1 The District’s Historic Plans

Action HP-2.1.A: Designation of the Plan

Complete the documentation and designation of the historic Plan of the City of Washington as a National Historic Landmark

OP-HPO, NPS

Short-Term

Action HP-2.1.B: Extensions of the Historic L’Enfant Plan

Complete the documentation and evaluation of the significant features of the historic Plan of the City of Washington, including added minor streets. Survey the extensions of the original street plan and the pattern of reservations throughout the District, and evaluate elements of the 1893 Permanent System of Highways for their historic potential.

OP-HPO, OP, NPS

Short-Term

Action HP-2.1.C: Review of Alterations to the Historic Plan of Washington

Early consultation with the HPRB and other preservation officials should occur whenever master plans or proposed redevelopment projects envision alterations to features of the Plan of the City of Washington.

OP-HPO, HPRB, NCPC, CFA

Ongoing

Action HP-2.1.D: Review of Public Improvements

An appropriate level of consultation with the SHPO should occur before undertaking the design and construction of public space improvements in the Plan of the City of Washington.

NCPC, CFA, NPS, DDOT, OP-HPO

Ongoing

HP-2.2 Historic Landscapes and Open Space

Action HP-2.2.A: Preserving Historic Landscapes

NPS, OP-HPO, NCPC, DPR, HPRB, CFA

Ongoing

Action HP-2.2.B: Preserving the Natural Escarpment

NCPC, OP-HPO, OP, NPS, CFA

Ongoing

Action HP-2.2.C: Preserving Rights-Of-Way

Preserve original street patterns in historic districts by maintaining public rights-of-way and historic building setbacks. Retain and maintain alleys in historic districts where they are significant components of the historic development pattern.

DDOT, OP-HPO, HPRB, OP, NCPC, DMPED

Ongoing

Action HP-2.2.D: Historic Avenue Landscapes

OP, OP-HPO, NCPC, CFA

Ongoing

HP-2.3 District Government Stewardship

Action HP-2.3.A: Protection of District-Owned Properties

Strengthen procedures to encourage historic preservation review of District actions at the earliest possible stage of project planning. Apply standards for District construction consistent with the standards applied to historic properties by federal agencies.

DGS, DMPED, OP-HPO, OP

Ongoing

Action HP-2.3.B: Enhancing Civic Assets

EOM, DGS, OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-2.3.C: Preserving Public Space in Historic Districts

OP, OP-HPO, DPW, DDOT

Mid-Term

HP-2.4 Zoning Compatibility

Action HP-2.4.A: Zone Map Amendments in Historic Districts

Identify areas within historic districts where zoning regulations may need adjustment based on the scale and height of contributing buildings, while considering District-wide needs for housing and affordable housing, pursue rezoning of such areas with more appropriate designations.

OP, OP-HPO, ZC

Ongoing

HP-2.5 Review of Rehabilitation and New Construction

Action HP-2.5.A: Conceptual Design Review Process

OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

Action HP-2.5.B: Design Standards and Guidelines

OP-HPO, HPRB

Mid-Term

Action HP-2.5.C: Design Review of Federal Projects

OP-HPO, HPRB, NCPC, NPS, GSA

Ongoing

Action HP-2.5.D: Accessibility Guidelines for Aging in Place

Analyze common barriers to accessibility in older homes and develop guidelines on how older adults can modify such homes in ways that are compatible with their historic character while making them visitable and safer to live in.

OP-HPO, HPRB, DACL

Mid-Term

HP-2.6 Archaeological Resources

Action HP-2.6.A: Archaeological Curation Facility

Establish, as a high priority, a facility for the proper conservation, curation, storage, and study of artifacts, archaeological materials, and related historic documents owned by the District . Ensure public access to these materials, and promote research using the collections and records.

OP-HPO, DCPL

Short-Term

Action HP-2.6.B: Archaeological Surveys and Inventories

OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-2.6.C: Archaeological Site Reports

Require prompt completion of site reports that document archaeological findings after investigations are undertaken. Maintain a central archive of these reports, and increase efforts to disseminate their findings and conclusions.

OP-HPO

Ongoing

HP-2.7 Enforcement

Action HP-2.7.A: Preservation Enforcement

Improve enforcement of preservation laws through a sustained program of inspections, imposition of appropriate sanctions, and expeditious adjudication. Strengthen interagency cooperation and promote compliance with preservation laws through enhanced public awareness of permit requirements and procedures. Ensure that any protections remain in place during any public health emergency.

OP-HPO, DCRA, OAH

Ongoing

Action HP-2.7.B: Accountability for Violations

Hold both property owners and contractors accountable for violations of historic preservation laws or regulations, and ensure that outstanding violations are corrected before issuing permits for additional work. Ensure that fines for violations are substantial enough to deter infractions, and necessary action taken to collect fines.

OP-HPO, DCRA, OAH

Ongoing

HP-2.8 Hazard Protection for Historic Properties

Action HP-2.8.A: Preservation and Climate Change

OP-HPO, OP, HSEMA, NCPC

Long-Term

Action HP-2.8.B: Historic Properties Strategy in the District’s Hazard Mitigation Plan

OP-HPO, OP, HSEMA, NCPC

Long-Term

Action HP-2.8.C: Guidelines for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation of Historic Properties

OP-HPO, OP, HSEMA, DCRA

Long-Term

HP-3.1 Access to Information About Historic Properties

Action HP-3.1.A: Internet Access to Survey Data and Designations

OP-HPO, OP, OCTO

Ongoing

Action HP-3.1.B: Enhancement of the . District of Columbia Inventory and Map

Improve the value and effectiveness of the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites as an educational tool by presenting it in a more engaging format with maps and illustrations. Organize it to give context and meaning to individual designations, and make it available both on the internet and in print. Keep the map of historic landmarks and districts current in an interactive GIS-based version accessible to the public on the internet.

OP-HPO, OP, OCTO

Short-Term

Action HP-3.1.C: Listings of Eligibility

OP-HPO

Ongoing

HP-3.2 Public Awareness of Historic Properties 1020

Action HP-3.2.A: Preservation Outreach and Education

OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-3.2.B: Historic Preservation in Schools

OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action HP-3.2.C: Historic District Signage

Complete implementation of the District-wide program for street signs identifying historic districts.

OP-HPO, DDOT

Short-Term

Action HP-3.2.D: Markers for Historic Landmarks

Continue with implementation of the program of consistent signage that property owners may use to identify historic properties and provide brief commemorative information.

OP-HPO, other

Ongoing

Action HP-3.2.E: Historic and Archaeological Exhibitions

OP-HPO, DCPL, other

Long-Term

Action HP-3.2.F: Heritage Tourism

OP-HPO, EVENTS DC, other

Ongoing

Action HP-3.2.G: Neighborhood Tourism

OP-HPO, other

Ongoing

Action HP-3.2.H: Appreciating Cemeteries

OP-HPO, other

Ongoing

HP-3.3 Preservation Partnerships and Advocacy

Action HP-3.3.A: Coordinated Preservation Advocacy

Encourage and facilitate interaction between preservation and economic development interests. Strengthen working relationships among the HPO, HPRB, ANCs , and preservation organizations. Establish special task forces or advisory groups as appropriate to support preservation programs and advocacy for historic preservation.

OP-HPO, HPRB, ANCs

Ongoing

Action HP-3.3.B: Incorporating Preservation Issues in Local Initiatives

OP-HPO, OP, DMPED, DDOT, DOEE, DGS, DHCD

Ongoing

HP-4.1 Preservation and Economic Development

Action HP-4.1.A: Historic Neighborhood Revitalization

Implement preservation development strategies through increased use of proven programs and initiatives sponsored by preservation leaders like the National Trust for Historic Preservation, NPS , and others. Make full use of the programs available through the National Main Street Center, Preserve America, Save America’s Treasures, and other programs and funds designed for the recognition of diverse cultural heritage and the preservation and promotion of historic landmarks and districts.

OP-HPO, NPS, DMPED, other

Ongoing

Action HP-4.1.B: Historic Homeowner Grants

OP-HPO, OTR, EOM

Ongoing

Action HP-4.1.C: Preservation and Housing Affordability

OP, OP-HPO

Short-Term

Action HP-4.1.D: Workforce Development in Preservation Craftsmanship

DYRS, OP-HPO

Ongoing

HP-4.2 Preservation Incentives

Action HP-4.2.A: Transfer of Development Rights Benefits for Preservation

Monitor the effectiveness of transfer of development rights (TDR) programs included in the ZR16 zoning regulations, and consider any appropriate revisions to enhance their utility for preservation.

OP, OP-HPO, ZC

Short-Term

Action HP-4.2.B: Tax Credits for Affordable Housing in Historic Buildings

OP, OP-HPO, HPRB

Ongoing

Action HP-4.2.C: Coordination of District Programs

OP, OP-HPO, OA

Ongoing

Community Services and Facilities Element

CSF-1.1 Long-Term Planning for Public Facilities

Action CSF-1.1.A: Civic Facilities Plan

Continue to develop and refine the District’s multilayered approach to facilities master planning) so that adequate community facilities are provided for existing residents and can be provided for new neighborhoods in Washington, DC, including by providing guidance for the long-term (six-year) CIP and the annual capital budget. The approach should include an assessment of all District-owned or -maintained community facilities and property, and should identify what improvements are needed to correct deficiencies and address planned growth and change in the District. The facilities plan should be continuously maintained and updated regularly with new priorities and timelines. As needed, the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to incorporate master facilities planning findings . As part of this work , the appropriate agency shall continue to annually collect and publish data on public school capacity and enrollments, recreation facilities, libraries, emergency medical service response time, sewers, green space, and public transit capacity, including bus routes and ridership statistics for Metrorail stations and lines as well as parking availability and traffic volumes on roads and at key intersections. These data should be used, as appropriate, when evaluating the need for facility and infrastructure improvements.

OCA, DGS, OP

Ongoing

Action CSF-1.1.B: Guidelines For Public Uses of Public Facilities

Develop unified District inventory of public facilities and establish guidelines that can help the District understand the adequacy of District-owned space for use by District agencies.

OCA, OP, DCPS, OPM

Short-Term

Action CSF-1.1.C: Site Planning Procedures

Public facility planning shall include site planning and management procedures to mitigate adverse impacts on surrounding areas.

OCA, OP, DGS, OCTO

Short-Term

Action CSF-1.1.D: Public Facilities Planning

Develop a Public Facilities Plan that helps to inventory, consolidate and coordinate facility information across District agencies.

Mid-Term

Action CSF-1.1.E: Opportunities to Promote Local Food Businesses

OP/FPC (Food Policy Council)

Short-Term

Action CSF-1.1.F: Co-Location of Housing with Public Facilities

OCA, OP, DGS, DHCD

Short-Term

Action CSF-1.1.G: Universal Design

Create a working group comprised of relevant District agencies to explore the use of Universal Design standards in new and existing District facilities.

DGS

Mid-Term

Action CSF-1.1.H: Central Kitchen Facility

OP/FPC (Food Policy Council), DGS, DME, DCPS

Mid-Term

CSF-1.2 Funding and Coordination

Action CSF-1.2.A: Capital Projects Evaluation

Continue to refine measurable criteria, standards, and systematic coordination procedures to evaluate capital improvement projects.

OCA, OP, DGS

Ongoing

Action CSF-1.2.B: Inventory of Lands Owned By or Under the Jurisdiction of the District

Continue to update and expand the District’s property management database, identifying the location, size, and attributes of all District-owned facilities and properties.

OP, DGS, OCTO

Ongoing

Action CSF-1.2.C: Coordinate Facilities Master Planning with Public Facilities Planning

OP, DGS

Ongoing

CSF-2.1 Health and Health Equity

Action CSF-2.1.A: Public Health Goals

Continue efforts to set public health goals and track and evaluate key health indicators and outcomes.

DC Health

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.1.B: Primary Health Care Improvements

DC Health

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.1.C: Health Care System Roadmap

DC Health

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.1.D: Advance People-Centered Thinking and Cultural and Linguistic Competency

Enhance and expand training of District agency employees regarding people-centered thinking and cultural and linguistic competency.

DDS

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.1.E: Built Environment and Health Outcomes

DC Health, OP

Ongoing

Action CSF 2.1.F: Advancing Grocery Store Access in Underserved Areas

DMPED, OP/FPC (Food Policy Council)

Ongoing

CSF-2.2 Healthy Communities and Resilience

Action CSF-2.2.A: Assessing Disparities and Supporting Recovery Strategies from Adverse Events

OP, DMPED, DC Health

On-going

CSF-2.3 Health Facilities and Services

Action CSF-2.3.A: Review Zoning Issues

OP, ZO, ZC

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.3.B: Increase Supply of Assisted Living Residential Facilities (ALRs) and of Community Residential Facilities (CRFs)

DMHHS, DC Health, DHCD, DHCF (Department of Healthcare Finance), DBH, DDS, OP, DMPED

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.3.C: Connecting District Residents to Resources

Continue to maintain a digital resource portal that disseminates resources on a cross-agency basis to better connect people with government and community-based health resources.

DDS

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.3.D: Improving Coordination and Service Delivery Among District Agencies

DDS

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.3.E: Health in All Policies

DDS

Ongoing

Action CSF-2.3.F: No Wrong Door/DC Support Link

DDS

Ongoing

CSF-3.1 Library Facilities

Action CSF-3.1.A: Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library Modernization

DCPL, EOM, OCFO

Ongoing

Action CSF-3.1.B: Branch Libraries

DCPL

Ongoing

Action CSF-3.1.C: Library Funding

DCPL

Ongoing

Action CSF-3.1.D: Libraries and Local History

DCPL

Ongoing

Action CSF-3.1.E: Archival Materials

Provide appropriate access to archival and historical materials of Washington, DC.

DCPL

Ongoing

Action CSF-3.1.F: Facilities Master Plan

Develop a Facilities Master Plan to inform future decisions on the libraries’ physical campuses and so that libraries are planned and designed to maximize their value to the community.

DCPL

Ongoing

CSF-3.2 Library Location

Action CSF-3.2.A: Optimizing Library Services on an Ongoing Basis

DCPL

Ongoing

CSF-4.2 Fire and Emergency Services

Action CSF-4.2.A: Level of Service Monitoring

FEMS, DC Water

Ongoing

Action CSF-4.2.B: Fire Prevention and Emergency Intervention Education

Continue to educate and empower residents on fire safety and prevention measures and on emergency response techniques, such as bystander CPR and use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs).

FEMS, HSEMA

Ongoing

Action CSF-4.2.C: New Apparatus Maintenance and Fireboat Facilities

FEMS, OCA

Ongoing

Action CSF-4.2.D: Third-Party Providers

FEMS, DGS

Ongoing

Action CSF-4.2.E: Implement Strategies from the 2017 IHC 2017 Final Report

Continue to implement strategies from the 2017 IHC Final Report, including those relating to street calls, nurse triage, public education, and third-party providers of pre-hospital medical care and transport. These strategies can improve the population’s health and safety by connecting low-acuity callers to a more appropriate comprehensive source of care and by reducing or eliminating the use of 9-1-1 resources for non-emergent medical issues, enabling greater and more appropriate use of 9-1-1 resources for rapid response, treatment, and transport for high-acuity, life-threatening medical calls.

FEMS, DC Health

Ongoing

CSF-5.1 Corrections Facilities

Action CSF-5.1.A: Planning and Design of Correctional Facilities

DOC

Ongoing

Action CSF-5.1.B: Maintenance and Upgrades to Information Systems

DOC, OCTO

Short-Term

Action CSF-5.1.C: Periodic Assessment of Effectiveness

Periodically assess the corrections process for effectiveness against desired outcomes and its needs and realign resources to support its public safety objectives accordingly.

DOC

Ongoing

CSF-5.2 Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

Action CSF-5.2.A: Address Supportive Needs of Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

DOC, DHCD, DOES, OSSE, DOH, DBH, DDS

Short-Term

Action CSF-5.2.B: Integrated Services Pilot Program for Returning Citizens

Enhance and expand the ReEntry Portal based on analysis of its functionality.

DOC

Ongoing

CSF-6.1 Emergency Preparedness

Action CSF-6.1.A: District Preparedness System

Continue to administer, define, refine, implement, and maintain DPS to provide continuity of government, maintain continuity of operations, and provide emergency services to the community.

HSEMA

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.1.B: Integration of Accessibility Requirements into the Preparedness System

HSEMA

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.1.C: Development Projects and Risk Reduction

Explore methods for further reducing risks and vulnerabilities of major development projects to human-made and natural hazards.

HSEMA, FEMS, MPD, OCA, DGS, OP, DMPED, DOEE, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.1.D: Evaluate Use and Impacts of Emerging Technologies on Emergency Preparedness

HSEMA, OCTO, OCA

Ongoing

CSF-6.2 Resilience and Critical Facilities

Action CSF-6.2.A: Community Risk Assessments

Update the CRA of DPS on a recurring basis to reflect changes in the risk profiles of relevant natural and human-made systems in the District.

HSEMA

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.2.B: Preserving Critical Community Facilities

Safeguard critical facilities from a wide range of threats and hazards and develop fortified and redundant systems to deliver essential services at all times.

HSEMA, OCA, DGS, OP, DMPED, DOEE, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.2.C: Training on Safeguarding Critical Community Facilities

Develop a training program on Critical Community Facilities for law enforcement, public utilities, and private sector personnel.

HSEMA

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.2.D: Vulnerability of District-Owned Facilities

Continue to support development of criteria and methodologies to assess the vulnerability of critical District-owned facilities to human-made and natural shocks, as well as chronic stressors.

HSEMA, OCA, DGS, OP, DMPED, DOEE, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.2.E: Mitigating Vulnerability of District-Owned Facilities

HSEMA, OCA, DGS, OP, DMPED, DOEE, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CSF-6.2.F: Evaluate the Potential Use and Impacts of Emerging Technologies on Resilience and Critical Facilities

Review and evaluate the impacts of new and emerging technologies on the District’s resilience and their potential for helping the District to advance near-term and long-range resilience objectives.

HSEMA, OCA, DGS, OP, DMPED, DOEE, DDOT

Short-Term

Action CSF-6.2.G: Community Resilience Hubs

Explore the potential of establishing Community Resilience Hubs to strengthen community ties and to help establish reliable networks for vital services and disaster preparedness and recovery.

HSEMA, DGS, OCA, OP

Short-Term

Action CSF-6.2.H: Temporary Facilities

OP, DGS, DC Health

On-going

Educational Facilities Element

EDU-1.1 Integrated Master Planning for All Public Schools

Action EDU-1.1.A: Master Facility Plan Process

OP, DGS, DME, OSSE, DCPS

Ongoing

Action EDU-1.1.B: Space for Youth Cultural Entrepreneurship Initiatives

Explore the availability of public school spaces to serve partnerships and programs between cultural organizations and schools that can help youth become entrepreneurs.

DCPS, OCTFME, Others

Short-term

EDU-1.2 DCPS Facilities

Action EDU-1.2.A: Parking Utilization Study at DCPS Facilities

Conduct studies to understand use of parking facilities at appropriate DCPS sites to determine where reductions may be possible in order to identify potential higher and better uses for them.

DDOT, DCPS

Short-term

Action EDU-1.2.B: Shared-Use Agreements

Continue to support shared-use agreements for public access to recreation facilities and gardens in public schools while ensuring host schools have appropriate, prioritized access.

DCPS, DPR

On-going

EDU-2.1 Schools as Community Anchors

Action EDU-2.1.A: Shared Maintenance Facilities

Identify opportunities to share DCPS and District government operations, transportation, and maintenance facilities to reduce land and facility costs for both entities.

OCA, DCPS, OPM, DPW

On-going

EDU-3.1 UDC

Action EDU-3.1.A: UDC Campus Locations

Maintain a distribution of campus locations that serves residents of all eight wards, helping advance goals of UDC’s Equity Imperative – 2022 Strategic Plan.

UDC, SEO, OCA, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action EDU-3.1.B: Housing Archival Documents at UDC

Explore synergistic opportunities for UDC to house archival documents of Washington, DC.

UDC, DCOPR

Mid-Term

Infrastructure Element

IN-1 Drinking Water

Action IN-1.2.A: Water System Maps

Support DC Water efforts to update water system maps to accurately show pipelines, valves, and hydrants, as well as the age, material, size, and lining of pipelines.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-1.2.B: Small Diameter Water Main Rehabilitation Program Continue the implementation of the Small Diameter Water Main Rehabilitation Program as identified in DC Water’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Work includes rehabilitating small-diameter (12-inch diameter and smaller) water mains to improve water pressure, system reliability, and flows in the system, as well as to maintain water quality.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-1.2.C: Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Improvements

Continue the assessment of advanced water treatment processes that use ozonation, biologically active filters, ultraviolet light disinfection, and other innovative approaches to treat water.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-1.2.D: Residential Lead Line Replacement Program

Require identification and replacement of all lead water mains and residential service pipes District-wide, focusing on households with children, low-income residents, and communities of color. Support and expand opportunities to assist District homeowners in affordably replacing lead service lines, complementing DC Water’s program.

DC Water

Ongoing

IN-2.1 Wastewater System

Action IN-2.1.A: Wastewater Collection and Treatment Capital Improvements

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-2.1.B: On-site Wastewater Treatment

OP, OZ, DOEE, DC Water

Ongoing

IN-2.2 Stormwater Management

Action IN-2.2.A: Stormwater Capital Improvements

Continue the implementation of stormwater capital improvements as identified in DC Water’s CIP.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-2.2.B: Stormwater Management Responsibilities

An appropriate funding mechanism to consistently maintain clean water standards and reduce surface runoff;

Clear lines of responsibility with regard to which agency provides oversight, guidelines, and resources for the stormwater system and its management; and

Assurance that stormwater improvements associated with new development are coordinated with the DC Water CIP.

OCA, DOEE, DC Water, DPC, DDOT

Short-term

Action IN-2.2.C Rainwater Reuse

Develop guidance on the installation, treatment, monitoring controls, and inspections for rainwater reuse for non-potable purposes.

DC Water, DOEE

Mid-term

IN-2.3 Combined Sewer System

Action IN-2.3.A: Rehabilitate Pumps

Rehabilitate and maintain pump stations to support the Clean Rivers Project and off-load stormwater in targeted combined sewer areas.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action IN-2.3.B: Federal Funding

Pursue federal funding to cover an equitable share of the Clean Rivers Project as the federal government was the original designer and builder of the system, is a major user of the combined sewer system, and is a significant beneficiary of the effort.

DC Water, DOEE, OCA

Ongoing

IN-3.1 Solid Waste Transfer Facilities

Action IN-3.1.A: Evaluate Transfer Station Needs

DPW

Ongoing

Action IN-3.1.B: Waste Processing Facility Regulations

DCRA, DPW, DOEE

Mid-term

Action IN-3.1.C: Develop Zero Waste and Solid Waste Management Plans

DC Water

Mid-term

IN-4.1 Telecommunications Infrastructure

Action IN-4.1.A: Guidelines for Siting/Design of Facilities

DSLBD, DCRA, OP

Mid-term

IN-4.2 Leveraging New and Emerging Technology

Action IN-4.2.A: Building on Pilot Project Lessons

Upon completion of pilot activities, such as PA 2040 and ParkDC, develop after-action reports that inform future work.

OCTO, NCPC, OP

Short-term

IN-5.1 Electric Infrastructure

Action IN-5.1.A: Aging Infrastructure

Pepco, DPW

Mid-term

Action IN-5.1.B: Undergrounding Electric Distribution Lines

Continue implementing the DC PLUG initiative, which calls for placing electric distribution lines underground throughout the District.

Pepco, DPW, DDOT

Mid-term

IN-6.2 Paying for Infrastructure

Action IN-6.2.A: Developer Reimbursement Agreements

OCA, EOM, OCFO, OAG, OP

Short-term

Action IN-6.2.B: Community Infrastructure Investment

Explore methods to properly assess and meet infrastructure needs associated with incremental development.

OP, DC Water, OCTO, PEPCO

Mid-term

IN-6.3: Cross-Systems Integration

Action IN-6.3.A: Coordination of Infrastructure Upgrades

Continue to update a central repository for data and schedules for planned infrastructure upgrades to minimize the need for repeated street and sidewalk excavation.

DPW, OCTO, DC Water, OPM

Short-term

Action IN-6.3.B: Fueling Stations Shared Uses

DPW, DOEE, OP

Mid-term

IN-7: Infrastructure Resilience

Action IN-7.1.A: Micro-grid-Ready Construction

DOEE, OP

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.B: Community Risk Assessments

HSEMA

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.C: Protecting Critical Infrastructure

Protect critical facilities from a wide range of threats and hazards and develop fortified and redundant systems in order to deliver essential services at all times.

HSEMA, DPW, DC Water, PEPCO, DOEE

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.D: Training for Protecting Critical Infrastructure

Develop a training program for protecting public utilities for law enforcement and private sector personnel.

HSEMA, DPW, DC Water, PEPCO, DOEE

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.E: Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure

Continue to support development of criteria and methodologies to assess the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to human-made and natural shocks, as well as chronic stressors.

HSEMA, DOEE, OP

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.F: Mitigating Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure

HSEMA, DOEE, OP

Mid-term

Action IN-7.1.G: Emerging Technologies and Critical Infrastructure

HSEMA, OCTO, DOEE, OP

Mid-term

Arts and Culture Element

AC-1.1 Expanding Arts and Cultural Facilities

Action AC-1.1.A: Increase Public Spaces for Arts and Culture Presentation

Encourage the provision of space for arts and cultural presentation in public areas within and adjacent to new buildings . Examples include plazas designed as performance spaces or incorporation of gallery lighting in publicly accessible lobbies to provide exhibition space.

CAH, OP, DMPED, DDOT, DCRA

Short-Term

Action AC-1.1.B: Cultural Facilities in Wards 7 and 8 Encourage additional arts and cultural establishments that balance the distribution of facilities throughout the District, increase programming diversity, and improve residents’ access to arts and cultural facilities. including theaters and cinemas in Wards 7 and 8.

DMPED, CAH, other

On-going

Action AC-1.1.C: Increase Access to Public Facilities for Cultural Use

DMPED, DME, DCPL, DPR, DCPS

On-going

Action AC-1.1.D: Evaluate District Assets

Evaluate vacant and unused District-owned or controlled properties for use as arts and cultural facilities. This includes underused portions of occupied buildings.

OP, DMPED, DGS

Mid-Term

Action AC-1.1.E: Consider Cultural Space in Master Facility Planning

Explore the potential for increasing publicly accessible cultural space through the master facility planning processes for publicly-owned assets, such as libraries, schools, parks, recreation centers, and public safety facilities.

DGS, OP, DMPED, DME

Short-Term

AC-1.2 Arts and Culture in Every Community

Action AC-1.2.A: Arts and Cultural Programming in Business Improvement Districts and DC Main Streets

CAH, OCTFME, DSLBD, BIDs, DCMS

On-going

Action AC-1.2.B: Zones for Arts and Culture

Ensure that the incentives in special zones for arts and culture are fulfilling their intent .

OP, DMPED

On-going

Action AC-1.2.C: Regulatory Process Support

DCRA, DDOT, HSEMA

Short-Term

Action AC-1.2.D: Art Galleries in Public Buildings

OP, CAH, DMPED, BIDs

On-going

Action AC-1.2.E: Cultural Space Partnerships

Encourage shared space arrangements that facilitate cultural presentation in commercial spaces, such as restaurants and bookstores.

OP, DMPED, OCTFME

On-going

AC-2.1 Increasing Opportunities For Public Art

Action AC-2.1.A: Public Art Master Plan

OP, CAH

Long-Term

Action AC-2.1.B: Small Parks for Public Art Assessment

DPR, OP, NPC, NCPC, CAH, OCTFME

Mid-Term

Action AC-2.1.C: Artwork and Cultural Presentation Space in EventsDC Facilities

Encourage EventsDC to incorporate significant artwork and space for cultural presentation within any new or significantly renovated facility.

Events DC, DMPED

On-going

AC-2.2 Using Art to Express Cultural Heritage

Action AC-2.2.A: Explore a Festival Streets Program

AC-3.1 Housing and the Cultural Workforce

Action AC-3.1.A: Housing Toolkit

OP, DHCD

Short-Term

Action AC-3.1.B: Qualification for Affordable Housing Programs

Conduct an assessment of barriers to affordable housing programs for residents who work in the arts and culture sector who are self-employed or have more than one source of employment.

OP, DHCD

Short-Term

AC-3.2 Cultural Organization Development

Action AC-3.2.A: Directory of District-Based Arts and Cultural Businesses

CAH, OCTFME, and others

Mid-Term

AC-3.3 Promoting Cultural Tourism

Action AC-3.3.A: Marketing Cultural Events

Partner with existing organizations that promote tourism to market cultural events to local, regional, and international audiences.

CAH, OCTFME

On-going

AC-4.1 Public Funding

Action AC-4.1.A: Sustain Grant Funding for Arts and Culture

Continue providing grant funding through CAH and community affairs agencies.

CAH

On-going

Action AC-4.1.B: New Sources of Cultural Funding

DMPED, OP, OCTFME, CAH, DSLBD, DISB

Mid-Term

AC-4.2 Partnerships

Action AC-4.2.A: Innovative Cultural Business Models

Explore how Washington, DC can partner with other cultural funders and stakeholders to advance innovative business models that lower barriers to forming financially sustainable cultural businesses.

DMPED, OCTFME, OP

Short-Term

AC-4.4 Increasing Arts and Cultural Education and Participation

Action AC-4.4.A: Partnerships for Advancement in Arts and Culture Education

CAH, DME, DCPS, and others

On-going

Action AC-4.4.B: Increase Youth Exposure to Arts and Culture

Explore opportunities to increase youth exposure to arts and culture through programming and events in public facilities, such as libraries and recreation centers.

DME, CAH, DCPL, DPR, DCPS, and others

Short-Term

Capitol Hill Area Element

CH-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action CH-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

SHPO, DMPED, DSLBD

Short-Term

Action CH-1.1B: 15th Street SE Rezoning

Rezone the 15th Street SE commercial district for residential uses, consistent with the corridor’s designation on the Comprehensive Plan.

Mid-Term

Action CH-1.1.C: Transportation Studies

DDOT

Ongoing

Action CH-1.1.D: H Street Streetcar

DDOT

Ongoing

CH-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action CH-1.2.A: Historic Surveys

SHPO

Ongoing

Action CH-1.2.B: Capitol Hill Design Guidelines

Develop graphic design guidelines for the Capitol Hill Historic District, illustrating appropriate architectural design features for new construction, renovation, and alterations.

SHPO

Short-Term

Action CH-1.2.C: RFK Stadium Area

DMPED, DDOT, OP, DPR, DOEE, Events DC

Long-Term

CH-2.1 H Street/Benning Road

Action CH-2.1.A: H Street Strategic Development Plan

Implement the recommendations of the 2003 H Street Strategic Development Plan

DMPED, OP, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CH-2.1.B: Business Assistance

H Street Main Street, DSLBD

On-Going

CH-2.2: Pennsylvania Avenue SE Corridor

Action CH-2.2.A: Streetscape Improvements

Implement plans to beautify Pennsylvania Avenue, including landscaping, street furniture and street lighting improvements, maintenance of the esplanade and small parks along the avenue, pedestrian improvements, and traffic management measures. These improvements should reinforce the avenue’s symbolic importance and should complement the efforts that have already been made to improve the streetscape in the 600 block and near Eastern Market.

NPS, DDOT, SHPO

Mid-Term

Action CH-2.2.B: Eastern Market Plaza

Prepare and implement a pedestrian-focused urban design and multimodal transit improvement plan for the Eastern Market Metro station entrance, making it a more attractive town squareand improving the plaza’s ability to function as a major transfer point including, if appropriate relocating bus stops to ensure safety and accessibility.

DDOT, OP,

Long-Term

Action CH-2.2. C: Potomac Gardens

DCHA, DMPED, OP

Long-Term

CH-2.3 U.S. Capitol Perimeter

Action CH-2.3.A: Streetscape and Signage Improvements

Implement streetscape and signage improvements that more clearly define the boundary of the U.S. Capitol Grounds and distinguish it from adjacent residential and commercial areas.

DDOT, Architect of the Capitol

Ongoing

CH-2.4 Reservation 13/RFK Stadium (Hill East Waterfront)

Action CH-2.4.A: Hill East/Reservation 13 Master Plan

DMPED, OP, DDOT

Long-Term

Action CH-2.4.B: RFK Stadium Planning

EventsDC, DMPED, OP

On-Going

CH-2.5 Southeast Boulevard

Action CH-2.5.A: Southeast Freeway Alternatives

DDOT, DOEE

Mid-Term

Action CH 2.5.B Additional Land Use Planning for Southeast Boulevard

OP, DDOT

Mid-Term

Central Washington Area Element

CW-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action CW-1.1.A: Land Use and Transportation Planning for Central Washington

OP, DDOT, NCPC, DMPED, DBID, DOES

Ongoing

Action CW-1.1.B: Central Washington Urban Design Planning

Ongoing

Action CW-1.1.C: Focused Planning and Implementation for Catalytic Sites

OP, DDOT, DMPED, NCPC

Ongoing

Action CW-1.1.D: Public Space Regulations

Simplify public space regulations for downtown to avoid duplicative or incompatible standards and overly complex permitting requirements.

OP, OZ, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action CW-1.1.E: Residential Development Incentives

Continue developing financial and non-financial incentives for the conversion of lower-performing retail/office buildings into new housing or mixed-use development throughout Central Washington.

OP, OZ, DMPED

Short-Term

Action CW-1.1.F: Reduce Downtown Congestion Through the Implementation of moveDC.

DDOT

Ongoing

CW-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action CW-1.2.A: Business and Community Improvement Districts

Support the activities of the BIDs and CIDs within Central Washington. Encourage partnerships between these entities and District government to achieve local job training, job placement, and business assistance goals.

DMPED, OP, DOES, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action CW-1.2.B: Central Washington Open Spaces and Arts and Culture Planning

Work with NCPC and NPS in the planning and programming of Central Washington’s major arts and cultural, and open spaces. In addition, work with the federal government to develop unique management policies and procedures for the smaller (non-National Mall) Central Washington federal parks.

OP, DPR, NCPC, NPS

Mid-Term

Action CW-1.2.C: Identification and Designation of Historic Properties

SHPO

Long-Term

CW-2.1 Metro Center/Retail Core

Action CW-2.1.A: Redevelopment of FBI Headquarters Site

Any future redevelopment of Squares 378 and 379 on Pennsylvania Avenue NW, where the FBI’s headquarters at the J. Edgar Hoover Building is currently situated, will be subject to the Final Square Guidelines adopted unanimously by NCPC in 2017.

NCPC, OP, DMPED

Long-Term

Action CW 2.1.B: Update the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation Plan

Work with federal and local partners to update the 1974 PADC Plan to further strengthen physical and programmatic connections across Penn Quarter, downtown, and the National Mall.

NCPC, NPS, CFA, OP, SHPO

Mid-Term

Action CW-2.1.C: Retail Revitalization Programs

Continue to use retail revitalization programs—such as tax increment financing, grants and loans for façade improvements, and small business development loans— to boost downtown retail development. Periodically assess whether programs are achieving desired outcomes.

DMPED

Mid-Term

CW-2.2 Gallery Place/Penn Quarter

Action CW-2.2.A: Gallery Place/Penn Quarter Streetscape Improvements

DDOT, OP

Ongoing

CW-2.3 Chinatown

Action CW-2.3.A: Chinatown Design Review

OP, MOAPIA

Ongoing

Action CW-2.3.B: Chinatown Park at 5th Street and Massachusetts Avenue NW

OP, DPR, MOAPIA, NPS

Mid-Term

CW-2.4 Mount Vernon District

Action CW-2.4.A: Parking Management Program

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action CW-2.4.B: Create an Iconic Neighborhood Park for Mount Vernon Triangle

DPR, DMPED, OP, NPS

Mid-Term

CW-2.5 Downtown East/Judiciary Square

Action CW-2.5.A: Link and Expand a Network of Neighborhood Parks and Gathering Spaces

Identify space for new public parks or other gathering spaces, and renovate existing open spaces to form a broader network of small parks across Downtown East and the surrounding neighborhoods. The parks network should provide a variety of open space amenities that are equitably dispersed so that no one park is required to serve the needs of all user groups in the area. A wide range of open space features, programming, and landscapes should activate currently underused spaces; maximize comfort with shade and seating; encourage site features that accommodate social interactions, gathering, and lingering; provide choices for active and passive recreation and play for all ages; and maximize the use of durable and easily maintainable materials and plantings.

OP, DPR, NPS

Mid-Term

CW-2.6 Golden Triangle/K Street NW

Action CW-2.6.A: K Street Transitway

Implement the K Street Transitway Project, including exclusive transit lanes from 12th Street NW to 21st Street NW.

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action CW-2.6.B: Strategic Park Investments

DPR, NCPC, NPS, DMPED

Mid-Term

CW-2.7 L’Enfant Plaza/Near Southwest/Maryland Avenue SW 1617

Action CW-2.7.A: Design Planning for Near Southwest

Work collaboratively with NCPC to support the transformation of this area into a mixed-use, livable new community through rezoning and design guidelines. Support new high-density mixed-use development, highly sustainable infrastructure, use of small energy production plants to produce energy needs for local buildings, and other best management practices found in the SW Ecodistrict Plan.

NCPC, OP, SHPO, CFA

Mid-Term

Action CW-2.7.B: Residential Uses in Near Southwest

OP, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action CW-2.7.C: Activating L’Enfant Plaza

In the future, as new development comes in and old buildings are renovated, work with federal partners and private developers to create buildings that contribute to street activation and vibrancy. Refrain from supporting new underground attractions and food courts, and instead, encourage new developments to create retail and restaurant space on the street level. Retrofit streets with new landscapes, attractive lighting, public art, temporary activations ,and cultural programming. Key to creating more vibrancy will be the extent to which local stakeholders will be able to improve connectivity to and from new and old attractions and neighborhoods around L’Enfant Plaza, including the planned renovation of the South Mall campus, the Wharf, and the Southwest Waterfront neighborhood, which is also experiencing significant growth and redevelopment.

NCPC, NPS, OP, OZ

Short-Term

Action CW-2.8.A: Implement the NoMa Vision Plan

OP, DDOT

Ongoing

Action CW-2.8.B: Northwest One New Community

Redevelop Northwest One as a mixed-income community, including new market rate and affordable housing, a new school and recreation center, a library and health clinic, and neighborhood-serving retail space. Redevelopment of Northwest One should:

Restore the District street grid through Sursum Corda;

Emphasize K Street NW as a main street that connects the area to NoMa and the Mount Vernon District;

Maximize private sector participation;

Include one-for-one replacement of affordable units;

Provide family-sized housing, including for multigeneration families;

Build affordable units first to minimize displacement and maximize the return of residents to their community; and

Include tenants’ rights of return and comprehensive relocation plans for tenants prior to the redevelopment.

DMPED, OP

Short-Term

Action CW-2.8.C: Mid-City East Small Area Plan

Implement recommendations detailed in the MidCity East Small Area Plan as it relates to neighborhoods in the Central Washington Area Element.

OP, DMPED, DDOT

Short-Term

Action CW-2.8.D: Union Station Expansion Project and Rail Yard Air Rights Development

DDOT, OP

Ongoing

Action CW-2.8.E: Public Participation in Union Station Air Rights Development

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Far Northeast and Southeast Area Element

FNS-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action FNS-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

DCOZ, DCOP

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.1.B: Restart the Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Program

Revive the Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Program or a similar effort once operated by the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization (MHCDO) to expand into additional neighborhood commercial areas such as such as East Capitol Street NE/SE and Benning Road NE/SE in Far Northeast and Southeast. Community-based organizations that could lead this effort include the Ward 7 Business Partnership, the Washington Area Community Investment Fund, or the MHCDO.

DMPED, DSLBD

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.1.C: Joint Planning Agreement with Prince George’s County

Develop a joint planning agreement with MNCPPC/Prince George’s County to coordinate the mutual review of projects and area plans on both sides of the District/Maryland line.

DMPED, DSLBD

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.1.D: Kenilworth Avenue Transportation Study

Implement the recommendations of the Kenilworth Avenue transportation study to better manage truck traffic and to separate local traffic from through traffic on neighborhood streets.

DDOT

Short-Term

Action FNS-1.1.E: Parkside Livability Study

DDOT

Short-Term

FNS-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action FNS-1.2.A: Historic Resource Recognition

DCSHPO

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.2.B: Clean Up the Anacostia River Toxic Sediments

DOEE, NPS

Long-Term

Action FNS-1.2.C: Marvin Gaye Park

DPR, NPS

Ongoing

Action FNS-1.2.D: Fort Dupont Park Improvements

NPS, DPR

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.2.E: Anacostia Park and Fort Circle Parks

NPS

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.2.F: John Philip Sousa Bridge

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action FNS-1.2.G: Connect to the Anacostia River

OP, DPR, DOEE

Long-Term

FNS-2.1 Minnesota/Benning Business District

Action FNS-2.1.A: Financial Assistance for Small Businesses

Target the Senator Square and East River Park Shopping centers for District financial assistance, grants, and loans for façade improvements and small business development.

OP, DMPED, DSLBD

Short-Term

FNS-2.2 Deanwood

Action FNS-2.2.A: Division and Nannie Helen Burroughs Commercial Development

Explore the option of acquiring underused land for commercial development at the intersection of Division and Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenues NE.

DMPED, DCOP

Long-Term

Action FNS-2.2.C: Minnesota Avenue Extension

Extend Minnesota Avenue from Sheriff Road to Meade Street NE to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to the Deanwood Metro station and surrounding public space.

DDOT

Mid-Term

FNS-2.3 Capitol View/Capitol Gateway Estates/Northeast Boundary

Action FNS-2.3.A: Land Acquisition at 61st and Dix Streets NE

DMPED

Ongoing

Action FNS-2.3.B: Lincoln Heights New Community

Continue to pursue redevelopment of Lincoln Heights as a new community, replacing the existing affordable housing development with new mixed-income housing, including an equivalent number of affordable units and additional market rate units.

DMPED, DCHA, DHCD

Ongoing

Action FNS-2.3.C: Neighborhood-Serving Retail

DSLBD, DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

FNS-2.4 Benning Road Metro Station Area

Action FNS-2.4.A: Benning Road Reconstruction and Streetcar Extension

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action FNS-2.4.B: Supportive Studies Along the Benning Road Corridor

Prepare appropriate planning and development studies to build upon and update the 2008 Small Area Plan for the Benning Road corridor to support enhanced physical connections and improved economic and community development conditions at the Minnesota and Benning Road Metro stations and sites proposed for more intense mixed-use development along Benning Road, including Fletcher Johnson. Conduct a community-based planning study for the redevelopment of Fletcher Johnson, that reinforces existing planning efforts by the Fletcher Johnson Task Force.

OP, DMPED, WMATA

Short-Term

FNS-2.5 Marshall Heights/Benning Ridge

Action FNS-2.5.A: Eastgate Gardens

Develop Eastgate Gardens as a mixed-income community containing housing for older adults, affordable housing, homeownershipopportunities, and a community arts center. As population increases here and elsewhere in Marshall Heights, pursue the refurbishing of shopping areas along Benning Road to better serve the surrounding community. The revitalization of neighborhood-serving retail and shopping districts along the Benning Road corridor should be encouraged.

DCHA, DHCD, DMPED

Ongoing

FNS-2.6 Pennsylvania Avenue Southeast Corridor

Action FNS-2.6.A: Pennsylvania Avenue SE Transportation Study

DDOT

Ongoing

Action FNS-2.6.B: Great Street Improvements

DDOT

Ongoing

Action FNS-2.6.C: Directing Growth

DMPED, DDOT, SHPO

Long-Term

Action FNS-2.6.D: Physical Improvements

DDOT, DSLBD

Ongoing

FNS.2.7 Skyland

Action FNS-2.7.A: Skyland Redevelopment

DMPED

Ongoing

Action FNS-2.7.B: Skyland Small Business Assistance

Continue to work with the District Department for Local and Small Business Development (DSLBD) to assist small business and private enterprise in the Skyland area.

DSLBD

Short-Term

Action FNS-2.7.C: Fort Baker Drive Buffering

Work with property owners to develop and maintain a suitable visual, sound, and security buffer between Skyland Shopping Center and the adjacent residential areas along Fort Baker Drive.

DMPED, DDOT

Short-Term

FNS-2.8 Kenilworth-Parkside

Action FNS-2.8.A: Buffer the Interface Between the I-295 Freeway

DDOT

Long-Term

Action FNS-2.8.B: Improve Vehicular, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Access to the Kenilworth-Parkside Area

DDOT

Long-Term

Action FNS-2.8.C: Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan

DCOP

Short-Term

Action FNS-2.8.D: Kenilworth Parkside Small Area Plan

DCOP

Mid-Term

Far Southeast and Southwest Area Element

FSS-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action FSS-R.1.1.A: Resilient Public Facilities

DGS, DOEE, DPR

Long-Term

Action FSS-1.1.B: Sustainable Congress Heights (EcoDistricts)

DOEE, OP

Mid-Term

Action FSS-1.1.C: Pilot Displacement-Free Strategies

Explore and develop pilot strategies to protect against displacement in a Ward 8 area facing the threat of resident and local business displacement from rapid economic development. Strategies could include an expanded version (to a greater number of low-income residents) of the senior citizen real property tax deferral program, and the deployment of organizers to ensure that tenant associations are formed and to build capacity of existing tenant associations so that they are aware of their rights under District law. Strategies should address low-income homeowners and renters of private, public and subsidized housing. Use the results of the pilot to identify District-wide applications.

DHCD, DMPED, OP

Short-Term

FSS-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action: FSS-1.2.A: Far Southeast/Southwest Climate Resilience

Develop actionable strategies and projects that decrease the vulnerability of community members, housing and community facilities, and local businesses and community-serving institutions from both current flooding risks and future risks due to climate change.

DOEE, OP

Mid-Term

Action FSS-1.2B: Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant

Work with DC Water to reduce foul odors at the Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant. Land uses on DC Village and elsewhere in the vicinity of the plant should be regulated in a way that limits the exposure of future residents to odors and other hazards associated with the plant.

DC Water, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action FSS-1.2.C: Shepherd Parkway

Coordinate with local and federal partners to enrich existing park conditions, improve the health of the park system, and address safety and maintenance concerns.

OP, DPR, DOEE, NPS

Mid-Term

Action FSS-1.2.D: Parks and Recreation

Coordinate with Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) to improve community park and recreation facilities.

OP, DPR

Mid-Term

Action FSS-1.2.E: Fort Circle Parks

Improve the Civil War Defenses of Washington, also known as the Fort Circle Parks, within Far Southeast/Southwest, including upgrades to the Fort Circle Trail and additional recreational facilities and amenities at Fort Stanton Park.

DPR, NPS

Mid-Term

FSS-2.2 St. Elizabeths Campus

Action FSS-2.2.A: St. Elizabeths West Campus

Work collaboratively with the federal government on the reuse of the West Campus. Priority should be given to preserve historic resources including not only the buildings but also the historic open spaces and massing of buildings on the site. To the greatest extent feasible, redevelopment of the West Campus should create new publicly accessible open space and be coordinated with redevelopment of the East Campus. Integrate DHS consolidation into the surrounding community to the greatest extent possible.

OP, DMPED

Completed

Action FSS-2.2.B: Leveraging Neighborhood Economic Development

DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

FSS-2.3 Barry Farm, Hillsdale, and Fort Stanton

Action FSS-2.3.A: Connections to Adjacent Areas

DDOT

Mid-Term

Action FSS-2.3.B: Barry Farm Historic Landmark

OP, DCSHPO, DMPED

Mid-Term

FSS-2.4 Congress Heights Metro Station

Action FSS-2.4.A: Congress Heights Gateway

OP, DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

FSS-2.5 Congress Heights Commercial District

Action FSS-2.5.A: Congress Heights Small Area Plan

Ongoing

Action: FSS-2.5.B: Pedestrian Safety and Vision Zero

Coordinate with the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) on pedestrian safety enhancements and work to address Vision Zero concerns.

OP, DDOT

Ongoing

Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area Element

AW-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action AW-1.1.A: Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan

DMPED, OP, DOEE, NPS, NCPC

Ongoing

Action AW-1.1.B: River Crossing Improvements

Implement the recommendations of the Middle Anacostia River Transportation Crossings Study that seek to improve local and regional traffic mobility.

DDOT

Ongoing

AW-2.1 Southwest Waterfront

Action AW-2.1.A: Southwest Waterfront Development Plan

Implement the 2003 Southwest Waterfront Development Plan.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action AW-2.1.B: Long-Term Improvements

DDOT, DMPED, WMATA, OP, NPS

Long-Term

AW-2.2 South Capitol Street

Action AW-2.2.A: Coordination with Federal Agencies

Continue to coordinate with the NCPC, the NPS, and other federal agencies on implementing the South Capitol Street Corridor Project.

NCPC, DDOT

Ongoing

Action AW-2.2.B: South Capitol Gateway

Create a civic or commemorative feature of national significance at the north end of the Frederick Douglass Bridge to celebrate this location as a riverfront and District gateway.

NCPC, DDOT

Ongoing

Action AW-2.2.C: South Capitol Transportation Improvements

DDOT

Ongoing

AW-2.3 Near Southeast/Capitol Riverfront

Action AW-2.3.A: Zoning Incentives

Ongoing

Action AW-2.3.B: Boathouse Row Recreational Uses

Long-Term

AW-2.4 Poplar Point

Action AW-2.4.A: Poplar Point Planning

DMPED, OP, DPR

Mid-Term

AW-2.5 Southwest Neighborhood

Action AW-2.5.A: Greenleaf PUD

Support the redevelopment of DCHA-controlled Greenleaf affordable housing parcels consistent with the increased density of Future Land Use Map designations as outlined in the Southwest Neighborhood Plan if development is achieved through a PUD that meets the following criteria:

Conforms to the design guidelines for each parcel as outlined in the Small Area Plan;

Provides replacement housing for all the existing affordable units within the development or the immediate Southwest neighborhood;

Encourages a mixed-income community through the inclusion of market rate units and, to the extent practicable, moderate-income housing; and

Achieves a significant level of green design in terms of both site and building design to contribute to healthy living and improved environmental performance.

DCHA, DMPED, OP

Long-Term

Action AW- 2.5.B: Lansburgh Park

DPR, OP, DOESS

Long-Term

Action AW-2.5.C: Storage Facility at Jefferson Middle School Academy

DGS

Short-Term

AW-2.6 Buzzard Point

Action AW-2.6.A: Buzzard Point Transportation/Riverwalk Connections

DDOT, DOEE

Long-Term

Mid-City Area Element

MC-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action MC-1.1.A: Multimodal Improvements

Support the development of a fully integrated transit, bicycle, and pedestrian system within the Planning Area by moving forward with plans for expanded service on the Metrorail Green Line, extension of the Metrorail Yellow Line, high-capacity transit on Georgia Avenue NW, and dedicated rush hour bus lanes along 16th Street NW.

DDOT, WMATA

Mid-Term

Action MC-1.1.B: Off-Street Parking

DDOT

Mid-Term

MC-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources 2009

Action MC-1.2.A: Tailored Design Guidelines

OZ, OP

Mid-Term

Action MC-1.2.B: Library Expansion

As funding allows, consider development of a new library in the eastern portion of Columbia Heights.

DCPL

Long-Term

Action MC-1.2.C: Recreation Center

OP, DPR

Long-Term

MC-2.1 Georgia Avenue NW Corridor 2011

Action MC-2.1.A: Corridor Identity

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.1.B: Georgia Avenue NW Revitalization Strategy

Implement the recommendations of the 2004 Revitalization Strategy for the Georgia Avenue and Petworth Metro station area and corridor.

OP, DMPED

Ongoing

Action MC-2.1.C: Howard Town Center

OP, DMPED

Long-Term

Action MC-2.1.D: Great Streets Improvements

OP, DSLBD

Long-Term

Action MC-2.1.E: Park Morton New Community

Continue redevelopment of Park Morton as a new community, replacing the existing affordable housing development with an equivalent number of new affordable housing units, plus new market-rate and moderate-income housing units, to create a new mixed-income community. Consider implementing this recommendation in tandem with plans for the reuse of public land on Spring Road NW. Ensure that every effort possible is made to avoid permanent displacement of residents .

DMPED, DHCD

Short-Term

Action MC-2.1.F: Preserving Historic Character

Consider design guidelines specific to Park View and Pleasant Plains, tailored to specific neighborhood concerns about compatible alterations and infill development. Consider potential historic designations in the context of these guidelines.

OP, HPO

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.1.G Open Streets

Ongoing

MC-2.2 14th Street NW Corridor/Columbia Heights

Action MC-2.2.A: Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study

Implement DDOT’s Cross-Town Multimodal Transportation Study recommendations.

DDOT

Mid-Term

MC-2.4 Adams Morgan

Action MC-2.4.A: AMVF

Implement the recommendations in AMVF.

OP, DDOT, DPR, DOEE, DSLBD

Ongoing

Action MC-2.4.B Lanier Heights and Reed-Cooke

Consider design guidelines specific to Lanier Heights and Reed-Cooke. Consider historic designation of Walter Pierce Community Park.

OP, HPO, DGS

Completed

Action MC-2.4.C: Local Business Assistance

Explore the feasibility of amending tax laws or developing tax abatement and credit programs to retain neighborhood services and encourage small local-serving businesses space along 18th Street NW and Columbia Road NW. Identify technical assistance needs and priorities of Hispanic/Latino-, Asian-, and Black-owned/operated businesses in the neighborhood, and recognize the benefits that naturally arise from cultural variety among tenants.

OCFO, CC, OCA, DSLBD, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.4.E: Design Guidelines

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.4.F: Commercial District Management

DSLBD

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.4.G: Enhance the Neighborhood Retail Experience

OP, DSLBD

Mid-Term

MC-2.5 Mount Pleasant Street NW

Action MC-2.5.A: Incentives for Mixed-Use Development and Affordable Housing

OP, OZ

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.5.B: Expanding Mount Pleasant Open Space

DPR, OP, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.5.C: Mount Pleasant Street Façade Improvements

Encourage urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial district along Mount Pleasant Street NW.

Long-Term

Action MC-2.5.D: Mount Pleasant Street NW Commercial Revitalization Strategy

Implement Mount Pleasant Street Small Area Plan recommendations.

OP, DSLBD, DDOT

Long-Term

Action MC-2.5.E: Market the Unique Character of Mount Pleasant Street NW

Led by the Mount Pleasant Main Street, coordinate a marketing campaign to promote Mount Pleasant businesses to District residents outside the neighborhood.

OP, DSLBD

Short-Term

MC-2.6 McMillan Sand Filtration

Action MC-2.6.A: McMillan Reservoir Development

Continue working with adjacent communities in the development and implementation of reuse plans for the McMillan Reservoir site.

Mid-Term

MC-2.7 Mid-City East’s Major Corridors (North Capitol Street/Florida Avenue/New York Avenue

Action MC-2.7.A:Mid-City East Small Area Plan

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Small Area Plan.

OP, DPR, DDOT, DSLBD

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.7.B: Make/Live Workspace

Explore make/live workspace as a buffer between industrial land and residential land as identified in the Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study.

OP, DHCD

Mid-Term

Action MC-2.7.C: Mid-City East Livability Study

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Livability Study.

Mid-Term

Near Northwest Area Element

NNW-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action NNW-1.1.A: Managing and Balancing Entertainment Districts

ABRA, DCRA

Mid-Term

Action NNW-1.1.B: Expanding Mass Transit

WMATA, DDOT

Mid-term

NNW-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources 2109

Action NNW-1.2.A: Add New Capacity to Recreational Infrastructure in Near Northwest

DPR, DCPL, DGS

Long-term

Action NNW-1.2.B: Historic Resource Recognition

Document places of potential historic significance within the Near Northwest.

SHPO

Short-term

NNW-2.1 Shaw/Convention Center Area 2111

Action NNW-2.1.A: New and Affordable Housing

DMPED, OP

Short-term

Action NNW-2.1.B: Redevelopment of Parcel 42

ZC, OZ, DMPED, OP

Short-term

Action NNW-2.1.C: Street Hierarchy and Public Realm

Undertake the following actions to improve the public realm in the Shaw/Convention Center area:

Develop, maintain, and enforce standards for residential and commercial streets that address sidewalks, tree boxes, and public rights-of-way;

Improve the appearance of gateway intersections at New Jersey and Rhode Island Avenues NW, New Jersey and New York Avenues NW, Mount Vernon Square, 11th Street, and Massachusetts Avenue NW; and

Explore the designation of P Street NW as a greenwayand identify opportunities for connecting open spaces along the street.

OP, DDOT

Mid-term

Action NNW-2.1.D: Expiring Public Housing Contracts

DMPED, HFA, DCH

Ongoing

Action NNW-2.1.E: Former Shaw High School Site

DMPED, OP, DCPS, DPR

Mid-Term

Action NNW-2.1.F: Mid-City East SAP

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East SAP.

Long-term

Action NNW-2.1.G: Mid-City East Livability Study

Implement recommendations provided in the Mid-City East Livability Study.

DDOT

Long-term

NNW-2.2 Dupont Circle

Action NNW-2.2.A: Dupont Circle Zoning Expansion

Consider expansion of Dupont Circle zoning to include the east side of the 18th Street commercial area (between S and U Streets) and the south side of U Street between 15th and h 18th Streets NW.

OP, ZC, OZ

Mid-term

Action NNW-2.2.B: Connecticut Avenue Streetscape and Deck-Over Project

DDOT

Mid-term

Action NNW-2.2.C: Dupont Underground

DMPED, DCCAH, OP

Ongoing

Action NNW-2.2.D: Streetscape Improvements Along Connecticut and Massachusetts Avenues NW

Create new streetscapes along Connecticut and Massachusetts Avenues NW that maximize green space and outdoor seating where possible.

DDOT

Short-Term

Action NNW-2.2.E: Expanded Recreation Center at Stead Park

DCPL

Short-Term

Action NNW-2.2.F: Improve Neighborhood Bike Lane Infrastructure

Study the possibility of creating additional protected bike lanes in Dupont Circle, including on 17th and 18th Streets NW and Massachusetts Avenue NW.

DDOT

Short-Term

NNW-2.4 Lower Georgetown

Action NNW-2.4.A: West Heating Plant

ZC, OZ, OP

Short-Term

NNW-2.5 Foggy Bottom/West End

Action NNW-2.5.A: Foggy Bottom/West End Transportation Improvements

Conduct studies and implement appropriate changes to improve access and circulation between, through, and around the Foggy Bottom and West End neighborhoods, respecting the L’Enfant Plan street grid, conserving Juarez Circle and other parklands as open space, and better incorporating the transportation needs of various institutions and uses into the fabric of surrounding neighborhoods.

DDOT, OP, DMPED

Ongoing

Action NNW-2.5.B: Washington Circle

Design and implement pedestrian access improvements to Washington Circle’s open space, such as removing fences and architectural barriers to the lawns.

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action NNW-2.5.C: Foggy Bottom River, Park, and Cultural Access Study

Study the feasibility of reconfiguring existing highway infrastructure in Foggy Bottom so as to maximize the benefits and accessibility of the open space and parkland, reconnect the gaps in the street grid and urban fabric, create opportunities for affordable housing production, improve pedestrian and bike connections to and from Georgetown, the Kennedy Center, President’s Park, National Mall, national parkland, and other attractions, and create new memorials, linear parks, and civic spaces.

OP, DMPED, DDOT

Long-Term

Rock Creek East Area Element

RCE-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action RCE-1.1.A: Façade Improvements

DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

Action RCE-1.1.B: Improving Traffic Flow

DDOT

Ongoing

RCE-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources 2209

Action RCE-1.2-A Rock Creek Park and Fort Circle Parks Coordination

In collaboration with the NPS, explore the feasibility of developing additional community-serving recreational facilities at Rock Creek Park and within the Fort Circle Parks to increase recreational options, public safety, and community stewardship of these assets. All facilities should be compatible with the General Management Plans for these park areas.

DPR, NPS

Mid-Term

Action RCE-1.2.B: Historic Resource Recognition

OP-HPO

Ongoing

Action RCE-1.2.C: Shepherd Park Recreation Center

DPR

Mid-Term

Action RCE-1.2.D: Metropolitan Branch Trail

DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action RCE-1.2.E: Gateway Thoroughfares

OP, DDOT

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.1.A: Traffic Congestion and Parking

OP, WMATA

Mid-Term

Action RCE-2.1.B: Pedestrian Safety and Connections

OP, WMATA

Mid-Term

Action RCE-2.1.C: Takoma Metro Station Redevelopment

OP, DDOT, DCRA, DPW

Immediate

Action RCE-2.1.D: Takoma Central District Village Green

Create a village green as the Central District’s signature open space feature.

DPR, OP, WMATA

Long-Term

RCE-2.2 Georgia Avenue/Petworth Metro Station Area

Action RCE-2.2.A: Site Acquisition

DMPED

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.2.B: Petworth Co-Location Opportunities

DCPL, DCPS

Short-Term

RCE-2.3 Upper Georgia Avenue NW

Action RCE: Retail Strategies for Upper Georgia Avenue NW

OP, DMPED

Ongoing

RCE-2.5 Armed Forces Retirement Home/Washington Hospital Complex 2215

Action RCE-2.5.A: AFRH Master Plan Coordination

OP, NCPC

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.5.B: North Capitol Crossroads Planning

OP, DDOT, OZ, NCPC

Ongoing

RCE-2.6 Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue

Action RCE-2.6.A: Housing Opportunities

Provide housing opportunities in the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue area for a mix of incomes, with an emphasis on older adults and home ownership.

OP, DHCD

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.6.B: Parking Coordination

DDOT, WMATA

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.6.C: First Place NE

Develop First Place NE as a multimodal neighborhood-serving corridor

with safe and accessible bicycle connections.

DDOT

Long-Term

Action RCE-2.6.D: Parks and Open Space

OP, DPR

Ongoing

RCE-2.7 Central 14th Street NW

Action RCE-2.7.A: Land Use Change

OP, ZC

Immediate

Action RCE-2.7.B: Public Realm

OP, DDOT

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.7.C: Bus Transit

Enhance WMATA bus service along 14th Street NW to address customer concerns and efficiency in scheduling, and determine future improvements to transit operations and management as necessary.

WMATA, DDOT

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.7.D: Parking

OP, DDOT

Ongoing

RCE-2.8 Former Walter Reed Army Medical Center Site

Action RCE-2.8.A: Land Use and Zoning

Establish appropriate land uses for the Walter Reed site pursuant to the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations map in the Walter Reed Small Area Plan.

OP, ZC

Immediate

Action RCE-2.8.B: Interim Activation

Implement interim uses to activate the former Walter Reed site in advance of major construction and rehabilitation projects.

DMPED, OP

Ongoing

Action RCE-2.8.C: Aspen Street NW

DDOT

Short-Term

Action RCE-2.8.D: Transportation Demand Management

DDOT

Ongoing

Rock Creek West Area Element

RCW-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action RCW-1.1.A: Commercial Zoning Assessment

OP, OZ

Short-Term

Action RCW-1.1.B: Traffic Flow Improvements

DDOT

Ongoing

RCW-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action RCW-1.2.A: Combined Sewer Separation

Continue efforts to separate storm and sanitary sewers consistent with Consent Decree requirements and continue to rehabilitate sewers within the area’s stream valleys.

DC Water

Ongoing

Action RCW-1.2.B: Palisades Open Space Conservation

DDOT, DPR, OP-HP

Short-Term

Action RCW-1.2.C: Wellness Center Development

DPR, DACL

Long-Term

Action RCW-1.2.D: Façade Improvements

Encourage urban design and façade improvements in the established commercial districts along Wisconsin Avenue and Connecticut Avenue NW.

OP, DMPED

Mid-Term

RCW-2.1 Connecticut Avenue Corridor

Action RCW-2.1.A: Large Hotel Sites

Future development and operational proposals for the Omni-Shoreham hotel should include analyses of impacts on adjacent residential and commercial areas and appropriate mitigating measures, prepared by property owners. Proactively address ongoing issues at the hotel, such as motor coach and visitor parking. The redevelopment of the Wardman Park hotel site should be studied and included in neighborhood planning efforts.

OP, OZ, ZC, DDOT

Ongoing

RCW-2.2 Wisconsin Avenue Corridor

Action RCW-2.2.A: Zoning and Design Measures

OP, DMPED, DDOT

Ongoing

Action RCW-2.2.B: Livability

Implement the recommendations in the Rock Creek West II Livability Study completed in 2011 and subsequent completed livability studies.

DDOT

Ongoing

Action RCW-2.2.C: Wisconsin Avenue NW Planning

OP, DDOT

Short-Term

RCW-2.3 Van Ness Commercial District

Action RCW-2.3.A: Van Ness Streetscape Improvements

DDOT, DSLBD, OP

Short-Term

Upper Northeast Area Element

UNE-1.1 Guiding Growth and Neighborhood Conservation

Action UNE-1.1.A: Industrial/Residential Buffers

OP, OZ

Short-Term

Action UNE-1.1.B: Industrial Land Transformation Study

Implement the recommendations of the 2014 Ward 5 Works Industrial Land Transformation Study.

OP, OZ, DMPED, OPM

Short-Term

Action UNE-1.1.C: Traffic Safety Improvements

DDOT

Mid-Term

UNE-1.2 Conserving and Enhancing Community Resources

Action UNE-1.2.A: Parkland Acquisition

DPR, OP

Ongoing

Action UNE-1.2.B: Hazardous Materials Transport

EOM, CC, DOH, DOEE, USDOT

Ongoing

Action UNE-1.2.C: Main Streets/Great Streets

Consider the designation of additional commercial areas as DC Main Streets, including portions of Bladensburg Road.

DMPED, DDOT, OP

Mid-Term

Action UNE-1.2.D: Arboretum Bridge

DDOT, NCPC, OP

Short-Term

UNE-2.1 Northeast Gateway

Action UNE-2.1.A: Florida Avenue Market

OP, OZ, DMPED

Short-Term

Action UNE-2.1.B: Northeast Gateway Open Space

DPR, OP

Mid-Term

Action UNE-2.1.C: Crummell School Reuse

OPM, DMPED

Mid-Term

Action UNE-2.1.D: Transformation of West Virginia Avenue Public Works Campus

DPW, DGS, OP, DMPED, DPR

Short-Term

UNE-2.2 Lower Bladensburg Road/Hechinger Mall

Action UNE-2.2.A: Crime Prevention

Implement the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) plans outlined in the Benning Road Corridor Redevelopment Framework.

MPD, DCRA

Short-Term

Action UNE-2.2.B: Bladensburg Road Corridor

Explore a tailored planning effort for the Bladensburg Road corridor that provides analysis and guidance for land use and urban design.

OP, DDOT

Short-Term

Action UNE-2.2.C: Langston Golf Course

Continue to work with the federal government to transform the Langston Golf Course into an appealing amenity for the surrounding neighborhoods.

HPO, DPR, NCPC

Mid-Term

Action UNE-2.2.D: Connectivity

Leverage the existing streetcar and continue to explore transit options to improve connectivity to RFK Stadium to the south and the Anacostia River to the east.

DDOT, WMATA

Mid-Term

UNE-2.3 New York Avenue Corridor and Brentwood

Action UNE-2.3.A: Business Improvement District

Consider the creation of a Business Improvement District (BID) serving the New York Avenue corridor.

DMPED, OP

Mid-Term

UNE-2.4 Upper Bladensburg Road/Fort Lincoln

Action UNE-2.4.A: Streetscape and Façade Improvements

Develop programs to improve the streetscape and commercial facades along Bladensburg Road from Eastern Avenue to South Dakota Avenue.

DMPED

Mid-Term

UNE-2.5 Rhode Island Avenue Metro Station

Action UNE-2.5.A: Rhode Island Avenue Station Area Planning

OP, WMATA, DDOT

Mid-Term

Action UNE-2.5.B: Further Density Requests at Brookland Manor

OP, OZ

Short-Term

UNE-2.6 Brookland Metro Station Area

Action UNE-2.6.A: Brookland-CUA Metro Small Area Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Brookland/CUA Metro Small Area Plan.

OP, WMATA, DDOT, DPR, OZ

Ongoing

Action UNE-2.6.B: Parking Strategy

DDOT

Mid-Term

UNE 2.7 Fort Totten Metro Station Area

Action UNE-2.7.A: Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area Final Development Plan

Implement the recommendations of the Riggs Road and South Dakota Avenue Area Final Development Plan.

OP, OZ, DDOT, DPR, DMPED, WMATA

Ongoing

Implementation Element

IM-1 Administration of the Planning Process

Action IM-1.A: Equity Crosswalk

Immediate

Action: IM-1.B Equity Tools for District Agencies, including the Zoning Commission

Prepare and implement tools, including training, to assist District agencies in evaluating and implementing the Comprehensive Plan’s policies and actions through an equity, particularly a racial equity lens. This includes tools to use as part of the development review process, preparation of plans, zoning code updates, and preparation of the capital improvement program, that considers how to apply an equity analysis in these processes, including any information needed. This shall specifically include a process for the Zoning Commission to evaluate all actions through a racial equity lens as part of its Comprehensive Plan consistency analysis.

OP, OZ, Mayor’s Office on Racial Equity

Short Term

Action IM-1.C: Equity and Resilience Training

OP, OZ, Mayor’s Office on Racial Equity,

Ongoing

IM-1.2 Small Area Planning

Action IM-1.2.A: Implementation of Small Area Plans

As needed, amend the Comprehensive Plan to reflect Small Area Plan policies that are inconsistent with or not appropriately specified in the Comprehensive Plan.

Mid-Term

Action IM-1.2.B: Small Area Plan Activities

Provide a list of completed, in-progress, and proposed Small Area Plans and other planning studies through the Comprehensive Plan Progress Reports, as discussed in Action IM-3.1.A.

Ongoing

IM-1.3 Zoning Regulations and Consistency

Action IM-1.3.A: Monitor and Review New Zoning Regulations

Regularly monitor and review the zoning regulations to verify that they are working to achieve their purpose and submit corrections, changes, and amendments as necessary.

Short-Term

Action IM-1.3.B: Adoption of Future Land Use Map and Policy Map

Adopt the Future Land Use Map and Policy Map by Act. Any inconsistencies in land use map designations between the illustration on the map and the textual description of the map designation that is contained in the adopted Comprehensive Plan legislation shall be resolved in favor of the text.

OP, OAG, EOM

Short-Term

IM-1.4 Long-Range Planning

Action IM-1.4.A: Policy Development

Use data collection and progress monitoring to actively review and formulate new policies that respond to the changes affecting Washington, DC to further the goal of an inclusive District.

Short-Term

IM-1.5 Public Input

Action IM-1.5.A: Planning Publications

OP, OZ, DCRA

Short-Term

IM-2.1 Link to Capital Improvement Planning

Action IM-2.1.B: Enhanced CIP Process

Develop an enhanced CIP process that:

Uses the Comprehensive Plan as the key guide to capital investments;

Encourages use of the same data sources for efficiency and effectiveness across agencies.

Develops criteria for the review of capital projects for inclusion in the CIP that allows for an objective and transparent evaluation process;

Establishes and uses tools that provide an equity and racial equity lens to evaluate projects;

Includes an itemized allocation in the capital budget for implementation priorities that are specifically called for in the Comprehensive Plan;

Clarifies the role of OP in the CIP process;

Is adequately staffed and available to support the CIP process;

Reflects the data and direction of a school Master Facility Plan, as approved by the D.C. Council; and

Develops and maintains a multi-year capital improvements planning process based on the Comprehensive Plan.

OP, OCA, EOM, OAG, DGS

Mid-Term

IM-3.1 Monitoring and Evaluating Comprehensive Plan Implementation

Action IM-3.1.A Progress Reports

Mid-term

##### **10-A DCMR § 2515** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2515 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2515}

##### **10-A DCMR § 2516** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2516 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2516}

##### **10-A DCMR § 2517** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2517 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2517}

##### **10-A DCMR § 2518** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2518 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2518}

##### **10-A DCMR § 2519** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2519 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2519}

##### **10-A DCMR § 2520** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-a2520 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-A2520}

## **10-B** PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

### **10-B20** REDEVELOPMENT LAND AGENCY

##### **10-B DCMR § 2000** ANNUAL MEETING {#sec-10-b2000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2000}

2000.1 The annual meeting of the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Land Agency shall be held on the fifteenth (15th) day of May at 2:00 p.m. at the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors, the office of the Agency.

2000.2 If the annual meeting date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the annual meeting shall be held on the next succeeding business day.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §4(b) of the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1945, 60 Stat. 793 (D.C. Code §5-803(b)); as amended by §201 of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act, 87 Stat. 778; Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1968 (D.C. Code (1973), Title 1 - Administration Appendix at 166); C.O. 68-376 issued May 22, 1968, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1975, 21 DCR 2793, D.C. Code §1-254 (1981).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8622 (April 7, 1978).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2001** REGULAR MEETINGS {#sec-10-b2001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2001}

2001.1 Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held without notice at 10:00 a.m., on the first (1st) and third (3rd) Thursday of each month at the office of the Agency.

2001.2 If the day of a regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, that meeting shall be held on the next succeeding business day.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8622 (April 7, 1978); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 31 DCR 4295 (August 31, 1984).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2002** SPECIAL MEETINGS {#sec-10-b2002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2002}

2002.1 The Chairperson of the Board of Directors may, when deemed expedient, call a special meeting of the Board of Directors for the purpose of transacting any business designated in the meeting notice.

2002.2 Upon the written request of two (2) other directors of the agency, the Chairperson of the Board of Directors shall call a special meeting of the Board of Directors for the purpose of transacting any business designated in the meeting notice.

2002.3 The notice of a special meeting shall be delivered to the business or home address of each director of the agency at least three (3) days prior to the date of the special meeting.

2002.4 At a special meeting no business shall be considered other than the matters designated in the meeting notice; Provided, that if all of the directors of the agency are present at a special meeting any and all business may be transacted at that special meeting.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8622 (April 7, 1978).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2003** QUORUM {#sec-10-b2003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2003}

2003.1 At all meetings of the Board of Directors, one-half (1/2) of the Board members in office shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting business and conducting the affairs of the Agency.

2003.2 A smaller number of directors than is required for a quorum may adjourn from time to time until a quorum is obtained.

2003.3 In case of a serious illness of an incapacitating nature, or absence from the country for a protracted period of time of a member or members, then a quorum shall be one-half (1/2) of the Board members in office, not incapacitated, and in the country at that time.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8622 (April 7, 1978).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2004** CONDUCT OF MEETINGS {#sec-10-b2004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2004}

2004.1 Except as otherwise provided in §2000 through §2005, for purposes of rulings from the chair or other parliamentary decisions, Robert's Rules of Order shall be followed.

2004.2 The Secretary shall prepare the agenda for all meetings, subject to approval of Chairperson.

2004.3 At the regular meetings of the Board of Directors the following shall be the order of business:

(a) Roll call;

(b) Reading and approval of the minutes of the previous meeting;

(d) Reports of committees;

(e) Unfinished business;

(f) New business; and

(g) Adjournment.

2004.4 At any meeting, another order of business may be adopted by resolution of the Board of Directors.

2004.5 All resolutions shall be in writing and shall be copied in a journal of the proceedings of the Board of Directors.

2004.6 The Board of Directors shall keep a written transcript of their proceedings in accordance with §742 of Public Law 93-198, the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act and shall sign the minutes of the meeting at the next meeting of the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8623 (April 7, 1978).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2005** MANNER OF VOTING {#sec-10-b2005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2005}

2005.1 The voting on all questions coming before the Board of Directors shall be by roll call, and the yeas, nays, and abstentions shall be entered in the written transcript of the meeting.

2005.2 A majority vote of the members present and voting shall be required for the approval of any proposed action; Provided, that no motion may be passed with fewer than two (2) affirmative votes unless a majority of the Board not incapacitated and in the country, as provided in §2003.3, is present.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 26 DCR 712 (August 10, 1979) adopting text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 24 DCR 8621, 8623 (April 7, 1978).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2006** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2006}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2007** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2007}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2008** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2008}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2009** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2009 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2009}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2010** LAND DISPOSITION HEARINGS {#sec-10-b2010 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2010}

2010.1 The procedures and definitions contained in. §§2010 through 2027 shall be applicable to the process by which a public hearing is held by the Agency on dispositions of land under D.C. Code §5-806(c) (1981).

2010.2 The Board of Directors may delegate to the Executive Director procedural responsibilities under §§2010 through 2027, including those described in §2012.6 and §2023.

2010.3 The decision as to the method of conducting dispositions of land prior to the issuance of the notice required by §2016.1 shall be made by the Board in its sole discretion.

2010.4 The Board may postpone, terminate, or adjourn any disposition hearing at any time. The Board may reschedule a postponed disposition hearing only after ten (10) days notice, or a shorter period that the Board determines to be reasonable.

2010.5 Board members shall not communicate, directly or indirectly, in connection with any issue of fact, with any person or party, nor, in connection with any issue of law, with any party or his attorney except upon notice and opportunity for all parties to participate.

2010.6 A Board member may communicate with other members of the Board and Agency employees and may have the aid and assistance of the staff of the Agency.

2010.7 The Board reserves the right to waive or modify the procedures set forth in §§2010 through 2027, so long as substantial rights are not impaired by the waiver.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 540, 548, 566, 569 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2011** APPEARANCE AND REPRESENTATION {#sec-10-b2011 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2011}

2011.1 In any disposition hearing the following persons may enter an appearance:

(a) An individual may appear on his or her own behalf, or may appoint an appropriate delegate;

(b) A partner of a partnership may represent the partnership;

(c) An officer of a corporation or association may represent the corporation or association if properly authorized to so do by the articles of incorporation, by-laws, or board of directors of the corporation or association; and

(d) An officer or employee of a public agency or governmental unit or department, may represent that public body.

2011.2 Any person appearing before the Board other than on his or her own behalf may be required by the Board to establish his or her authority to act in that capacity.

2011.3 A person appearing before the Board at a disposition hearing shall have the right to be represented by an attorney admitted to practice before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, or who is admitted to practice before the highest court of any State and not barred from practice in the courts of the District of Columbia.

2011.4 An attorney appearing as counsel for a person shall certify his or her qualifications to appear before the Board. Unless certification of qualifications is made, an attorney shall not be permitted to appear as counsel for another person except with the specific permission of the presiding officer.

2011.5 Each party to a public hearing shall be represented by a person or persons authorized to testify to all relevant aspects of that party's interest in the matter and fully conversant with the particulars of that interest.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 542 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2012** COMPUTATION OF TIME {#sec-10-b2012 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2012}

2012.1 In computing any period of time specified in §§2010 through 2027, calendar days shall be counted.

2012.2 In computing any period of time specified, the day of the act, event, or default after which the designated period of time begins to run shall not be included.

2012.3 The last day of the period computed under this section shall be included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, in which event the period shall run until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday.

2012.4 When the period of time is five (5) days or less, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays shall not be counted.

2012.5 Whenever a person has the right to or is required to take some action within a prescribed period after the service of a notice or other paper upon him or her and the notice or paper is served by mail, two (2) days shall be added to the prescribed period.

2012.6 Except as otherwise provided by law, whenever an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time, the time fixed or the period of time prescribed may for good cause be extended or shortened by the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 544 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2013** SERVICE OF PAPERS {#sec-10-b2013 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2013}

2013.1 Any paper required to be served upon a person shall be served upon him or her or upon the representative designated by him or her or by law to receive service of papers.

2013.2 When a person is represented by an attorney who has entered an appearance for that person, service may be made upon the attorney of record.

2013.3 Service may be made by personal delivery, by mail, by telegraph, or as otherwise authorized by law.

2013.4 Where there are numerous persons entitled to service of papers in regard to a disposition hearing, the Board may make special provisions regarding the service of papers.

2013.5 Service upon a person shall be complete, as follows:

(a) By personal delivery, on handing the paper to the person, or leaving it at his or her office with a clerk or other person in charge or, if there is no one in charge, by leaving it in a conspicuous place in the office, or, if the office is closed or the person to be served has no office, leaving it at his or her usual place of residence with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing there;

(b) By telegraph, when deposited with a telegraph company, properly addressed and with charges prepaid; or

2013.6 Proof of service, stating the name and address of the person on whom served and the manner and date of service, shall be shown for each document filed.

2013.7 Proof of service may be made by any of the following methods:

(a) Written acknowledgment of the persons served or his counsel;

(b) The certificate of counsel if he has made the service; or

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 545 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2014** DOCUMENTS {#sec-10-b2014 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2014}

2014.1 A document shall be considered filed in the office where the filing is required only when that document is received in that office during the office hours when filing is permitted and the document is received by a person authorized to receive it.

2014.2 Each person who files a document in connection with a disposition hearing shall at the time of the initial filing in the matter state his or her address. Thereafter he or she shall promptly inform the office in which the filing was made of any change in address.

2014.3 If a person fails to furnish a record address as required in §2014.2, he or she shall not be entitled to notice in connection with the disposition hearing.

2014.4 All documents to be filed in connection with any disposition hearing shall be addressed or delivered to the Executive Director of the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency at the offices of the Agency or any other place or person that the Board may specify.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 547 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2015** PARTIES {#sec-10-b2015 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2015}

2015.1 The Applicant Redeveloper shall be a party to the related disposition hearing.

2015.2 Any person may petition the Board of Directors to intervene in a disposition hearing and become a party to the hearing if the Board finds that the petitioner may be affected or aggrieved by the subject disposition.

2015.3 The petitioner to intervene shall file the information required by §2015.4 no later than eighteen (18) days prior to the date set for the disposition hearing.

2015.4 A petitioner shall file the following information in accordance with the provisions of §2015.3:

(a) His or her name and address;

(b) Whether he or she will appear as a proponent or opponent of the disposition;

(d) A written statement setting forth the manner in which he or she may be affected or aggrieved by the disposition and the grounds upon which he or she supports or opposes the disposition; and

(e) A list of witnesses who will testify on his or her behalf. This requirement shall not be waived except for good cause shown.

2015.5 The Board may rule on the petition without receiving any testimony or oral argument, and may delegate authority to the Executive Director to make these rulings.

2015.6 Notice of the decision shall be given to the petitioner and all parties.

2015.7 If a petition is granted, the petitioner shall immediately become a party to the proceedings.

2015.8 If a petition to intervene is denied, the denial shall be in writing and set forth the reasons for denial.

2015.9 The Board shall rule on petitions within twelve (12) days of the scheduled disposition hearing.

2015.10 In the event of an untimely petition or denial of a petition by the Executive Director, the petitioner may appeal to the Board for admittance at the commencement of the hearing; Provided, that the petitioner shall submit, to the extent that time allows, all materials required by §2015.4, as if he or she were a party.

2015.11 The Board, if it chooses to grant the appeal allowed by §2015.10, may postpone the hearing to allow review of any new material admitted.

2015.12 Any other persons may be heard at the hearing for any period of time that the Board allows. These other persons shall be subject to cross-examination by the parties, but shall not be permitted to cross-examine parties or the Agency staff except with permission of the Board.

2015.13 Parties shall have the right of cross-examination, subject to the provisions of §2020.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 549 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2016** PRELIMINARY PROCEDURES {#sec-10-b2016 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2016}

2016.1 The Agency shall publish notice of the disposition hearing in local newspapers of general circulation at least thirty (30) days in advance of the disposition hearing. The notice shall include the following:

(a) A description of the land to be sold or leased;

(b) The identity of the applicant redeveloper; and

2016.2 At least ten (10) days prior to the scheduled disposition hearing, all admitted parties shall file the following information:

(a) Eight (8) copies of all written reports and documents intended to be introduced at the hearing;

(b) Eight (8) copies of a written summary of verbal evidence of any expert which will be proffered at the hearing;

(d) A list of maps, plans, or other documents readily available to the general public that will be offered into evidence; and

(e) The estimated time required for the party's presentation.

2016.3 No material of the kind described in §2016.2 shall be received in evidence unless filed or referred to in accordance with this chapter.

2016.4 Materials submitted in compliance with §2016.2 shall be construed as an intent only to introduce the evidence, and the party shall not be bound to introduce those materials at the hearing.

2016.5 Reports and recommendations of public bodies, including the Agency, shall not become a part of the official record unless appropriate staff representatives of those public bodies appear at the disposition hearing to present the reports and recommendations and to be cross-examined by the parties, and unless the reports or recommendations are filed with the Board at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the scheduled disposition hearing.

2016.6 All submissions by parties and public bodies pursuant to §§2016.2 and 2016.5 shall be available for examination at the offices of the Agency to any person during usual business hours.

2016.7 Upon a showing of surprise by a party, a hearing may be adjourned to allow sufficient time to offer rebuttal evidence. Rebuttal evidence shall be filed with the Board at a time specified by the Board prior to resumption of the hearing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 551 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2017** CONDUCT OF HEARINGS {#sec-10-b2017 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2017}

2017.1 The disposition hearing shall be held at the times and places designated by the Board.

2017.2 The hearing may be adjourned from time to time. If the time and place of resumption is publicly announced when the adjournment is ordered, no further notice of the hearing has to be given.

2017.3 A disposition hearing shall be presided over by a presiding officer selected from among themselves by the Board. The presiding officer shall have the authority to do the following:

(a) Regulate the course of the hearing;

(b) Rule on offers of proof and receive relevant evidence;

(d) Hold conferences for simplification of the issues by consent of the parties;

(e) Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters including motions to amend and to order hearings reopened;

(f) Call, examine, and cross-examine witnesses;

(g) Introduce into the record documentary or other evidence;

(h) Request the parties at any time during the hearing to state their respective positions concerning any issue in the proceeding and theory in support of those positions; and

(i) Take any other action authorized or necessary under §§2010 through 2027.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 553 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2018** OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT {#sec-10-b2018 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2018}

2018.1 Each hearing shall be reported under the supervision of the presiding officer, stenographically or by other means, by an official reporter who may be designated from time to time by the Board or may be a regular employee of the Agency.

2018.2 The transcript prepared by the reporter shall be the sole official transcript of the hearing.

2018.3 The transcript shall be open for inspection at the Agency.

2018.4 Copies of the transcript shall be available to parties and to the public from the official reporter on payment of the charges fixed for copying.

2018.5 Changes in the official transcript may be made only when they involve errors affecting substance.

2018.6 A motion to correct a transcript shall be filed with the Board within ten (10) days after the transcript has been filed with the Board. Copies of the motion shall be served simultaneously on all opposing parties or their legal representatives.

2018.7 Objections to a motion to correct a transcript shall be filed with the Board within five (5) days.

2018.8 The transcript may be changed to reflect the corrections in the motion to correct.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 556 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2019** ORDER OF PROCEEDINGS {#sec-10-b2019 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2019}

2019.1 The order of procedure for presenting evidence at the hearing shall be as follows:

(a) Introductory statement of presiding officer;

(b) Presentation by Agency staff representative;

(d) Testimony of other parties;

(e) Rebuttal by applicant redeveloper;

(f) Rebuttal by other parties;

(g) Statements of persons not parties to the proceedings; and

(h) Rebuttal by parties of statements of persons who are not parties.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 557 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2020** PRESENTATION OF TESTIMONY {#sec-10-b2020 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2020}

2020.1 Each party shall be given an equal period of time in which to make an oral presentation at the disposition hearing.

2020.2 The length of each presentation shall be at the discretion of the presiding officer.

2020.3 After each presentation, each party shall be permitted a period of time to cross-examine the party offering the presentation or to present rebuttal witnesses.

2020.4 Rebuttal witnesses shall be subject to cross-examination by the party against whom such witnesses testifies.

2020.5 Cross-examination shall be of sufficient scope and length so as to permit full and true disclosure of the facts.

2020.6 The Board or its designee shall be permitted to cross-examine all witnesses and persons making statements at the hearing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 558 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2021** WITNESSES {#sec-10-b2021 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2021}

2021.1 The witnesses called upon by each party in making its presentation shall not be required to testify under oath.

2021.2 The presiding officer shall ask each witness prior to his or her testimony if he or she is familiar with the provisions of law imposing penalties for knowingly making false representations in connection with any matter within the jurisdiction of the Agency.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 558 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2022** EVIDENCE {#sec-10-b2022 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2022}

2022.1 Evidence presented at the disposition hearing shall be limited to the following issues:

(a) Qualifications of the applicant redeveloper; and

(b) Suitability of the disposition, taking into consideration the requirements and objectives of the Urban Renewal Plan and Program, the rules of the Agency, and other requirements of law.

2022.2 The rules of evidence as applied to hearings shall be those of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, and shall include exclusions of evidence whether hearsay or otherwise which does not contain facts of probative value or is not relevant to the issues to be decided.

2022.3 Objections to the admission or exclusion of evidence shall be in short form, stating the grounds of objections relied upon. The transcript shall not include argument or debate on these objections, except as ordered by the presiding officer. Rulings on objections shall be a part of the transcript.

2022.4 Exceptions to the rulings of the presiding officer made during the course of a public hearing are unnecessary. For all purposes for which an exception otherwise would be taken, it shall be sufficient that a party, at the time the ruling of the presiding officer is made or sought, makes known the action he or she desires the Board to take or any objection to an action taken, and the grounds for the objection.

2022.5 Any offer of proof made in connection with an objection taken to any ruling of the presiding officer rejecting or excluding proffered oral testimony shall consist of a statement of the substance of the evidence which a party or his or her counsel contends would be adduced by that testimony.

2022.6 If excluded evidence consists of evidence in documentary or written form or of reference to documents or records, a copy of that evidence shall be marked for identification and shall constitute the offer of proof.

2022.7 The presiding officer may exclude testimony under the rules of privilege recognized by the courts of the District of Columbia or as provided by law, including, but not limited to communications between attorney and client and records of files of any official or agency of government which, by statute or otherwise, is recognized as confidential. No greater exclusionary effect shall be given any such rule or privilege that would be obtained by an action in a court of the District of Columbia.

2022.8 The applicant redeveloper shall bear the burden of proof in a land disposition hearing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 559 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2023** DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE {#sec-10-b2023 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2023}

2023.1 When written exhibits are offered in evidence, one (1) copy must be furnished to each of the parties at the hearing unless the parties previously have been furnished with copies or the presiding officer directs otherwise.

2023.2 If the Board has not fixed a time for the exchange of exhibits, the parties shall exchange copies of exhibits at the earliest practicable time, preferably before the hearing or, at the latest, at the commencement of the hearing.

2023.3 Exhibits may be in the form of photographs, models, graphs, or similar materials.

2023.4 Any exhibit which exceeds a size suitable for inclusion in the record must be reduced to a size not to exceed legal size of eight and one-half inches by fourteen inches (81/2 in. x 14 in.).

2023.5 No material shall be accepted for the record which exceeds legal size, except material submitted by the Agency.

2023.6 If models are used, photographs of the models not exceeding legal size, shall be supplied at the public hearing.

2023.7 In his or her discretion, the presiding officer may permit a party to withdraw original documents offered in evidence and substitute true copies instead.

2023.8 Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies or excerpts, if the original is not available.

2023.9 Upon request, parties shall be given an opportunity to compare the copy with the original when available.

2023.10 When relevant and material matter offered in evidence by any party is embraced in a book, paper, or document containing other matter not material or relevant, the party offering the same shall plainly designate the matter so offered. The immaterial and irrelevant parts shall be excluded and shall be segregated insofar as is practicable.

2023.11 If the presiding officer so directs, the relevant or material matter offered under §2023.10 may be read into the record, or, if the presiding officer so directs, a true copy of the relevant matter, in proper form, shall be received as an exhibit, and like copies shall be delivered by the party offering it to opposing parties or to their attorneys appearing at the hearing, who shall be afforded an opportunity to examine the book, paper, or document, and to offer in evidence, in like manner, other portions of the book, paper, or document.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 561 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2024** OFFICIAL NOTICE {#sec-10-b2024 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2024}

2024.1 Official notice of Urban Renewal Plans, Agency statutory authority, and other public records of the Agency, and of any matter of which courts may take judicial notice may be taken by the Board.

2024.2 Materials which may be officially noticed shall include, but are not limited to, the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1945, as amended by D.C. Code §5-801 et seq. (1981), and the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, and shall be considered a part of the official record without formal introduction into evidence.

2024.3 Where a decision by the Board rests upon official notice of a material fact, the decision will so state and shall allow any party upon request to have an opportunity to show to the contrary. This request shall be filed and served within the time and in the manner prescribed in the decision.

2024.4 Where a decision has rested upon official notice of a material fact and has afforded the parties an opportunity to show to the contrary, no further opportunity to show to the contrary shall be allowed.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 563 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2025** OFFICIAL RECORD {#sec-10-b2025 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2025}

2025.1 The official record of a disposition hearing shall include all of the following, if applicable:

(a) All evidence received of any kind, and records, documents, charts, and maps in the possession of the Agency of which the Board made use or took official cognizance;

(b) A statement of matters officially noticed, and any contest of that official notice by any party including any rulings on the matter by the presiding officer;

(c) Offers of proof, objections to offers of proof, and the rulings by the presiding officer on offers of proof, and any statements made by a party as to what the excluded evidence would have shown;

(d) Arguments of the parties or of counsel;

(e) The Boards findings of fact and conclusions of law; and

(f) All Agency memoranda, reports, or other data submitted to the Board, referred to by it, or requested by it from Agency personnel, either prior or subsequent to the issuance of the notice required by §2016.1 related to the subject disposition.

2025.2 The Agency shall introduce into evidence any related documents, exhibits, or testimony viewed or considered by the Board prior to the issuance of notice under §2016.1 and not introduced by any party. These materials shall be made a part of the official record.

2025.3 The record will be closed following the disposition hearing; Provided, that the record may be kept open for a stated period for the receipt of specific exhibits or information as directed by the presiding officer or Board.

2025.4 The official record shall be the sole and exclusive basis for decision by the Board except to the extent that official notice may be taken of a fact as provided in §2024.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 564 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2026** FINAL DECISIONS BY THE BOARD {#sec-10-b2026 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2026}

2026.1 The final decision of the Board shall be in writing and be issued after the conclusion of the disposition hearing.

2026.2 The Board's final decision shall be accompanied by findings of fact and conclusions of law, if any.

2026.3 The findings of fact shall consist of a concise statement of the conclusions upon each contested issue of fact.

2026.4 Findings of fact and conclusions of law shall be supported by and in accordance with reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.

2026.5 A copy of the decision, findings and conclusions, and any resolution accompanying each decision shall be served upon each party.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 566 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2027** MOTIONS {#sec-10-b2027 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2027}

2027.1 Any party may apply to the Board for a ruling by motion.

2027.2 All motions shall be made at an appropriate time depending on the nature of the motion and the action requested in the motion.

2027.3 Unless made during a disposition hearing, motions shall be in writing.

2027.4 Motions shall state with particularity the grounds for the relief sought, the nature of the relief sought, and shall be accompanied by any affidavits or other evidence desired to be relied upon.

2027.5 Motions made during hearings, answers to those motions, and rulings on those motions may be made orally on the record unless the presiding officer directs otherwise.

2027.6 Within three (3) days after a motion is served, or any other period that the Board may fix, any party to the proceeding may file an answer in support or in opposition to the motion, accompanied by any affidavits or other evidence as it desires to rely upon.

2027.7 No oral argument shall be heard on motions unless the Board otherwise directs.

2027.8 Written memoranda or briefs may be filed with motions or answers to motions, stating the points and authorities relied upon.

2027.9 The filing or pendency of a motion shall not automatically alter or extend the time limitations of any land disposition proceeding.

2027.10 All written motions shall be filed not later than five (5) days prior to the date established for the disposition hearing unless the Board finds that circumstances justify granting of leave to file motions at other times.

2027.11 All motions pending at the time of the disposition hearing shall be disposed of at that time.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 567 (February 8, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2099** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2099 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2099}

2099.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Applicant redeveloper - the person or persons described as the potential redeveloper of land in the public notice of sale or lease issued by the Agency pursuant to D.C. Code §5-806(c) (1981) and §2016.1 of this chapter.

Disposition hearing or hearing - the public hearing and, where applicable, the related preliminary procedures described in §2016 of this chapter, held by the Agency on dispositions of land.

Disposition of land - any process, including, but not limited to, public bidding, solicitation of offers, consideration of unsolicited offers or negotiation with one (1) or more persons, by which the Agency undertakes to sell land or lease land for a term of years.

Land - includes both bare or vacant land and any improvements constructed on that land, and water or land under water.

Party - any person admitted by the Board to appear in a disposition hearing, except representatives of the Agency.

Person or persons - includes individuals, partnerships, corporations, associations, and public and private organizations of any character, other than the Agency.

Petitioner - a person who has petitioned to be admitted as a party to a disposition hearing but who has not been so admitted.

Presiding officer - the member of the Board selected to preside at a disposition hearing.

Public bidding - a disposition process in which the Agency solicits offers for the sale of land and the price offered is the sole criterion in the selection of a redeveloper.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 539, 541 (February 8, 1973).*

### **10-B21** DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY

##### **10-B DCMR § 2100** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b2100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2100}

2100.1 The purpose of this chapter is to set forth the policies and basic procedures of the D.C. Redevelopment Land Agency (also referred to in this chapter as the "Agency") with respect to the disposition of Agency-owned real property. This chapter reflects the requirements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations applicable to the property disposition process by virtue of financial assistance contracts between the Agency and the United States of America and grants to the District.

2100.2 The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all property owned by the Agency which is proposed for redevelopment or a combination of redevelopment and rehabilitation, whether the disposition of the property is for public or private reuse.

2100.3 This policy shall apply only to the following actions:

(a) Determination of the nature of dispositions;

(b) Form of offering;

(d) Selection criteria;

(e) Selection process;

(f) Changes subsequent to selection; and

(g) Modification of the Land Disposition Agreement.

2100.4 The timing of dispositions, the monitoring of the selection process, and post-contract or lease activities shall be determined by the Department of Housing and Community Development (also referred to in this chapter as the ("Department") unless otherwise set forth in this chapter.

2100.5 The Board may for good cause extend times for submission of proposals or other documents required to be submitted under the provisions of this chapter, a prospectus, or an Exclusive Right Agreements, or otherwise modify the requirements of those documents.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §4(b) of the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 793 (D.C. Code §5-803(b)); as amended by §201 of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganizational Act, 87 Stat 778; Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1968 (D.C. Code (1973), Title 1 - Administration Appendix at 166); C.O. 68-376 issued May 22, 1968, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1975, 21 DCR 2793 (D.C. Code (1981), Vol. 1 at 254).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2101** CONFLICT OF INTEREST {#sec-10-b2101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2101}

2101.1 A person shall be disqualified from participating as a member of a development team or from having any ownership interest in a proposed development if that participation would be a conflict of interest under the laws and regulations of the District.

2101.2 No individual may represent a community group, ANC, or residents' association in meetings or public hearings conducted by the RLA or in written communications if that individual or community group, ANC, or residents' association has any personal financial interest in the development team or development entity.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5411 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2102** OFFERING POLICY {#sec-10-b2102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2102}

2102.1 The interest of the District normally is best served when the publicly owned land is disposed of through a competitive public process. Therefore, all land to be disposed of for private reuse (whether residential, commercial, or non-profit) shall normally be offered by a publicly announced competitive bid process, except as provided in §2102.3.

2102.2 Dispositions for public use (whether to the District government, the federal government, or any other public instrumentality) shall be subject only to the provisions of §§2115 and 2116.1.

2102.3 The Board may waive its policy of competitive disposition if any of the following conditions exist:

(a) If a non-profit sponsor proposes to acquire a site for subsidized residential use or for the development of a community facility;

(b) If an existing property owner proposes to acquire an adjacent site to permit the expansion or improvement of the existing business or enterprise conducted on that owner's property;

(c) In the case of a HUD-approved sponsor who has qualified, or is in the process of qualifying, for financial assistance under a HUD-administered housing assistance program; or

(d) If, in the opinion of the Redevelopment Land Agency Board of Directors, a competitive offering would be unlikely to significantly improve the quality of the development sought for a site.

2102.4 For purposes of this section, the term "community facility" shall mean any facility which has as its primary purpose the provision of social, recreational, or spiritual services to all or part of the community on a not-for-profit basis.

2102.5 The Board may waive the requirement for competitive dispositions only by the adoption of a resolution which contains the findings upon which the Board made the waiver.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5411 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2103** OFFERING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-b2103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2103}

2103.1 Each offering shall be announced publicly, and the notices shall be given as widespread a dissemination as is practicable.

2103.2 All announcements shall be published one (1) or more times in the local press. Announcements shall also be distributed to all parties on record with the Department as desiring to receive announcements of site offerings.

2103.3 If, under the conditions set forth in §2104, the Board authorizes an offering other than by prospectus, that offering shall be set forth in the public announcement of site availability.

2103.4 The public announcement of site availability shall contain the following:

(a) The parcel being offered;

(b) The use to which the parcel may be put;

(d) The materials that must be submitted as part of a qualified proposal;

(e) Where and when the offering documents may be secured;

(f) The length of time the offering will be kept open;

(g) The cost, if any, of securing the offering document and supporting materials.

(h) The criteria the Board will use in evaluating the proposals;

(i) The procedure the Board will follow to determine an acceptable proposal, including the time limits applicable to the procedure;

(j) If appropriate, a date by which proposals must be submitted; and

(k) The procedure which will be used following acceptance of a proposal until execution of a disposition agreement.

2103.5 If final designation takes place more than six (6) months after the appraisal required under §2103.4(c), a new price shall be determined by an updated appraisal.

2103.6 An announcement shall be published when the offering documents and supporting materials are available for public distribution.

2103.7 Normally each offering document shall consist of a prospectus and supporting material.

2103.8 Each prospectus shall be reviewed and approved by the Board by a duly adopted resolution before it is made available for public distribution. The resolution shall approve the prospectus and authorize its publication.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5412 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2104** COUNCIL REVIEW OF OFFERING DOCUMENTS {#sec-10-b2104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2104}

2104.1 The provisions of this section shall apply to documents issued under §§2103 and 2105.

2104.2 Prior to the issuance of a prospectus, request for proposals or bids, or other notification to solicit offers ("offering documents") for urban renewal properties, the Agency shall submit a draft copy of the offering document to the Council for a thirty (30) day period of review excluding days of Council recess.

2104.3 Unless approved by the Council during the review period, no offering document may be issued until the end of the thirty (30) day period of review beginning the day the offering document is transmitted by the Agency and received by the Chairman of the Council, subject to the provisions of §2104.4.

2104.4 If, during the thirty (30) day review period, the Council adopts a resolution disapproving the offering document, the document shall not be issued.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5413 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2105** OFFERING WITHOUT PROSPECTUS {#sec-10-b2105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2105}

2105.1 If the Board determines that appropriate circumstances exist, it may, by the adoption of an appropriate resolution, authorize the site to be offered other than through a prospectus.

2105.2 The form and content of each offering document issued under this section shall be reviewed and approved by the Board by a duly adopted resolution.

2105.3 The Board's determination that an offering should be made without the issuance of a prospectus shall be based on the following factors:

(a) The size of the site to be offered;

(b) The use(s) to which the site is to be put;

(d) The existence of exigencies warranting a shorter marketing period.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5413 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2106** PROSPECTUS: FORM AND CONTENT {#sec-10-b2106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2106}

2106.1 In general, each prospectus shall contain the following sections:

(a) Request for Proposals;

(b) Parcel and Neighborhood Information;

(d) Developer Submission;

(e) Selection Process;

(f) Developer's Kit; and

(g) Further Information.

2106.2 The Board may at its discretion modify the content of the sections listed in §2106.1 (and described in this section) to take account of relevant site and marketing conditions and legal requirements.

2106.3 The "Request for Proposals" section shall set forth clearly the site being offered, the general uses to which the site may be put, and other significant information affecting the development of the site.

2106.4 The "Parcel and Neighborhood Information" section shall include the following:

(a) A specific identification of the site being offered, the size of the site, and the maximum permitted development;

(b) The sales price of lease rate for the site, if established and timing for the establishment of the sales price or lease rate;

(c) Whether the land price or lease rate is fixed or whether it shall be competitive (a minimum rate, but no maximum rate); and

(d) A summary of the urban renewal plan controls and zoning controls that apply to the site.

2106.5 Where appropriate, the specific urban renewal plan and zoning controls should be attached as part of the supporting materials in the "Parcel and Neighborhood Information" section.

2106.6 In the "Selection Criteria" section, the following criteria (and other criteria which may be established by the Board) shall be clearly set forth so that prospective developers will clearly understand the factors to be used in evaluating the proposals:

(a) Experience of development team;

(b) Financial capacity;

(c) Development program proposed for site; (including any special development considerations that will be considered by the Board);

(d) Design concept, to the extent applicable, which should set forth the process by which designs will be reviewed and any special design considerations that will be considered by the Board; and

(e) Minority and local participation program, which should indicate the areas in which participation is sought, and any standards established for that participation).

2106.7 The "Developer Submission" section shall require the following materials to be submitted in response to an offering:

(a) A proposal letter indicating amount and type of deposit (if required). A form letter shall be included as part of the supporting materials;

(b) A resume setting forth the previous experience of each member of the development teams with developments comparable to that being offered, including specific examples of those developments;

(d) A completed Form 6004, Part II - "Redeveloper's Statement of Financial Responsibility," together with current financial statements of the redeveloper or principals of the redeveloper;

(e) A statement of proposed financing, which may include development cost budget, amount, and sources of debt and equity financing, as well as a projected income and expense analysis for the proposed development for a period of five (5) years subsequent to initial completion;

(f) A narrative description of proposed development, describing magnitude of development, type and location of proposed uses, as well as approximate area for each proposed use, where appropriate;

(g) Statements regarding minority and local participation in the planning, ownership, and management of proposed development;

(h) A design concept drawing and other graphic materials in appropriate detail and scale may be required. These materials shall be in sufficient detail to permit reasonable evaluation of feasibility both in terms of design and financial feasibility of the proposed development; and

(i) An indication of the number of copies of submission documents that are required.

2106.8 The statements submitted under §2106.7(g) regarding minority and local participation shall include the following:

(a) Identification of all minorities and women on or expected to be part of development team;

(b) A description of efforts to be made to provide minority and local residents with employment and business opportunities during life of proposed development; and

(c) A description of previous efforts and accomplishments in the hiring of minorities and women in the development process, where applicable;

2106.9 The "Selection Process" section shall set forth in sufficient detail the sequence of events that will occur from the time the submissions are received by the Agency until a land disposition agreement is executed. In general this sequence shall consist of the following stages:

(a) Stage I - review of submissions leading to selection by the Board;

(b) Stage II - except where an ERA is used - refinement of proposals leading to final scheduling of public hearing and consideration of final selection; and

2106.10 The "Further Information" section shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the specific person or office to which inquiries should be directed. This section may also set forth any procedures the Board may establish to provide clarification of the submissions.

2106.11 The "Developer's Kit" section shall list all supporting materials that are to be supplied to a prospective developer. The material should provide the following:

(a) Detailed specific information regarding the development controls that apply to the site;

(b) Official maps showing dimensions of site and location of any specific building restrictions (including easements, set-backs, and similar restrictions);

(d) Any instruction, guidelines, laws, and regulations that must be complied with as part of the required submission; and

(e) Other information which may assist a prospective developer in the preparation of the required submission.

2106.12 A reasonable fee may be charged for the information provided in the prospectus or other offering document. This fee should bear a reasonable relationship to the Department's cost in preparing and assembling the information.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5414 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2107** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2107}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2108** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2108}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2109** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2109}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2110** PUBLIC HEARINGS {#sec-10-b2110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2110}

2110.1 In the case of private development, the Agency shall only give final designation to a developer and dispose of a site after holding a duly authorized public hearing in accordance with applicable law.

2110.2 The Board shall hold a public hearing when it is satisfied the following criteria have been met:

(a) The prospective developer is organized consistent with the conditions established by the Board at the time of selection;

(b) The proposal for development has sufficiently progressed, and adequate documentation has been submitted, to assure the Board that the proposed development will be economically feasible, meet public policy objectives, and satisfy all legal and department review requirements;

(d) The prospective developer has demonstrated the ability to finance the proposed development;

(e) The Affirmative Action Plan and Community Participation program are approved; and

(f) There is agreement on the substantive provisions of the Land Disposition Agreement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5417 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2111** PRE-HEARING REVIEW {#sec-10-b2111 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2111}

2111.1 Prior to public hearing, the proposals shall be reviewed under the procedures set forth in this section.

2111.2 Proposals received as the result of a public offering document shall be reviewed by the Department staff.

2111.3 All proposals shall be transmitted for review and comment to community organizations, including the Project Area Committee ("PAC") in the project area in which the offered site is located, the local Advisory Neighborhood Commission(s) ("ANC's") whose boundaries encompass the offered site, and when appropriate, other organizations within the community surrounding the offered site which, in the opinion of the Department, represent a broad cross-section of the community.

2111.4 The Department shall make a reasonable number of copies of the submission documents constituting the proposal available to each community organization. However, if large architectural plans are submitted, the Department shall not be required to reproduce those plans, but should distribute whatever extra copies of the plans that are received as part of the submission.

2111.5 The community organizations shall have thirty (30) days from the date copies of proposals are received to provide the Department with written comments and recommendations. For good cause, the Department may shorten this time consistent with applicable law.

2111.6 When necessary to the selection process, within a reasonable time after distribution of the proposals to the community groups, the Department shall schedule, with the consent of the Board, interviews with each of the prospective developers submitting a proposal.

2111.7 Notices of interview schedules shall be distributed to each community organization receiving a copy of the proposal. Notices shall indicate the date, time, and place for each interview.

2111.8 The interviews shall be conducted by a panel consisting of members of the Board, one (1) of whom shall act as chairperson, and members of the staff selected by the Director of the Department.

2111.9 Community representatives may be invited to sit on the interview panel.

2111.10 Each member of the interview panel shall have the right to ask questions and to request the interviewee to supply additional information or clarification that may be needed to complete the review of the submission.

2111.11 Prior to the interviews, the Department shall prepare and submit to the Board a written analysis of the proposals. The analysis shall reflect any community group comments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5418 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2112** SELECTION PROCESS {#sec-10-b2112 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2112}

2112.1 At an official public meeting, the Board shall by resolution either select a developer, reject all proposals, or direct the Department to provide further evaluation of one (1) or more of the proposals based upon specific stated concerns of the Board.

2112.2 If the Department is directed to provide further evaluation, upon receipt of that evaluation, the Board shall, at a public meeting adopt a resolution selecting a developer or rejecting all proposals.

2112.3 The selection of a developer shall, in accordance with the offering document, be either in the form of a grant of an exclusive right to prepare a development proposal ("Exclusive Right") or a tentative designation ("Tentative Designation").

2112.4 Developers or members of the development team entity whose names are on the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) list of debarred, suspended, or ineligible bidders, shall be disqualified from participating in the development. The Redevelopment Land Agency shall review the list and advise the developer of any names.

2112.5 Final selection or designation of a redeveloper under either an Exclusive Right or a Tentative Designation shall only occur through Board adoption of an appropriate resolution following a public hearing in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

2112.6 Notification of proposed final developer selection by the Board shall be mailed or delivered to the Project Area Committees, directly affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, and other community organizations deemed appropriate by the Department.

2112.7 Normally, notice shall be mailed or delivered thirty (30) days prior to the date of the proposed Board action, but shorter notice may be given where necessary and as may be permitted by law.

2112.8 The Board resolution providing for final selection or designation shall set forth the findings the Board has made upon which the final selection of designation or the redeveloper is based.

2112.9 Comments by the ANC shall be given great weight and adverse comments shall be considered specifically in the Board's findings.

2112.10 The resolution shall also approve the terms and conditions of the proposed Land Disposition Agreement and authorize its execution by either a date certain, or within thirty (30) days after Board approval.

2112.11 The resolution shall also approve the land price or lease rate, if that price or rate has not been previously approved by the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5419 and 5422 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2113** EXCLUSIVE RIGHT SELECTION {#sec-10-b2113 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2113}

2113.1 An exclusive right designation shall be used in competitive dispositions when the Board determines that because of market conditions, size of the site, or use of the site, selection of a developer should be made on the basis of the developer's qualifications and the substance of the development proposal or where the prospectus is to be supplemented to control the relationship with the prospective developer prior to final designation.

2113.2 An Exclusive Right Agreement shall provide that the grantee shall have the exclusive right to prepare and submit a development proposal to the Agency, and that during the time the exclusive right is in effect, the Agency will neither solicit nor negotiate any other development proposal for the site.

2113.3 The Board may accept, reject, or request modifications to the proposal submitted.

2113.4 The Board shall accept a development proposal by adopting a resolution authorizing the scheduling of a public hearing on the designation of the developer and the terms and conditions of the land disposition agreement.

2113.5 The grant of an exclusive right shall be conditioned upon prompt execution of an Exclusive Right Agreement.

2113.6 Where appropriate, a form copy of the Exclusive Right Agreement shall be included as part of supporting materials referred to in the offering document.

2113.7 The Exclusive Right Agreement shall set forth in appropriate detail, the requirements for submission of a development proposal and a schedule for the submission of such requirements. Specifically, the Agreement should contain the following provisions:

(a) The terms and conditions for the submission, and the amount and conditions for the return of the good faith deposit;

(b) A description of the Community Participation Program designed to ensure reasonable community participation in the preparation of the development proposal;

(d) A description of the Affirmative Action Program designed to provide reasonable opportunities for minorities and women in all phases of the planning, development, and operations of the proposed development;

(e) A proposed development schedule showing the selected developer's estimates of the timing and sequence of events needed to secure final designation, execution of the Land Disposition Agreement, and start and completion of the improvements;

(f) A list of documents and materials that will constitute the final proposal submission;

(g) The provisions for the granting of time extensions under the Agreement, including, at the discretion of the Department, reasonable charges as consideration for the Board's granting of any such extensions; and

(h) The Department's responsibilities as detailed in §811.8 with the times for such actions.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5419 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2114** TENTATIVE DESIGNATION SELECTION {#sec-10-b2114 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2114}

2114.1 A tentative designation selection shall be used in competitive dispositions where, in the judgment of the Department, marketing conditions, the size of the site, or the use of site will permit the Board to impose more detailed requirements in the submission of proposals or where the designation is required by the federal or local program to which the sponsor has or intends to apply.

2114.2 A tentative designation shall provide that upon satisfactory and timely completion of the terms and conditions of the prospectus and any other conditions imposed in connection with the tentative designation, the Board will schedule a public hearing on the designation of the developer and the proposed land disposition agreement.

2114.3 Upon completion of the public hearing, the Board may authorize the execution of the Land Disposition Agreement.

2114.4 The responsibilities and obligations of both the tentatively designated developer and the Agency shall be incorporated by reference when the Board adopts a resolution granting the tentative designation.

2114.5 The responsibilities of the tentatively designated developer shall include the following:

(a) Time for submission of a development schedule covering activities from tentative designation through execution of the land disposition agreement;

(b) Submission of evidence of construction and permanent financing;

(d) Submission of additional architectural plans.

2114.6 The responsibilities of the Department during the period shall include the following:

(a) Preparation of draft land disposition agreement;

(b) Establishment of land price;

(d) Review and approval of financial plans;

(e) Review and approval of Affirmative Action Plans;

(f) Review and approval of Citizen Participation Plans; and

(g) Scheduling of a public hearing to dispose of the site to the developer.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5421 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2115** TRANSFER OF SITES FOR PUBLIC USE {#sec-10-b2115 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2115}

2115.1 Sites designated under the urban renewal plan for disposition to the federal government, the District government, or other public instrumentality shall be transferred by documents which recite inter alia, the following:

(a) The consideration for the transfer;

(b) The public use to which the site is to be put;

(d) Where applicable, that the plans for any improvements on the site have been determined to conform to the requirements of the approved plan for the site.

2115.2 Upon receipt of the notification from the designated developer that the developer is prepared to accept title to the site, the Department shall do the following:

(a) When applicable, secure the appraisals necessary for the Board to establish the price;

(b) Determine that any plans for improvements to be made to the site will be in accordance with the urban renewal plan or other public control plans, and that those plans have received other design approvals as necessary and appropriate; and

2115.3 When the Department is satisfied that the actions set forth in §2115.2 have been completed, it shall request the Board to authorize the transfer of the property.

2115.4 The request for transfer shall certify that all the appropriate preconditions to transfer have been satisfied and that the site is ready to be transferred. The Board shall approve the transfer of the property by resolution.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5422 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2116** UNSOLICITED OFFERS FOR DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-b2116 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2116}

2116.1 All unsolicited offers for redevelopment sites sent or referred to either the Agency or the Department shall be forwarded to the Director of the Department for appropriate action.

2116.2 The Director or an assigned member of the Department shall immediately acknowledge the request and advise the offeror that the Department will do the following:

(a) Recommend to the Board that it authorize negotiations;

(b) Recommend to the Board that it deny the request for negotiations; or

2116.3 When the Department decides to recommend an action under §2116.2 to the Board, the recommendation shall be based upon a finding of the existence of one (1) or more of the conditions set forth in §2102.4.

2116.4 The Department shall notify the offeror in writing of the date, time, and place that the request for negotiation is to be considered by the Board.

2116.5 The notice shall also inform the offeror that the offeror may request the Board in writing to make an oral presentation of the request. The Board may determine whether to honor the request.

2116.6 The Board, by resolution, shall either reject or conditionally accept the offer of negotiation. The resolution shall stipulate a time by which the negotiations are to be completed and may require periodic reports on the status of the negotiations.

2116.7 If the offer is rejected, the Department shall forward a copy of the Board action to the offeror.

2116.8 If the offer is conditionally accepted, the Board shall instruct the staff to submit the proposal to the Council for a thirty (30) day review and comment period and simultaneously to begin negotiations with the offeror.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5423 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2117** NEGOTIATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b2117 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2117}

2117.1 When the Board authorizes the Department to negotiate the disposition of a site with a named prospective developer, the Director or his or her designee shall do the following:

(a) Notify the prospective developer in writing that the Board has authorized the Department to commence negotiations and that the negotiations must be completed within a stipulated period of time; and

(b) Provide the prospective developer with a list of concerns that must be addressed by the prospective developer during the negotiations.

2117.2 The concerns to be addressed by the developer shall include the following:

(a) The nature and extent of the proposed use as well as the procedure and timing for the submission of plans, drawings, and other graphic material. This material shall be in sufficient detail to permit the Department to make a reasonable judgment as to the design and financial feasibility of the proposed development;

(b) The nature and extent of the proposed financing, including source of both debt and equity funds as well as the procedure and timing for the submission of financing documents. This information shall be in sufficient detail as to permit the Department to make a reasonable judgment as to financial feasibility of the proposed development;

(c) The purchase price or lease rate for the site or the schedule for the Agency's determination of the price or lease rate;

(d) The nature and extent of the steps the prospective developer proposes to take to ensure community participation in the planning and development of the project;

(e) The nature and extent of the Affirmative Action Program the prospective developer proposes to follow to ensure adequate opportunities are made available for minorities and women in the planning, management, and development of the project and in leasing of commercial space in the completed project;

(f) The qualifications of each of the members of the development team. The required information shall include materials regarding the background, experience, and capability of each team member, as well as any organizational document relating to the offeror's legal entity;

(g) The extent to which minorities and women and local groups participate in the equity ownership of the proposed project; and

(h) The terms and conditions of the proposed land disposition agreement. A draft agreement should be made available to the prospective developer as quickly as possible.

2117.3 The Department shall arrange meetings or conferences, and provide other assistance that may be necessary to ensure that a formal proposal that addresses the concerns set forth above is submitted within the time stipulated in the Board resolution. If the Department is of the opinion that for good and sufficient reasons the deadlines cannot be met, it shall request the Board to extend the negotiation time for a reasonable period.

2117.4 When negotiations have been completed and a formal proposal is submitted to the Department, the Department shall review the proposal and shall submit the proposal to the appropriate community organizations (see §810.3(a) for definition of "appropriate community organizations"). These organizations shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of the proposal to provide the Department with written comments.

2117.5 Prior to final designation, the Department shall prepare and submit to the Board a written analysis of the proposal along with any comments by Council issued during the thirty (30) day Council review and comment period, and any written community comments.

2117.6 At a duly announced meeting, the Board shall by resolution accept, reject, or direct the Department to further negotiate the proposal.

2117.7 If further negotiations are directed, the Board shall indicate the specific area to be renegotiated and the reason for renegotiation.

2117.8 The resolution accepting the proposal shall be in accordance with the provisions of §§2112.5 through 2112.11.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5424 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2118** MODIFICATIONS PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGNATION {#sec-10-b2118 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2118}

2118.1 When the Board adopts a resolution authorizing an exclusive right or tentative designation it makes certain findings regarding major elements of the prospective redeveloper's proposal. Consequently, if prior to the submission of a final proposal the redeveloper desires to substantially modify any of these elements, then the Department shall advise the Board in writing so that the Board will have the opportunity to determine whether to continue the preliminary designation.

2118.2 Modification including, but not limited to, the following elements of the redeveloper's proposal shall be submitted to the Board for consideration:

(a) Substantial change in the land use;

(b) Substantial change in size, or type of improvement;

(d) Substantial change in membership of the development team; or

(e) Substantial change in minority or local participation in the ownership or management of the redevelopers;

2118.3 Any change in the redeveloper, the proposal, or membership of the redeveloper's team after final selection, but prior to execution of the Land Disposition Agreement, shall be governed by §2118.1.

2118.4 A modification subsequent to execution of the Land Disposition Agreement shall be governed by the terms of the agreement.

2118.5 For purposes of this section, the phrase substantial change in the land use" shall mean any change requiring a modification of the urban renewal plan or other publicly approved plan or development controls.

2118.6 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in size, or type of improvement" shall mean any size change in excess of ten percent (10%) of the total square footage of the building, or any change that would result in a change in the primary use for which the building was designed. A change of some office use to retail use, or vice versa , would not require Board approval if the building remains primarily an office building or retail facility.

2118.7 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in ownership of developer" shall mean any ownership change that would result in a change of a general partner or corporate officer or more than ten percent (10%) of the ownership interest of limited partners or shareholders.

2118.8 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in membership of the development team" shall mean any change in the developer, architect, builder, attorney, lender, leasing agent, financial advisor, management consultant, or other major component from that previously presented to the Board.

2118.9 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in minority or local participation in the ownership or management of the redevelopers" shall mean any change the result of which will be to alter the percentage of minority or local participation more than ten percent (10%) from that previously presented to the Board, or a change that results in loss of majority status.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 29 DCR 5410, 5425 (December 10, 1982).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2119** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2119 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2119}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2120** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2120 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2120}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2121** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2121 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2121}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2122** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2122 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2122}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2123** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2123 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2123}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2124** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2124 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2124}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2125** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2125 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2125}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2126** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2126 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2126}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2127** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2127 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2127}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2128** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2128 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2128}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2129** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2129 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2129}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2130** SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BUSINESSES DISPLACED BY URBAN RENEWAL {#sec-10-b2130 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2130}

2130.1 The purpose of §§2130 through 2133 of this chapter is to set forth the policies and basic procedure of the Redevelopment Land Agency to fulfill its obligations to those businesses displaced by public action and entitled to benefits under §§633.90 through 633.96 (Special Disposition Requirements) of the Urban Renewal Plan For The Downtown Urban Renewal Area approved by the District Council on January 28, 1969, as amended.

2130.2 The provisions of this chapter shall apply to qualified businesses located in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area which were displaced by Agency or District action and which are entitled to or have exercised benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USCA 4601, et seq.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5055 (September 30, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2131** FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO DISPLACED BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b2131 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2131}

2131.1 A qualified business shall be eligible for financial assistance in the form of either of the following:

(a) A lump-sum payment, where desired by the qualified business; Provided, that a such qualified business shall meet the requirements of §§2131.4 through 2131.9; or

(b) Rent subsidies and tenant work allowances to be used in the new buildings within sites sold by the Agency for redevelopment to the extent that these benefit programs and benefits are available; Provided, that a qualified business shall meet the requirements of §§2131.6 and 2131.7.

2131.2 Qualified businesses shall be eligible for rent subsidies for a period of up to five (5) years in the new buildings on sites sold by the Agency for redevelopment.

2131.3 Rent subsidies may be distributed on a graduated basis, with the rent subsidy decreasing by four dollars per square foot ($4/ft.2) each year the subsidy is applied.

2131.4 The initial rent subsidy shall not exceed twenty dollars per square foot ($20/ft.2) lease space, except as provided for in §2131,12.

2131.5 Tenant work allowances shall not exceed twenty dollars per rentable square foot ($20/ft.2) of retail space.

2131.6 The rent subsidies specified in §2131.1 may be distributed if a qualified business demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Agency a showing of economic need.

2131.7 Rent subsidies and tenant work allowances shall be distributed pursuant to an Agency-approved Leasing Opportunities Plan for sites sold by the Agency for redevelopment.

2131.8 To qualify for financial assistance specified in §2131.1, the qualified business shall grant permission to the Agency to obtain, and shall make available, relevant financial and business information, such as business tax returns, that will allow the Agency to determine the characteristics and financial needs of the qualified business.

2131.9 Only those businesses which have not exercised their benefits under 42 USCA 4601 et seq., prior to September 30, 1983, shall be eligible for a lump-sum payment.

2131.10 The benefits specified in §2131.1 shall be in addition to those benefits provided under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USCA 4601 et seq.).

2131.11 Until Agency-owned site are sold for redevelopment, the Agency shall charge qualified retail businesses no more than eighty percent (80%) of the fair market rents (as defined in §2199), on a per square foot basis, for those sites.

2131.12 The maximum initial per square foot rent subsidy available on a parcel shall be increased in the same ratio that the land price for that parcel increases in accordance with the contract of sale for the parcel.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5055, 5057 (September 30, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2132** OTHER ASSISTANCE TO DISPLACED BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b2132 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2132}

2132.1 Where desired by a qualified business, the Agency shall assist in the relocation of the qualified business into interim and permanent relocation lease space within the Downtown Urban Renewal Area by doing the following:

(a) Providing qualified businesses referrals to vacant lease space;

(b) Requesting redevelopers to assist with relocation efforts by providing referrals to lease space; and

(c) Providing, where practicable, interim relocation space in Agency-owned properties located within or outside of the Downtown Urban Renewal Area.

2132.2 It shall not be considered practicable for the Agency to provide interim relocation space in Agency-owned properties if any of the following apply:

(a) The development of the property is expected. Development shall be considered to be "expected" if the contract of sale has been executed or is expected to be executed within one (1) year from the date the qualified business is expected to vacate;

(b) The property is leased to one (1) or more tenants;

(c) The cost of rehabilitation of the property does not reasonably compare to the expected rental income from the property; or

(d) The property may pose a threat to health and safety of the qualified business.

2132.3 The Agency shall identify management training and counseling programs prior to the relocation of the qualified business and may assist the qualified business to obtain training so that the business will be better able to operate in new space. Assistance may be provided as follows:

(a) Directly by Agency staff or the Agency's designee;

(b) Through relevant course work at local educational institutions;

(d) By other suitable similar means.

2132.4 On all retail core sites the Agency shall require all redevelopers to offer a priority of opportunity to lease space in the new buildings for businesses in the project area displaced by public action.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5055, 5058 (September 30, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2133** APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR DISPLACED BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b2133 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2133}

2133.1 After receipt of a written decision by the Agency, a qualified business may file an appeal within fifteen (15) days with the Administrator, Housing and Business Resources Administration, on any case in which he or she believes the Agency has done any of the following:

(a) Failed to properly determine eligibility for, or amount of, benefits under §§2130 through 2132 of this chapter;

(b) Failed to follow the procedures set forth in §§2130 through 2132 of this chapter.

2133.2 The appeal shall be in writing, and may include any related statement of fact or other material.

2133.3 Within fifteen (15) days after receipt of all information submitted by a person in support of his or her appeal, the Administrator of the Housing and Business Resources Administration, or his or her designee, shall make a written determination on the appeal and shall furnish the person with a copy.

2133.4 The written determination shall include at least the following:

(a) The Agency decision upon review of the appeal;

(b) The factual and legal basis upon which the decision is based, including any relevant explanation; and

(c) If the full relief requested is not granted, a statement of the person's right to appeal for reconsideration to the Director, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the Agency's determination.

2133.5 An appeal to the Director, DHCD, shall be in writing and may include any additional information pertinent to the case not earlier submitted to the Agency.

2133.6 Within thirty (30) days after receipt of all information submitted by the person making the appeal, the Director, DHCD, or his or her designee shall review the case and make a written determination on the appeal.

2133.7 A copy of the written determination made pursuant to §§2133.6 shall be furnished to the person making the appeal and shall include at least the following:

(a) The decision on review of the appeal;

(b) The factual and legal basis upon which the decision is based; and

2133.8 Nothing in this section shall preclude a person from seeking judicial review of his or her appeal on its merits after exhaustion of all administrative remedies available under this section.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5055, 5060 (September 30, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2199** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2199 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2199}

2199.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Actual rent - the commercial base rent actually paid by a qualified business, on a per square foot basis, in new buildings on a site in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area sold by the Agency.

Average annual net earnings - one-half (1/2) of any net earnings of the qualified business, before federal, state, and local income taxes, during the two (2) taxable years preceding the taxable year in which displacement takes place; Provided, that if the Agency determines that the two (2) year period specified is not equitable for establishing earnings, an alternate base period determined by the Agency to be most representative may be used. In determining the average annual net earnings, the Agency shall use federal, state, or local business tax returns as the basis.

Downtown Urban Renewal Area or project area - the area described in §200.10 and on Map No. 1 of the "Urban Renewal Plan For The Downtown Urban Renewal Area," as amended.

Fair market rents - the average of rents charged in the retail core of the Downtown Urban Renewal Area for similar space with similar amenities, leasing terms and conditions, and categories of use (retail or office), on a per square foot basis.

Lump-sum payment - an amount equal to the average annual net earnings of a qualified business, but not more than forty thousand dollars ($40,000). If a qualified business has more than one (1) facility, the average annual net earnings attributable to the facility located on Agency-owned property shall be the basis for determining the lump-sum payment.

Market rents - the commercial rents actually charged, on a per square foot basis, in new buildings on sites in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area sold by the Agency.

Net earnings - net profit (or loss) as recognized by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service plus salaries, wages, or other compensation paid by the qualified business to the owner, his or her spouse, or dependents.

Qualified business - any sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation which, on or after the effective date of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (48 USCA 4601 et seq.) moves from real property, or moves his or her personal property from real property, as a result of acquisition of that real property, in whole or in part, or as the result of the written order of the Agency or District to vacate real property, for a program or project undertaken by the District or Agency within the District or federal financial assistance.

Rent subsidies - the difference between market rents and actual rents for lease space charged to qualified businesses.

Retail core - the retail core area defined on Map No. 2, General Land Use Plan, of the "Urban Renewal Plan For The Downtown Urban Renewal Area," as amended.

Tenant work allowances - those costs for preparing tenant space (such as interior plasterboard, walls, partitions, wiring, special lighting, plumbing, and flooring) within the leased space that would normally be paid for by a tenant of that space.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5055, 5056 (September 30, 1983).*

### **10-B22** RELOCATION ASSISTANCE

##### **10-B DCMR § 2200** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b2200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2200}

2200.1 The provisions of this chapter shall establish a means of providing relocation services, payments for moving costs, replacement housing, and other expenses, and to ensure uniform, fair, and equitable treatment for all persons who are required to move because of public works projects, including highway projects, of the government of the District of Columbia.

2200.2 The provisions of this chapter shall also establish a means of providing relocation services for persons required to move as a result of other public actions, such as the condemnation of unsafe and insanitary buildings and the enforcement of District laws and regulations relating to housing.

2200.3 The construction or development of public works shall be so scheduled that, to the greatest extent practicable, no person lawfully occupying real property shall be required to move from his or her dwelling or his or her business until after ninety (90) days written notice.

2200.4 Except as provided by §2208, no family or individual shall be required to move unless offered relocation housing that meets the standards set forth in this chapter.

2200.5 Any person displaced on or after February 13, 1973, shall be entitled only to those services and payments provided in this chapter; Provided, that nothing in this chapter shall be construed to affect any rights or liabilities in existence as of January 2, 1971, nor any rights granted pursuant to Commissioner's Order No. 71-185, dated June 7, 1971.

2200.6 Any displaced person who moved after January 2, 1971, and before the February 13, 1973, and who filed a claim for any relocation payment under the regulations then in effect may file a supplementary claim for any additional benefits to which he or she may be entitled under this chapter.

2200.7 Any displaced person who moved after January 2, 1971, and before February 13, 1973, and who did not file a supplementary claim, may file either under the regulations in effect on the date of the move or under this chapter.

2200.8 The Mayor shall make all relocation payments and provide all assistance required of a federal agency by §209 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (also referred to in this chapter as "the Act"), as amended (D.C. Code, §5-834), and shall make all payments and meet all requirements prescribed for a federal agency by Title III of the Act.

2200.9 The Mayor shall ensure that, within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, there will be available in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and individuals displaced, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings, equal in number to the number of and available to displaced persons who require those dwellings. The dwellings shall also be reasonably accessible to the places of employment of the displaced persons.

2200.10 The Mayor shall coordinate activities of federal and District agencies and departments and planned or proposed governmental actions in the community that may affect relocation assistance programs and which are related to the relocation functions of the Relocation Office under the Agreement, and to develop in cooperation with the Relocation Office, operating procedures necessary to carry out these functions.

2200.11 To the extent permitted by law, the D.C. Department of Human Services and other departments and agencies administering public assistance, job training and placement, vocational rehabilitation, health, welfare, and other programs shall cooperate with and assist the Relocation Office in providing displaced individuals and families services and assistance that they may require which they are eligible to receive.

2200.12 Individuals and families who are displaced, and those who are displaced by local code enforcement from property acquired by the United States or the District for public works projects or from property condemned or vacated as unsafe and insanitary as the result of enforcement of District laws and regulations relating to housing, shall, with respect to vacancies occurring in housing owned or operated within the District by federal or District agencies, be given the same preference provided to displaced families by §8(b) of the District of Columbia Redevelopment Act of 1945, as amended (D.C. Code §5-807(b)).

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: §5 of the Act approved October 6, 1964 (78 Stat. 1004; D.C. Code §5-833), §402(130) of Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1967, D.C. Code 1967, Title I, Appendix at 154, and §209 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1894; D.C. Code §5-834).*
- *SOURCE: §§102, 103, 104, 303, 403, 601, 602 and 603 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2201** ELIGIBILITY FOR RELOCATION SERVICES AND ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b2201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2201}

2201.1 All persons displaced on or after February 13, 1973, because of the acquisition of real property by the District or an order to vacate by the District or a court of competent jurisdiction by virtue of the condemnation of unsafe and insanitary buildings or the enforcement of laws and regulations relating to housing shall be eligible for relocation services and assistance.

2201.2 Assistance and relocation services (but not payments) shall be offered to any person occupying property immediately adjacent to that acquired for a District public works project whenever the Mayor determines that the person has been or will be caused substantial economic injury because of the acquisition.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §301 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 605 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2202** RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RELOCATION OFFICE {#sec-10-b2202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2202}

2202.1 The Relocation Office shall provide services which may be necessary or appropriate in order to do the following:

(a) Determine the need, if any, of displaced persons and of persons displaced by local code enforcement for relocation assistance;

(b) Provide for displaced persons and for those displaced by local code enforcement current and continuing information on the availability, prices, and rentals of comparable decent, safe, and sanitary housing including units available for sales or rent, and of comparable commercial properties and locations for displaced businesses;

(c) Assist a person displaced from his or her place of business in obtaining and becoming established in a suitable replacement location;

(d) Supply information concerning federal and District housing, loan, and other programs offering assistance to displaced persons and to those displaced by local code enforcement;

(e) Provide other advisory services to displaced persons and to those displaced by local code enforcement in order to minimize hardships and inconvenience to those persons in adjusting to relocation; and

(f) Provide relocation services and assistance to eligible persons, including notifying and informing site occupants of the necessity and reason for their displacement, and by referring individuals and families to appropriate public and private agencies for needed social and welfare services.

2202.2 Upon notification by the Mayor that it is appropriate to do so, the Relocation Office shall provide persons occupying property to be acquired by the District a written statement informing the occupants that the property may be acquired, and shall advise them of the availability of relocation services and assistance, and of the availability of a copy of this chapter.

2202.3 Owners of occupied properties shall also be furnished the information statements required by §2202.2 by the District.

2202.4 Written statements shall be provided to persons displaced by local code enforcement informing them of the availability of relocation services and assistance and of a copy of this chapter.

2202.5 In the case of Federal-aid highway projects, a notice in lieu of the statement required in §2202.2 shall be furnished in accordance with the requirements of section II of the Federal Highway Administration Instructional Memorandum, No. 80-1-71, dated April 30, 1971, and any subsequent amendments to that memorandum.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §302 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 606 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2203** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2203}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2204** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2204}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2205** STANDARDS FOR RELOCATION HOUSING {#sec-10-b2205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2205}

2205.1 Only dwelling and rooming units in compliance with the provisions of D.C. Housing Code (Title 14 DCMR) and other applicable laws and regulations shall be considered decent, safe, and sanitary and offered as permanent relocation housing for families and individuals.

2205.2 Permanent relocation housing shall be within the ability of the family or individual to pay and shall be reasonably accessible to places of employment, transportation, and other facilities.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §401 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 607 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2206** INSPECTIONS {#sec-10-b2206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2206}

2206.1 The D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs shall inspect relocation housing units and shall furnish reports on those housing units that may be requested by the Relocation Office.

2206.2 Inspections may be requested to determine whether housing units proposed for replacement dwellings or already occupied as replacement dwellings, are decent, safe, and sanitary under the D.C. Housing Code (Title 14 DCMR).

**History**
- *SOURCE: §402 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 608 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2207** TEMPORARY RELOCATION HOUSING {#sec-10-b2207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2207}

2207.1 Families and individuals for whom displacement is proposed and for whom permanent relocation housing is not immediately available, may be rehoused temporarily in any vacant housing owned by the District, or in other appropriate housing; Provided, that this temporary use shall not delay construction activities at the particular project site.

2207.2 Temporary relocation shall be authorized for the following purposes:

(a) To protect families and individuals from hazardous conditions;

(b) To expedite the clearance and redevelopment of a project site; or

2207.3 Where practicable, temporary relocation shall be limited to a period of not more than twelve (12) months.

2207.4 Temporary relocation housing shall be in habitable condition.

2207.5 Temporary relocation housing shall meet the following standards:

(a) It shall be equipped with operable plumbing, heating, and electrical systems; and

(b) It shall be free of structural or other conditions that may be hazardous to the health and safety of the occupants.

2207.6 The cost of a temporary relocation shall be charged to management costs and shall in no way affect the eligibility of the displaced individual or family for a relocation payment or the Agency's obligation to provide permanent relocation housing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §404 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 608 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2208** EVICTION {#sec-10-b2208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2208}

2208.1 Persons occupying any building or property owned by the District shall be subject to eviction for the following reasons:

(a) Non-payment of rent;

(b) Use of the premises for an illegal purpose or in violation of the rental agreement;

(d) Refusal to admit to the premises representatives of the Relocation Office or of any agency or department cooperating with that office; or

(e) For the use of the premises in any manner that would constitute grounds for eviction under District laws.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §405 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 609 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2209** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2209}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2210** RELOCATION PAYMENTS: GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b2210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2210}

2210.1 The Relocation Office shall administer the relocation payments program in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, and shall be responsible for determining the eligibility of each displacee for a relocation payment and the amount of payment.

2210.2 Appropriate records, with supporting documentation, shall be maintained by the Relocation Office with respect to each claim.

2210.3 A person shall be eligible to receive payments incurred in moving if he or she is in occupancy of property on the date of acquisition, or if he or she meets any one (1) of the following occupancy criteria:

(a) The person is in occupancy at the initiation of negotiations for the acquisition of the real property in whole or in part;

(b) The person is in occupancy at the time he or she is furnished a written notice by the District that it intends to acquire the property by a given date, and moves the real property or moves his or her personal property from the real property and the real property is subsequently acquired; or

(c) The person is in occupancy at the time he or she is given a written notice to vacate by the District (except in the case of a person displaced by local code enforcement), and moves his or her personal property from the real property, whether or not that real property is subsequently acquired.

2210.4 Payments may be made to an eligible claimant for actual and reasonable expenses incurred in moving himself or herself, his or her family, business, and personal property, including the cost of the following:

(a) Transportation not exceeding a distance of fifty (50) miles from the site of displacement, except when the Relocation Office determines that relocation beyond that distance is justified;

(b) Packing and unpacking, and crating and uncrating personal property;

(d) Storage of personal property for a period generally not exceeding twelve (12) months if the Relocation Office determines that storage is necessary in connection with relocation;

(e) Insuring personal property while in storage or transit;

(f) Disconnecting, dismantling, or removing and reassembling, reconnecting, and reinstalling machinery, equipment, or other personal property (including utilities and goods and inventory kept for sale) not acquired by the District; Provided, that the cost of any addition, improvement, alteration, or other physical change in or to any structure in connection with effecting the reassembly, reconnection, or reinstallation shall not be included as a moving expense unless the Relocation Office determines that the addition, improvement, alteration, or other physical change is required by law or regulation or is necessary to the reinstallation of the personal property;

(g) Replacing personal property lost, stolen, or damaged (not through the fault of negligence of the claimant, his or her agent, or employee) in the process of moving, where that loss, theft, or damage is not covered by insurance; and

(h) An item of personal property that is used in connection with a business or nonprofit organization which is not moved, but is replaced with a comparable item. Reimbursement shall not exceed the replacement cost, less proceeds received from the sale of the item or the estimated cost of moving, whichever is less.

2210.5 When an owner retains ownership of his or her dwelling, the cost of moving the dwelling shall not be reimbursable as personal property. However, if he or she uses his or her dwelling as a means of moving personal property, the owner may be eligible for moving expenses on the basis of a fixed payment.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §501(d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 611 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2211** MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY OF THE SAME DWELLING UNIT {#sec-10-b2211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2211}

2211.1 If two (2) or more eligible families occupy the same single-family dwelling unit, each family shall be eligible for moving expenses and a replacement housing payment, if each relocates to separate dwelling units.

2211.2 Two (2) or more eligible individuals without an identifiable head of the household, who occupy the same family dwelling unit, shall be considered to be one (1) "family" for purposes of fixed payment moving expenses and for replacement housing payments. Each eligible individual may claim reimbursement for actual moving expenses.

2211.3 When all eligible individuals under §2211.2 do not relocate to decent, safe, and sanitary housing, the Relocation Office, in computing the replacement housing payment, shall determine and pay to those individuals who relocate into decent, safe, and sanitary housing a pro rata share of the appropriate payment that would have been received had all those individuals relocated together in the same ownership or rental status they had at the time of initiation of negotiations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §501(d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 611 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2212** JOINT RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS USE {#sec-10-b2212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2212}

2212.1 Displaced individuals or families occupying living quarters on the same premises as a displaced business, shall be considered separate persons for purposes of determining entitlement to relocation payments.

2212.2 The owner-occupant of a multi-family dwelling shall, in addition to the payment for the moving of his or her own person property, also be eligible to receive moving payments under §2216 for the other units of the multi-family dwelling.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §501(e) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 612 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2213** INSPECTIONS, APPRAISALS, AND TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS {#sec-10-b2213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2213}

2213.1 Any person claiming relocation payments in accordance with this chapter shall permit inspection by the Relocation Office at reasonable times of all personal property which he or she intends to move and the premises to which that personal property is to be moved. Any person refusing to comply with the requirements of this subsection shall be ineligible to receive relocation payments.

2213.2 The Relocation Office shall obtain the services of appraisers, estimators, or engineers when necessary in connection with the determination of reasonable and necessary moving expenses, direct loss of property, and replacement housing payments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §§501(f) and (h) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 612 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2214** HARDSHIP CASES {#sec-10-b2214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2214}

2214.1 Where hardship is established to the satisfaction of the Relocation Office, relocation payments may be paid to eligible claimants in advance of the move.

2214.2 Hardship payments shall be limited to the amount necessary to alleviate the hardship related to the relocation of the claimant, and shall not exceed the total amount to which the claimant may be entitled.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §501(g) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 612 (February 21, 1973),*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2215** DIRECT PAYMENTS TO MOVERS {#sec-10-b2215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2215}

2215.1 An approved payment may be made directly to the mover or other contractor; Provided, that the method of payment shall have been agreed to in writing by the Relocation Office, the claimant, and the mover or other contractor. A claimant may assign all or a portion of a fixed payment for this purpose.

2215.2 The Relocation Office, the Agency, and the District shall not pay to a mover or other contractor any amount of any payment that may be disqualified, set off, or disallowed, either through default or failure of the claimant to meet the requirements of this chapter, or because the claimant is indebted to the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §501(h) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 613 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2216** PAYMENTS TO BUSINESSES: MOVING EXPENSES {#sec-10-b2216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2216}

2216.1 An owner of a displaced business shall be eligible to receive the actual reasonable costs, as defined in §2210.4, of a move accomplished by a commercial mover. These expenses shall be substantiated by receipted bills.

2216.2 The Relocation Office may obtain, as a project expense, two (2) bids or estimates for each move expected to cost over five thousand dollars ($5,000) in order to determine the reasonableness of the moving cost.

2216.3 Except for reasons beyond control of the claimant and found justifiable by the Relocation Office, no moving expense payment shall be made unless, at least thirty (30) days prior to moving, the business concern furnishes the Relocation Office a written notice of its intention to move, setting forth the address to which it expects to move and a list which generally identifies the property to be moved.

2216.4 An owner of a displaced business who moves himself or herself may be paid an amount, limited to out-of-pocket expenses, not to exceed the estimated cost of accomplishing the move commercially based upon two (2) bids or estimates.

2216.5 If in the judgment of the Relocation Office no bids or estimates can be obtained, the owner shall be paid the actual reasonable moving costs substantiated by receipted bills or other evidence or expenses incurred.

2216.6 When personal property used in connection with the business to be moved is of high bulk-low value and the estimated cost of moving that property is disproportionate in relation to its value, the owner shall be paid an amount negotiated with respect to that property not to exceed the difference between the cost of comparable personal property on the market and the amount which would have been received for that property if liquidated.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(a) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 613 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2217** PAYMENTS TO BUSINESSES: LOSS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY {#sec-10-b2217 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2217}

2217.1 An owner of a displaced business shall be reimbursed for actual direct losses of tangible personal property when the owner is entitled to relocate that personal property in whole or in part and elects not to do so.

2217.2 Payment. for actual direct losses shall be made only after a bona fide effort has been made by the owner to sell the personal property involved.

2217.3 If the business is to be reestablished and the personal property is sold and not moved, but is promptly replaced with comparable property at the new location, reimbursement shall be the lesser of the following:

(a) The replacement cost minus the net proceeds of the sale, or

(b) The estimated cost of moving the personal property.

2217.4 If the personal property is sold and if the business is to be discontinued or the personal property is not to be replaced in the re-established business, reimbursement shall be the lesser of the following:

(a) The difference between the depreciated value of the property in place and the net proceeds of the sale; or

(b) The estimated cost of moving the personal property.

2217.5 If a bona fide sale is not effected because no offer is received for the personal property, payments shall include the reasonable expenses of the attempted sale, in addition to the fair market value of the personal property for continued use, not to exceed the estimated cost of moving the property for a distance of fifty (50) miles.

2217.6 If the personal property is abandoned without efforts on the part of the owner to dispose of it by sale or removal, no payment shall be made for moving expenses or losses with respect to the property.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 614 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2218** COSTS OF SEARCHING FOR A NEW BUSINESS LOCATION {#sec-10-b2218 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2218}

2218.1 An owner of a displaced business shall be reimbursed for the actual reasonable expenses of searching for a replacement business.

2218.2 The payment under this section shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500), unless the Relocation Office determines that a greater amount is justified because of exceptional circumstances.

2218.3 Expenses may include the cost of transportation, meals, lodging away from home, and the reasonable value of time actually spent in search, including the fees of real estate brokers or agents.

2218.4 Payment for time actually spent in search shall be based upon the applicable hourly wage rate of the person conducting the search, but shall not exceed ten dollars ($10) per hour.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(c) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 615 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2219** PAYMENTS TO BUSINESSES IN LIEU OF ACTUAL EXPENSES {#sec-10-b2219 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2219}

2219.1 Payment may be made to an owner of a displaced business in place of actual expenses and property losses as provided in §§2216 through 2218.

2219.2 Payments in place of actual expenses shall be equal to the average annual net earnings of the business; Provided, that no payment shall be less than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) or more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000).

2219.3 For the purposes of this subsection, the term "average annual net earnings" shall mean one-half (1/2) of the net earnings of the business, before federal or other income taxes, during the two (2) taxable years immediately preceding the taxable year in which the business is relocated. The term shall also include any compensation paid by the business to the owner, to his or her spouse, or to his or her dependents during the two (2) year period.

2219.4 Payments in place of expenses under this section shall be made only if the following conditions apply:

(a) The business cannot be relocated without a substantial loss of its existing patronage, which shall be determined only after consideration of all pertinent circumstances, including, but not limited to, the following factors:

(1) The type of business;

(2) The nature of the clientele; and

(3) The relative importance of the present and proposed location and the availability of a suitable replacement location;

(b) The business is not part of a commercial enterprise having at least one (1) other establishment which is not being acquired by any governmental agency and which is engaged in the same or similar business; and

2219.5 If the owner of the business affected can show that the business was in operation for twelve (12) consecutive months during the two (2) taxable years prior to the taxable year in which it is required to relocate, had income during that period, and is otherwise eligible, payment in place of actual moving expenses shall be made to the owner of that business.

2219.6 If the business was in operation for twelve (12) consecutive months or more but was not in operation during the entire two (2) preceding taxable years, the payment shall be computed by dividing the net earnings by the number of months the business was operated and multiplying that number by twelve (12). For this purpose, a taxable year shall be considered the twelve (12) month period used by the business in filing income tax returns.

2219.7 To be entitled to a payment in place of moving expenses, the owner of a business shall substantiate the claimed net earnings by furnishing documents such as copies of District or federal tax returns for the tax years in question, certified financial statements, or sworn affidavits stating his or her net earnings. The unsubstantiated statement of an owner alone shall not suffice for this purpose.

2219.8 The Relocation Office shall have the right to review the records and accounts of the business.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 615 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2220** MOVING PAYMENTS TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS {#sec-10-b2220 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2220}

2220.1 A nonprofit organization may be eligible to receive payments for actual reasonable moving expenses, actual direct losses of tangible personal property, and actual reasonable expenses of searching for a replacement site to the same extent as provided for a displaced business.

2220.2 A nonprofit organization may elect to receive a payment in place of actual expenses in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) when the Relocation Office determines the following:

(a) That the nonprofit organization cannot be relocated without a substantial loss of its existing patronage. The term "existing patronage" as used in connection with nonprofit organizations, includes the persons, community, or clientele served or affected by the activities of the nonprofit organization;

(b) That the nonprofit organization is not part of a commercial enterprise having at least one (1) other establishment not being acquired which is engaged in the same or similar activity; and

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(e) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 617 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2221** DISPLACED ADVERTISING SIGNS {#sec-10-b2221 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2221}

2221.1 An owner of a displaced advertising sign may be eligible to receive the actual reasonable costs of a move accomplished by a commercial mover.

2221.2 In any case in which the owner of a displaced sign moves it himself or herself, the owner may be paid an amount, based upon two (2) firm bids or estimates, not in excess of the estimated cost of accomplishing the move commercially.

2221.3 If in the judgment of the Relocation Office no bids or estimates can be obtained, the owner shall be paid his or her actual reasonable moving costs if substantiated by receipted bills or other evidence of expenses incurred.

2221.4 The owner of a displaced advertising sign may be eligible for reimbursement for actual direct losses when he or she is entitled to relocate the sign, but does not do so. The amount of reimbursement shall be the depreciated reproduction cost of the sign or the estimated cost of moving the sign, whichever is less.

2221.5 The owner of a displaced advertising sign may be eligible for reimbursement for the actual reasonable expenses of searching for a replacement sign site, but the payment shall not exceed one hundred dollars ($100). Expenses may include the cost of transportation, meals, lodging away from home, and the fees of real estate brokers or agents.

2221.6 Payment for the time actually spent in search shall be based on the applicable hourly wage rate of the person conducting the search, but shall not exceed ten dollars ($10) per hour.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §502(f) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 617 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2222** MOVING PAYMENTS TO INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILIES {#sec-10-b2222 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2222}

2222.1 A person displaced from his residence may be eligible to receive either of the following optional moving payments:

(a) Reimbursement for the actual and reasonable expenses of moving his or her person property, himself or herself, and his or her family; or

(b) A two hundred dollar ($200) dislocation allowance, plus a fixed payment not to exceed three hundred dollars ($300) according to the schedule established July 12, 1971, by the Federal Highway Administration, as amended, which is applicable to the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(a) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 618 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2223** PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING: LONG-TERM OWNERS {#sec-10-b2223 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2223}

2223.1 A displaced person who is the owner and occupant of a dwelling for one hundred eighty (180) days before initiation of negotiations shall be eligible to receive an additional payment, not to exceed a total of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), to cover the following:

(a) The cost necessary to purchase replacement housing;

(b) Compensation for the loss of favorable financing on his or her existing mortgage in the financing of replacement housing; and

(c) Reimbursement of expenses incidental to the purchase of replacement housing when those costs are incurred as specified in this section.

2223.2 The owner-occupant shall be eligible for the payments if the following conditions are met:

(a) He or she is in occupancy at the initiation of negotiations for the acquisition of the real property, in whole or in part, or at the time he or she is furnished a written notice by the District that it intends to acquire the property by a specified date, and the occupancy has been for at least one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days immediately prior to the date of initiation of negotiations;

(b) The property was acquired from him or her by the District, and he or she relocates and occupies a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within one (1) year beginning on one (1) of the following dates, whichever is the latest:

(1) The date the owner receives from the District final payment for all costs of the acquired dwelling in any negotiated settlement, or, in the case of condemnation, the date the District deposits the required amount in court in a condemnation proceeding;

(2) The date the owner is required to move in accordance with a written notice to vacate issued by the District; or

(3) The date the owner moves, if earlier than the date stated in the notice to vacate on which he or she is required to move.

2223.3 A displaced owner-occupant who enters into a contract for the construction or rehabilitation of a replacement dwelling, and, for reasons beyond his or her control, is unable to occupy the replacement dwelling within the time period described in this section shall be deemed to have purchased and occupied the dwelling as of the date of the contract.

2223.4 The replacement housing payment shall be the amount, if any, which, when added to the amount paid for the property by the District at acquisition, equals the actual cost which the owner pays for a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling, or the amount which the Relocation Office determines on the basis of approved schedules, comparables, or other approved method, to be necessary to purchase a comparable dwelling, whichever amount is less.

2223.5 Increased interest payments shall be provided to compensate a displaced person for the increased interest cost he or she is required to pay for financing a replacement dwelling if the deed of trust was a valid lien on the acquired dwelling for at least one hundred eighty (180) days prior to initiation of negotiations.

2223.6 Increased interest payments under §2223.5 shall be equal to the difference between the following:

(a) The aggregate interest and other debt service costs of the amount of the principal of the deed of trust on the replacement dwelling, limited to the unpaid balance of the deed of trust on the acquired dwelling over its remaining term at the time of acquisition, and reduced to discounted present values, and

(b) The aggregate interest and other debt service costs paid on the deed of trust on the acquired dwelling.

2223.7 In making the computation required by §2223.6, the aggregate interest and other debt service costs with respect to the replacement dwelling shall not exceed the prevailing interest rate currently charged by mortgage lending institutions in the District, or, if the replacement dwelling is located outside of the District, in the area in which the dwelling is located.

2223.8 The discount rate for computing the present worth of future payments of increased interest shall be computed at the prevailing interest rate paid on savings deposits by commercial banks in the District or in the area where the replacement dwelling is located.

2223.9 A payment for incidental expenses shall be provided to compensate a displaced person for costs incident to the purchase of a replacement dwelling and shall be the amount necessary to reimburse that person for actual incidental costs. These costs may include the following:

(a) Legal, closing, and related costs, including title search, preparing conveyance contracts, notary fees, surveys, preparing drawings or plats, and charges paid incident to recordation;

(b) Lenders, Federal Housing Administration, or Veterans Administration appraisals;

(d) Certifications of structural soundness;

(e) Credit Reports;

(f) Owner's and mortgagee's evidency or assurance of title;

(g) Escrow agent's fees; and

(h) Sales or transfer taxes.

2223.10 No reimbursement shall be made for any fee, cost, charge, or expense which is determined to be part of the debt service of finance charge under Title I of the Truth in Lending Act (Public Law 90-321), and Regulation "Z" (12 CFR Part 226) issued pursuant to that Act by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 618 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2224** PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING: SHORT-TERM OWNERS {#sec-10-b2224 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2224}

2224.1 A displaced person who is the owner and occupant of a dwelling and is otherwise eligible under §2223.2, except that he or she has owned and occupied the dwelling for less than one hundred eighty (180) days, but not less than ninety (90) days prior to the initiation of negotiations, shall be eligible to receive an amount, not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000) for the following:

(a) A downpayment on the purchase of a replacement dwelling;

(b) Reimbursement of actual expenses incidental to the purchase; or

2224.2 Upon purchase and occupancy of a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within the time limits specified in §2223.2, a displaced person covered by this section shall be eligible for the following:

(a) That amount of the downpayment which is determined by the Relocation Office as equivalent to the downpayment required on a comparable dwelling financed with a conventional loan, plus the eligible incidental expenses, when the total amount does not exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000); or

(b) An amount equal to two thousand dollars ($2,000) plus fifty percent (50%) of the amount in excess of two thousand dollars ($2,000); Provided, that the displaced person shall contribute fifty percent (50%) of the amount in excess of two thousand dollars ($2,000) when the downpayment, plus incidental expenses, is more than two thousand dollars ($2,000).

2224.3 The full amount received for a downpayment under §2224.2 shall be applied to the purchase price and incidental expenses, and the downpayment and incidental costs claimed shall be shown in the closing statement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 622 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2225** PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING: TENANTS {#sec-10-b2225 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2225}

2225.1 A displaced person who is a tenant of a dwelling and who is eligible for a rental replacement housing payment under §2227, and who elects to purchase a replacement dwelling, shall be eligible to receive an amount, not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000), for a downpayment on the purchase of a replacement dwelling, including the expenses incidental to the purchase.

2225.2 Upon purchase and occupancy of a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within one (1) year from the date of completion of the move, the displaced person shall be eligible for the following:

(a) That amount of the downpayment which is determined by the Relocation Office as equivalent to the downpayment required on a comparable dwelling financed with a conventional loan, plus eligible incidental expenses, when the total amount thereof does not exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000); or

2225.3 The full amount received for a downpayment shall be applied to the purchase price and incidental expenses, and the downpayment and incidental costs claimed must be shown in the closing statement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 622 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2226** PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING: ROOMERS {#sec-10-b2226 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2226}

2226.1 A displaced person who is the tenant of a sleeping room and who is eligible for a replacement housing payment under §2227 shall be eligible to receive an amount, not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000), for a downpayment on the purchase of a replacement dwelling, including the expenses incidental to the purchase.

2226.2 Upon purchase and occupancy of a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within one (1) year of the date of completion of the move, the displaced person shall be eligible for the following:

(a) That amount of the downpayment which is determined by the Relocation Office as equivalent to the downpayment required on a comparable dwelling financed with a conventional loan, plus eligible incidental expenses, when the total amount of the downpayment and expenses does not exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000); or

(b) An amount equal to two thousand dollars ($2,000) plus fifty percent (50%) of the amount in excess of two thousand dollars (2,000); Provided, that the displaced person shall contribute fifty percent (50%) of the amount in excess of two thousand dollars ($2,000) when the downpayment, plus incidental expenses, is more than two thousand dollars ($2,000).

2226.3 The full amount received for a downpayment shall be applied to the purchase price and incidental expenses, and the downpayment and incidental costs claimed must be shown in the closing statement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 623 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2227** RENTAL OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING {#sec-10-b2227 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2227}

2227.1 A displaced person who is the owner and occupant of a dwelling, and who is otherwise eligible under §2223, and who elects to rent a replacement dwelling, shall be eligible for a rental replacement housing payment not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000) for a period not to exceed four (4) years.

2227.2 The payment under §2227.1 shall be determined by subtracting from the amount necessary to rent a comparable dwelling for the next four (4) years, forty-eight (48) times the economic rent for the acquired dwelling as determined by the Relocation Office. The payment shall not exceed the maximum amount the owner-occupant would have been paid if the owner-occupant had elected to receive a replacement housing payment for the purchase of a replacement dwelling.

2227.3 A displaced person who is the owner and occupant of a dwelling, and who is otherwise eligible under §2223, except that he or she has owned and occupied the dwelling less than one hundred eighty (180) days, but not less than ninety (90) days, prior to the initiation of negotiations, and who elects to rent a replacement dwelling, shall be eligible for a rental replacement housing payment not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000) for a period not to exceed four (4) years, as provided in §2227.2.

2227.4 A displaced person who is a tenant of a dwelling for ninety (90) days before the initiation of negotiations shall be eligible for a rental replacement housing payment, not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000), over a period not to exceed four (4) years if that person rents and occupies a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within one (1) year from the date of completion of the move.

2227.5 The payment shall be determined by subtracting from the amount necessary to rent a comparable dwelling for the next four (4) years or forty-eight (48) times the actual rent paid for the replacement dwelling, whichever is less, forty-eight (48) times the average monthly rental paid three (3) months before acquisition.

2227.6 If the rent paid before acquisition is not reasonable, the economic rent, or fair rental value as established by the District, shall be used in computing the payment.

2227.7 When the average monthly rental computed exceeds twenty-five percent (25%) of the monthly gross income, the computation shall be based on twenty-five percent (25%) of the monthly gross income.

2227.8 A displaced person who is the tenant of a sleeping room for ninety (90) days prior to the initiation of negotiations, and who rents and occupies a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling within one (1) year of the completion of the move shall be eligible for a rental replacement housing payment not to exceed four thousand dollars ($4,000), over a period not to exceed four (4) years, to be computed in the same manner as for the tenant of a dwelling under §2227.2.

2227.9 The owner-occupant of a dwelling for one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the initiation of negotiations who rents replacement housing and subsequently purchases a home within the prescribed time may receive a replacement housing payment for the purchase of a dwelling if he or she meets the requirements of §2223. Any amount previously received as a rental replacement housing payment shall be deducted from the second (2nd) claim.

2227.10 All rent replacement housing payments in excess of five hundred dollars ($500) shall be disbursed in four (4) equal installments on an annual basis.

2227.11 The first payment under §2227.10 shall be made only after the replacement dwelling has been found to be decent, safe, and sanitary, as defined in §2299.

2227.12 Subsequent annual payments, if any, shall be made only after the claimant certifies that he or she is occupying decent, safe, and sanitary housing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(c) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 624 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2228** ADVANCE PAYMENTS IN CONDEMNATION CASES {#sec-10-b2228 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2228}

2228.1 In cases where condemnation proceedings are pending, a provisional replacement housing payment may be calculated, based on the maximum offer for the property as the acquisition price.

2228.2 Payment may be made upon the owner-occupant's agreement to the following:

(a) That upon final determination of the condemnation proceeding the replacement housing payment will be recomputed using the acquisition price determined by the court as compared to the actual price paid or the amount determined necessary to acquire a comparable decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling; and

(b) That if the amount awarded in the condemnation proceedings plus the amount of the replacement housing payment already received exceeds the cost of a comparable dwelling or the actual amount paid for a replacement dwelling, he or she will refund to the District the excess amount.

2228.3 In no event shall the owner-occupant be required to refund more than the amount of the replacement housing payment advanced.

2228.4 If the property owner does not agree to the adjustment under §2228.2, the replacement housing payment shall be deferred until the case is finally adjudicated and shall then be computed on the basis of the final determination, using the award as the acquisition price.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 626 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2229** RETENTION OF HOME {#sec-10-b2229 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2229}

2229.1 The owner shall be allowed the option of retaining his or her dwelling except in areas where the relocation of the building would be inconsistent with the planned urban development.

2229.2 The owner of improvements or appurtenances on lands being acquired shall be allowed the option of retaining his or her improvements or appurtenances at a retention value predetermined by the District by comparison with improvements sold on the market. The predetermined value shall be made prior to the initiation of negotiations.

2229.3 The procedures and payments for purposes of §2229.2 shall conform to those set forth in FHWA PPM 80-5, paragraph 1(d), and IM 80-1071, §24(f).

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(e) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 626 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2230** COMPUTATION OF PAYMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT HOUSING {#sec-10-b2230 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2230}

2230.1 A claimant who is eligible for a replacement housing payment for rental or sales housing, may have the computation of his payment based upon either of the following:

(a) A schedule of the average sale or rental prices for comparable dwellings; or

(b) The sale or rental prices of three (3) comparable dwellings available on the market.

2230.2 The schedule under §2230.1(a) shall be determined in accordance with the following method:

(a) The Relocation Office shall establish a schedule of probable selling prices of dwelling comparable to the various types of dwelling being acquired and a schedule of probable rental prices of dwelling units comparable to the various types of rented dwellings being vacated;

(b) The schedules will be prepared from an analysis of the various selling and rental prices of dwelling available on the market and shall be updated periodically; and

2230.3 The schedule under §2230.1(b) shall be determined in accordance with the following method:

(a) The Relocation Office shall analyze the sale or rental prices of at least three (3) dwelling comparable to the acquired dwelling unit which are available on the market and which meet the criteria for a comparable dwelling as defined in this chapter;

(b) Less than three (3) comparables may be used when sufficient comparable dwellings are not available and the files are documented to this effect; and

(c) An adjustment of asking prices to selling prices shall be determined by comparing the asking prices and actual sale prices of recently sold dwellings, and a factor or percentage shall be developed representing the average difference between the asking price and actual sale price. This factor or percentage shall be kept current.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §503(f) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 627 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2231** SUBMISSION OF CLAIMS {#sec-10-b2231 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2231}

2231.1 All claims for payment shall be submitted on official forms provided by the Relocation Office, and shall be supported with documentation, as required by the office.

2231.2 All claims for payment shall be filed within eighteen (18) months of the completion of the move; except replacement housing payments for owner-occupants, which may be filed within eighteen (18) months from the completion of the move or eighteen (18) months from the date on which the District makes its final payment for the site dwelling, whichever is later.

2231.3 The time limitations set forth in §2231.2 may be waived by the Relocation Office upon a determination that failure to file within the prescribed time was for good cause.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §504(a) and (b) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 627 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2232** SETOFFS AND DUPLICATE PAYMENTS {#sec-10-b2232 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2232}

2232.1 The District may setoff against the claim of an otherwise eligible displaced person any claim which it may have against that person arising out of the use of real property owned by the District, subject to the qualifications set forth in this section.

2232.2 Before making a setoff, the District shall notify the displaced person of its intention to do so and shall advise him or her that he or she may within thirty (30) days file a statement challenging or opposing the setoff.

2232.3 If a statement challenging the proposed setoff is filed and the District institutes within thirty (30) days after the filing a judicial action to recover the amount claimed, it may tentatively set off the claim.

2232.4 If the District obtains a judgment for the amount claimed, or any part of the claim, the amount of the judgment shall constitute a final setoff.

2232.5 If judicial action on the claim is instituted by the District and judgment is denied for the whole claim, or if the District fails to institute judicial action, the District shall pay the full amount of the relocation claim for which the displaced person is eligible.

2232.6 No relocation payment shall be made from the District funds in any case where a payment for a similar purpose is authorized by an Act other than the Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §504(c) and (d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 628 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2233** REVIEW OF CLAIMS AND PAYMENTS {#sec-10-b2233 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2233}

2233.1 An person aggrieved by a determination as to eligibility for, or the amount of, a payment under this chapter may have his or her claim reviewed and reconsidered by the Mayor in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section. A person making a claim under this section shall be referred to as a "claimant."

2233.2 Whenever the Relocation Office denies the eligibility of a claimant for a payment, disapproves the full amount claimed, or refuses to consider the claim on its merits because of untimely filing or on any other ground, it shall notify the claimant in writing of its determination and the reasons for the determination. The Relocation Office shall also inform the claimant of the applicable procedures for the receipt and consideration by it of an appeal by the claimant of the determination.

2233.3 Any claimant who feels that the explanation accompanying the determination of the Relocation Office to deny or reduce the amount of his or her claim is incorrect or inadequate may request a full written explanation of the determination and the reasons for it.

2233.4 The request for a full written explanation shall be made within six (6) months of receipt of the initial determination.

2233.5 The Relocation Office shall provide the explanation requested under §2233.3 to the claimant within fifteen (15) days of its receipt of the claimant's request.

2233.6 A claimant shall be notified that, prior to filing a written complaint pursuant to §2234, he or she may request and be afforded an opportunity to make an oral presentation and to discuss his or her claim with a reviewing officer.

2233.7 The reviewing officer shall be a person other than the person who made the initial determination, and shall have the authority to revise the initial determination on the claim.

2233.8 The reviewing officer who hears an informal presentation pursuant to this section shall also review the formal appeal of the claimant if one is made.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §505(a) through (d) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 628 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2234** APPEAL OF REVIEW DETERMINATION {#sec-10-b2234 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2234}

2234.1 A claimant desiring review and reconsideration of the determination of the Relocation Office may file a written request for review of that determination with the Relocation Office.

2234.2 The written request for review under this section shall be made within six (6) months of the notification to the claimant of the Relocation Office's determination under §2233, but in no event less than twenty-one (21) days following the Relocation Office's notification to the claimant of its determination.

2234.3 The time period specified in §2234.2 shall be extended if necessary so that a claimant who previously requested a full written explanation pursuant to §2233 shall have no less than twenty-one (21) days from his or her receipt of that written explanation within which to file his or her request for review and reconsideration.

2234.4 The claimant may include in his or her request for review any statement of facts within his or her knowledge or belief, or other material which he or she feels has a direct bearing on the appeal.

2234.5 If the claimant requests more time to gather, prepare, and submit additional material for consideration or review, he or she shall be granted an additional twenty-one (21) days from the date of his or her request for review.

2234.6 The Relocation Office shall issue a statement of its findings on review within thirty (30) days from receipt of the last material submitted for consideration by the claimant in accordance with §2234.4 or §2234.5.

2234.7 In the case of complaints dismissed for untimeliness or for any other reason not based on the merits of the claim, the Relocation Office shall issue its statement of findings within ten (10) days from receipt of the last material submitted by the claimant.

2234.8 The reviewing office, who shall have the authority to revise the initial determination on the claim, and who shall be a person other than the person who made the initial determination, shall review the initial determination in light of the following:

(a) All material upon which the original determination was based, including all applicable rules and regulations;

(b) The reasons given by the claimant for requesting reconsideration and review of his or her claim;

(d) Any further information which the Relocation Office may, in its discretion, obtain by request, investigation, or research, to ensure fair and full review of the claim.

2234.9 The final determination on review by the Relocation Office shall include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) The decision on reconsideration of the claim;

(b) The factual and legal basis upon which the decision is based; and

**History**
- *SOURCE: §505(e) through (i) of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 629 (February 21, 1973).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2299** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2299 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2299}

2299.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1894; Public Law 91-646).

Agency - the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency.

Agreement - the Relocation Cooperation Agreement entered into between the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency (D.C.F.A. 2610), dated December 8, 1964, as amended December 5, 1969, and as the same may be further amended from time to time.

Comparable replacement dwelling - a dwelling which is the following:

(a) Decent, safe, and sanitary;

(b) Functionally equivalent and substantially the same as the acquired dwelling, but not excluding newly constructed housing;

(c) Adequate in size to meet the needs of the displaced family or individual or, at the option of the displaced person, which exceeds his or her needs when the replacement dwelling has the same number of rooms or the equivalent square footage as the acquired dwelling;

(d) Open to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, or national origin, consistent with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968;

(e) Located in an area not generally less desirable than the one in which the acquired dwelling is located, with respect to the neighborhood conditions, including but not limited to, municipal services and other environmental factors, public utilities, and public and commercial facilities;

(f) Reasonably accessible to the displaced person's place of employment;

(g) Within the financial means of the displaced family or individual; and

(h) Available on the market to the displaced person.

If housing that meets the requirements of this definition is not available on the market, and upon a proper finding of the need for that housing, available housing exceeding these basic criteria may be considered as meeting this definition.

Decent, safe, and sanitary housing - housing that is in sound, clean, and weather-tight condition, in conformance with the D.C. Housing Code (Title 14 DCMR), or other housing regulations comparable to the D.C. Housing Code, and other District laws or regulations.

Deed of Trust (mortgage) - that class of liens given to secure advances on, or the unpaid purchase price of, real property under the laws of the District, together with credit instruments, if any, secured by those liens.

Displaced by local code enforcement - families and individuals who are owners or occupants of real property who have been notified by the District to vacate the premises either because the premises are in violation, or are being used in violation, of District laws and regulations relating to housing.

District - the government of the District of Columbia.

Displaced person - any of the following:

(a) Any person who moves as a result of acquisition;

(b) Any person who is in occupancy at the initiation of negotiations for of the acquisition real property, in whole or in part, or is in occupancy at the time he or she is given a written notice by the District that it intents to acquire the property by a given date, and moves from the real property or moves his or her personal property from the real property, and the real property is subsequently acquired; or

(c) Any person who is in occupancy at the time he or she is given a written notice to vacate by the District (except in the case of local code enforcement) and moves from the real property or moves his or her personal property from the real property, whether or not the real property is subsequently acquired.

Dwelling - any single family house, a single-family unit within a multi-family building (including a non-housekeeping unit), a unit of a condominium or cooperative housing project, or any other residential unit.

Economic rent or Fair rental value - the amount of rent a displaced family or individual would have to pay for a comparable dwelling unit in an area similar to the neighborhood in which the dwelling unit to be acquired is located.

Initiation of negotiations - the date the District makes the first personal contact with an owner of property, or his or her designated representative, and furnishes him or her with a written offer to purchase the real property.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District, or his or her designated agents.

Owner - any individual(s) who own(s), legally or equitably, a fee simple estate, a life estate, a ninety-nine (99) year lease, or other proprietary interest in the property, or interest in a cooperative; who is the contract purchaser of any of these estates or interests; or who has succeeded to any of the foregoing interests by devise, bequest, inheritance, or operation of law. The tenure of ownership of one who obtains real property by devise, bequest, inheritance, or operation of law shall include the tenure of the preceding owner.

Person - any individual, family, partnership, corporation, or association. The term specifically includes the following:

(a) "Business" - any lawful activity conducted primarily as follows:

(1) For the purchase, sale, lease, and rental of personal and real property, and for the manufacture, processing, or marketing of products, commodities, or any other personal property;

(2) For the sale of services to the public;

(3) By a nonprofit organization; or

(4) Solely for the purpose of payments relating to moving and related expenses as provided in this chapter, for assisting in the purchase, sale, resale, manufacture, processing, or marketing of products, commodities, personal property, or services by the erection and maintenance of an outdoor advertising display or displays, whether or not such display or displays are located on the premises on which any business activities are conducted;

(b) "Family" - two (2) or more individuals, one (1) of whom is the head of a household, together with all other individuals regardless of blood or legalities who live with and are considered a part of the family unit. Two (2) or more individuals who occupy the same dwelling with no identifiable head of a household, shall be treated as one (1) family for replacement housing payment purposes;

(d) "Nonprofit organization" - a corporation, partnership, individual, or other public or private entity engaged in a business, professional, or institutional activity on a non-profit basis, necessitating fixtures, equipment, stock in trade, or other tangible property for carrying on of the business, profession, or institutional activity on the premises.

Personal property - tangible property which is situated on the real property vacated or to be vacated by a displaced person and which is considered personal property and is noncompensable (other than for moving expenses) under applicable District law of eminent domain, and, in the case of a tenant, fixtures and equipment, and other property which under District law are considered real property, but which the tenant may lawfully remove.

The determination as to whether an item of property is personal or real shall depend upon how it is identified in the acquisition appraisals or the closing or settlement statement with respect to the real property acquisitions, except that no item of property which is compensable under the District law to the owner of real property in the real property acquisition shall be treated as tangible personal property in computing actual direct losses of tangible personal property as provided in this chapter.

Relocation Office - the District of Columbia Relocation Assistance Office established within the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency, pursuant to §4 of the Act approved October 6, 1964 (78 Stat. 1004, D.C. Code §5-831 (1981)).

**History**
- *SOURCE: §201 of the Relocation Regulations, Regulation No. 73-4, 19 DCR 599, 601 (February 21, 1973).*

### **10-B23** LARGE TRACT REVIEW PROCEDURES

##### **10-B DCMR § 2300** PURPOSE AND SCOPE {#sec-10-b2300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2300}

2300.1 The Office of Planning, pursuant to this chapter, shall be to ensure that there is established a coordinated interagency review process in the District of Columbia to do the following:

(a) Review, prior to the filing of applications for building or construction permits, all large tract development projects comprising three (3) acres or more and any commercial or mixed-use commercial development of fifty thousand square feet (50,000 ft.2) or more gross floor area (above grade) and cellar area (below grade);

(b) Review, in the case of large tract development of ten (10) acres or more, all applications for subdivision authorizations and for multiple building convenants under § 108.7 of the District of Columbia Building Code (DCMR Title 12); and comprising three (3) to ten (10) acres, if in the judgment of the Director of the Office of Planning, such review is necessary; and

(c) Review requests for subdivisions of tracts and land comprising three (3) to ten (10) acres, if in the judgment of the Director of the Office of Planning such review is necessary.

2300.2 The goals of this chapter shall be the following:

(a) To minimize adverse environmental, traffic and neighborhood impacts;

(b) To avoid unnecessary public costs in terms of new services or facilities required of city agencies; and

(c) To carry out the policies of the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital (D.C. Law 5-76 and D.C. Law 5-187).

2300.3 The procedures of this chapter shall also serve a way for the developer of a large tract to consult and receive coordinated comments from city agencies and comments from the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANCs) prior to filing for necessary building or construction permits.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is Mayor’s Order 86-121, 33 DCR 5699 (September 12, 1986).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2301** APPLICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS {#sec-10-b2301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2301}

2301.1 All applicants for subdivision authorizations and for multiple building convenants under §108.7 of the District of Columbia Building Code (DCMR Title 12) shall submit to the Director, Department of Public Works, and an application for subdivision along with an application for certification under this chapter.

2301.2 Applicants for subdivision review shall submit to the Director, Department of Public Works, eight (8) copies of the following documents for subdivisions of three (3) acres or more:

(a) A completed certification form (forms shall be provided by the Office of Planning); and

(b) A study of site characteristics and conditions, containing the following:

(1) A description of existing topography, soil conditions, vegetation and drainage consisting of written material, plats, maps and photographs;

(2) Proposed topography including street grades and other grading contours;

(3) Identification of mature trees to remain and percent of site to be covered by impervious surface;

(4) Proposed drainage and sewer system and water distribution;

(5) Proposed treatment of existing natural features such as steep slopes, ravines, natural watercourses, etc.;

(6) Proposed method of solid waste collection; and

(7) Estimated water consumption (gallons per year).

(1) Proposed circulation system including general location of roadways, driveways and sidewalks;

(2) Relationship of the proposed circulation system to the District's street system;

(3) Estimated number and type of trips assumed to be generated by project, and assumed temporal and directional distribution;

(4) Accommodations for and use of parking and loading areas;

(5) Traffic management requirements (lights, stop signs, one-way streets, etc.);

(6) Relationship of the proposed project to the mass transit system (nearest bus stops and routes, nearest Metrorail stations, etc.);

(7) Before and after capacity analyses and level of service at critical intersections.

(d) A site plan or plans including, in addition to pertinent site condition and circulation information, the following:

(1) Subdivision plan;

(2) Approximate location and description of all structures;

(3) Type of ownership and management arrangement (fee simple, cooperative, condominium, etc.);

(4) Staging plan describing the phasing of construction if the project is not to be carried out all at one time;

(5) Information concerning any required new public facilities and estimated impact on existing public facilities other than streets or sewers (schools, recreation, police, fire, etc.) to assist in an assessment of such factors to be prepared by the Office of Planning; and

(6) Relationship of the proposed structure(s) to public space, both developed and redeveloped.

2301.3 Applicants for commercial and mixed-use commercial development projects of fifty thousand square feet (50,000 -ft.2) or more shall submit to the Director, Office of Planning, eight (8) copies of the following documents:

(a) A completed certification form (forms shall be provided by the Office of Planning);

(b) The name, address and signature of all owners, or their authorized agent, and of property included in the area to be developed. If there is an agent, the applicant shall provide written authorization and the extent of the agent's authority;

(d) A statement indicating the contribution of the project toward implementing city and community goals and policies;

(e) A statement indicating the relationship of the proposed development to the objectives of the District Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital;

(f) A general site and development plan, indicating the proposed use, location, dimensions, number of stories and height of building;

(g) A general circulation plan, including the location of vehicular and pedestrian access ways, other public space and the location and number of all off-street parking and loading spaces, loading berths and service delivery spaces;

(h) A typical floor plan;

(i) A general statement of the approximate schedule of building construction;

(j) Vehicular trip generation, trip assignment and before and after capacity analysis and level of service at critical intersections; and

(k) Any other information needed to fully understand the final building proposed for the site.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701. 7702 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2302** SCOPE OF REVIEW {#sec-10-b2302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2302}

2302.1 The scope of review to be used by District departments and agencies in assessing projects under this chapter shall include the following:

(a) Consistency with laws in the District of Columbia, including the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital and regulations enacted pursuant thereto;

(b) Potential traffic, neighborhood and design impact; and

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7705 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2303** REVIEW SCHEDULE {#sec-10-b2303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2303}

2303.1 Requests for review and certification submitted to the Office of Planning under this chapter shall be completed within sixty (60) days from the time of a submission or referral to the Office of Planning. If additional time is required, the applicant(s) affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission or affected property owners, shall receive written notice from the Director, Office of Planning.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7705 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2304** EXEMPTIONS {#sec-10-b2304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2304}

2304.1 The following areas and sites shall be exempted from the provisions of this chapter:

(a) Areas of the city that are currently within the C-3-C, C-4 and C-5 zoned districts;

(b) Campus Plans which have been approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment;

(d) All R-5-A projects which have been approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment;

(e) Office buildings located within the special purpose zoning districts which have been approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment;

(f) Projects that are submitted to the District of Columbia Zoning Commission under Title 11 DCMR, §2400, "Planned Unit Development," of the Zoning Regulations of the District of Columbia;

(g) Properties owned or controlled by the Redevelopment Land Agency;

(h) Federal and District owned properties;

(i) Properties under the auspices of the Architect of the Capitol; and

(j) Projects that are currently under Large Tract Review by the Office of Planning as of July 28, 1986.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7705 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2305** AGENCY PROCEDURAL RESPONSIBILITIES {#sec-10-b2305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2305}

2305.1 The Directors of the Department of Public Works, Consumer and Regulatory Affairs and the Office of Planning shall be responsible for establishing and ensuring agency compliance with the policies set forth in this chapter; any rules, regulations, and procedures that may be adopted by the respective departments and offices pursuant to this chapter; and any other subsection as may be added.

2305.2 The Director, Office of Planning, shall coordinate the review of all commercial or mixed-use commercial development proposals of fifty thousand gross square feet (50,000 ft.2 or more as well as proposals involving three (3) acres or more.

2305.3 The Director, Office of Planning, upon receipt of large tract review requests shall advise the applicant of the prospective coordinated review and request that required documentation be submitted in accordance with §2301. Upon completion of the technical review, the Director, Office of Planning, shall initiate negotiations with the applicant to implement the spirit and intent of the recommendations.

2305.4 The Director, Department of Public Works, shall refer to the Director, Office of Planning, all applications for subdivisions of tracts comprising three (3) acres or more, whether or not changes to existing municipal regulations are required; and

2305.5 The Director, Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, shall refer to the Director, Office of Planning, all requests for multiple building convenants made in connection with development of tracts comprising three (3) acres or more, whether or not changes to existing municipal regulations are required. In addition, the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs shall refer to the Office of Planning all commercial or mixed-use commercial development proposals of fifty thousand gross square feet (50,000 ft.2) or more prior to accepting such proposal(s) for building and/or construction permits.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7706 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2306** AGENCY AND PUBLIC NOTICE {#sec-10-b2306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2306}

2306.1 The Office of Planning shall establish interagency review procedures and ensure that all affected District government agencies and departments are given notice and provided copies of the submissions. The affected agencies and departments shall include the Departments of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Public Works, Fire Department, Metropolitan Police Department, and the Office of the Corporation Counsel.

2306.2 The Office of Planning shall mail notice of the applications to the following:

(a) The Advisory Neighborhood Commission within which the property in question is located;

(b) To all known citizen groups within the Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC); and

(c) To property owners within two hundred feet (200 ft.) of the perimeter of the property. (Applicant to supply names and addresses of property owners within two hundred feet.).

2306.3 A period of thirty (30) days from the date of dispatch of the notice shall be allowed to receive comments of organizations and persons notified.

2306.4 The Office of Planning shall set up a technical conference between the applicant and affected city agencies to review the submissions and on request, will provide a similar technical briefing to the Advisory Neighborhood Commission(s).

2306.5 Following the technical and neighborhood conferences the Office of Planning shall obtain agency comments and coordinate a draft report, which shall include recommendations concerning the applicant's site plan, circulation proposals, and other materials submitted. Copies of the report shall be submitted to affected District agencies, the applicant and the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission(s).

2306.6 The Director, Office of Planning shall issue copies of the final technical report and a statement that the process has been completed. Copies of the final report shall be mailed to the applicant, affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANCs), citizens and agencies and departments of the District government. The applicant shall contact the Office of Planning to determine if any follow-up actions are required.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7707 (December 12, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2399** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2399 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2399}

2399.1 When used in this chapter. the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA) - established in the 1938 Zoning Act to resolve minor disputes over the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance.

District - the District of Columbia.

District Element - a title of the plan adopted by the District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984.

Large Tract - any project comprising three (3) acres or more and any commercial or mixed-use commercial development of fifty thousand (50,000) or more gross floor area (above grade) and cellar area (below grade).

Mixed-Use Commercial - office and retail uses as well as service establishment.

Office of Planning - established by Mayor's Order No. 83-25, effective January 3, 1983 (30 DCR 334).

Redevelopment Land Agency - established in 1944 by Congress to implement urban renewal plans.

Subdivision - established by Mayor's Order No. 67-651a, revised May 16, 1967, in which the 1938 regulations for the District of Columbia read as follows: subdivision is the division or assembly of land into one or more lots of record.

Zoning Regulations - rules which control and restrict the heights, bulk, number or stories and size of buildings and other structures, the open spaces around them, the density of population within them, and the uses of buildings, structures and land in the District of Columbia, and for the purposes dividing the District of Columbia into zoning districts.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 7701, 7708 (December 12, 1986).*

### **10-B24** CHINATOWN DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES

##### **10-B DCMR § 2400** PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REVIEW {#sec-10-b2400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2400}

2400.1 The purpose of this chapter is to establish a review process relating to applications for permits in Chinatown that the Director of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs is required to refer to the Director of the Office of Planning pursuant to Mayor's Order No. 89-132, dated June 9, 1989.

2400.2 The Director shall review referred applications on the basis of the following:

(a) Consistency of the proposed project with the District elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital and the Chinatown Design Guidelines Study Report;

(b) Contribution of building design, including signs and awnings, to the Chinese identity of Chinatown; and

(c) Chinese character of public space improvements and the contribution of those improvements to increased pedestrian activity.

2400.3 Nothing in this chapter is intended to abrogate the existing authority or responsibility of either the Public Space Committee or the Downtown Streetscape Committee.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is Mayor’s Order 89-132 issued June 9, 1989, 36 DCR 4525 (June 23, 1989).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2401** APPLICATIONS, DOCUMENTS, AND INFORMATION {#sec-10-b2401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2401}

2401.1 When a permit application has been referred to the Director, the applicant shall submit to the Director up to eight (8) copies, as required by the Director, of the following documents:

(a) A completed Chinatown Design Review application (to be provided by the Office of Planning);

(b) The names and addresses of all owners or their authorized agents;

(c) A statement setting forth the relationship of the proposed development to the objectives of the Chinatown Design Guidelines Study report;

(d) Plans and elevations indicating appearance and proposed uses and including dimensions, colors, and a general description of materials; and

(e) Any other information the Director deems necessary to perform design review.

2401.2 In addition to the documents required by §2401.1, the applicant for any major new or renovation project (including exterior renovations) shall submit to the Director up to eight (8) copies, as required by the Director, of the following documents:

(a) If the project is within the historic district, a statement setting forth the historic preservation constraints on Chinese design character and how Chinese design character has been accommodated within those constraints to achieve an appropriate balance between potentially competing objectives;

(b) A general circulation plan, indicating the location of vehicular and pedestrian access ways, the location, number, and dimensions of all off-street parking spaces and loading service bays, and the locations and dimensions of other public space improvements; and

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2402** REVIEW TIMETABLE {#sec-10-b2402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2402}

2402.1 If, upon examination of a referred permit application of information submitted pursuant to §2401, the Director concludes that a design review is unnecessary, the Director shall promptly and in writing notify the permit applicant and the Director of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

2402.2 If a design review is performed, the Director shall complete the review process and make appropriate written recommendations within sixty (60) days from the date the Director receives all of the information necessary to perform the review.

2402.3 If necessary, the Director may give written notice to the permit applicant of up to four (4) additional thirty (30) day extensions, for a total review period of not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days. Additional review time shall be permitted only when agreed to by the permit applicant.

2402.4 The Director shall provide written notice of all extensions to the Director of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs and to the Chinatown Steering Committee.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 891 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2403** NOTICE OF DESIGN REVIEW AND RESPONSE {#sec-10-b2403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2403}

2403.1 If the Director decides to perform a design review, the Director shall promptly give written notice to all affected departments and agencies of the District government. The Director shall also give written notice to the Chinatown Steering Committee and to Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2C.

2403.2 The Director shall, along with the notice, provide each department, agency, or other entity notified information sufficient to enable it to make appropriate recommendations to the Director.

2403.3 Each department, agency, or other entity given notice pursuant to §2403.1 shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of that notice to submit its written recommendations to the Director, unless that time is extended by the Director for good cause.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 892 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2404** TECHNICAL CONFERENCES AND BRIEFINGS {#sec-10-b2404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2404}

2404.1 The Director may conduct technical conferences between a permit applicant and affected departments, agencies, and other entities.

2404.2 On request, the Director shall provide technical briefings to the Chinatown Steering Committee.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 892 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2405** FINAL REPORT {#sec-10-b2405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2405}

2405.1 At the conclusion of the review process, the Director shall prepare a final report. Where appropriate, the final report shall contain recommendations for modifications to the construction or renovation proposal, or other project reviewed.

2404.2 The Director shall send a copy of the final report to the following:

(a) The affected departments and agencies;

(b) The permit applicant;

(d) The Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2C.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 893 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2406** EXEMPTIONS {#sec-10-b2406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2406}

2406.1 Federally owned properties shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 892 (February 1, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2499** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2499 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2499}

2499.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Chinatown - the area bounded by Mount Vernon Square, Massachusetts Avenue, 5th Street, G Street, and 8th Street, N.W.

Chinatown Steering Committee - the Chinatown community organization, formed at the request of the District government, to advise the District government on physical, economic, and social impacts in Chinatown.

Director - the Director of the Office of Planning, or the Director's designee.

Downtown Streetscape Committee - the committee established by the Department of Public Works on November 13, 1981, for coordinated review of proposed streetscape improvements of development plans for compliance with the Downtown Streetscape Regulations and policies.

Public Space Committee - the committee established by Mayor's Order No. 83-54, dated February 17, 1983, to make final determinations on the approval or denial of applications for the temporary use of public space.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 890, 892 (February 1, 1991).*

### **10-B27** OFFICE OF THE SURVEYOR: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS

##### **10-B DCMR § 2700** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b2700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2700}

2700.1 Whenever the regulations in this chapter shall require restrictions or conditions of higher standards than are required in or under any statute or any other municipal regulations, the provisions of this chapter shall govern.

2700.2 Whenever the provisions of any statute or of any municipal regulations shall require restrictions or conditions of higher standards than are required in or under this chapter, the provisions of the statute or other municipal regulations shall govern.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §1601 of An Act of March 3, 1901, (31 Stat. 1427, ch. 854; D.C. Code §1-913 (1981)); as amended by §2 of the Surveyor User Charges Act of 1978, D.C. Law 2-149 (D.C. Code §1-929 (1981)).*
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2701** APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS {#sec-10-b2701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2701}

2701.1 No land or ground in the District of Columbia shall be subdivided for purpose of creating a lot of record, except in conformity with this chapter.

2701.2 Where a lot of record is subdivided for the purpose of creating another lot of record, it shall be effected in a manner as not to violate the provisions of this chapter or any other District of Columbia regulations.

2701.3 No part of a lot of record shall be sold or transferred unless, prior thereto, the lot shall be subdivided in conformity with the provisions of this chapter nor shall any subdivision containing any part of the lot be admitted to record unless the requirements of this paragraph have been complied with.

2701.4 No subdivision shall be admitted to record which contains any part of any unrecorded lot unless the remainder of the lot conforms with all applicable regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2702** APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2702}

2702.1 Application for a subdivision shall be submitted to the Surveyor, and may be made by an owner or his or her agent.

2702.2 When, in the judgment of the Surveyor, a preliminary sketch is necessary in connection with the preparation of the record plat, the sketch shall be submitted with the request.

2702.3 The tract of land to be subdivided shall be plainly and clearly indicated as to location and boundaries, by description appearing in the deed to the land, copy of which shall be furnished by applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2703** PRELIMINARY SKETCH: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2703}

2703.1 The preliminary sketch shall be drawn to scale and shall clearly provide such information as the Surveyor may require, such as, but not limited to, the following:

(a) Property lines of the land to be subdivided;

(b) Man-made features, such as buildings, structures, walls, fences, railroads, culverts, sewers, etc.;

(d) The zoning districts and their boundary lines within the land involved;

(e) The layout of the existing and proposed improvements in or around the land involved, such as private and public throughfares, alleys, parks and reservations, with their official designation;

(f) The layout of the existing and proposed squares and lots, together with building restriction lines where same may be provided or required with their official designation;

(g) Areas proposed to be dedicated for public purposes;

(h) North point by orientation; and

(i) Suggested grade elevation at street intersection, breaks in street grade, and cross-sections of street when unusual conditions require special treatment.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2704** PREPARATION OF PLAT RECORD: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2704}

2704.1 The Surveyor shall prepare all plats of subdivisions for creating lots of record.

2704.2 The Surveyor shall not cause work to be done on the plat of subdivision until the required fee has been paid to the D.C. Treasurer and a receipt has been filed in the Office of the Surveyor.

2704.3 The fee shall be in accordance with a schedule of fees adopted by the Mayor.

2704.4 Recording of the plat of subdivision shall not take place until all information required thereon shall have been completed.

2704.5 All plats of subdivision shall comply with the following:

(a) The true bearings of the boundary lines shall be given in degree, minutes and seconds with their lengths in feet and decimal parts of a foot;

(b) All subdivisions shall be located by dimension to a point of record;

(d) All streets shall be identified by number, name or letter of the alphabet as required in §2715.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*
- *EDITOR's NOTE: The authority to revise or adopt fee schedules was vested in the Mayor by §2 of the Surveyor User Chargers Act of 1978, D.C. Law 2-149 (D.C. Code §1-929 (1981)).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2705** SIGNATORS: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2705}

2705.1 Upon completion of the plat of subdivision and prior to recording thereof, the plat shall be forwarded to the owner or his or her agent for necessary signature.

2705.2 The plat of subdivision shall be signed in ink by the owner in fee simple of the land proposed to be subdivided, and his or her signature shall be witnessed by two (2) persons and notarized.

2705.3 The plat of subdivision shall contain an affidavit by the owner executing the plat of subdivision to the effect that the following requirements are met:

(a) They are the owners in fee simple of the property proposed to be subdivided;

(b) They are in peaceful occupation thereof; and

2705.4 In the event the property is encumbered by a trust, the assent of the trustee shall be shown on the plat.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2706** CERTIFICATIONS: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2706 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2706}

2706.1 The plat of subdivision shall contain a certification by the Finance Officer, D.C. Property Tax Division, that the following requirements have been met:

(a) The owner whose name appears on the plat of subdivision is the owner of the property to be subdivided; and

(b) Taxes, special assessments, and other public charges against the property have been paid.

2706.2 When a subdivision is to be recorded during the first half of the fiscal year, the tax shall be paid for the half before allowing the subdivision to be recorded.

2706.3 When a subdivision is to be recorded during the second half of the fiscal year, the tax shall be paid for the entire fiscal year before allowing the subdivision to be recorded.

2706.4 The plat of subdivision shall contain a certification by the Zoning Administrator, Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, that in his or her judgment the property proposed to be subdivided is not in violation of any zoning regulations and that the remaining parts shall comply with the regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2707** BOUNDARY MARKING: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2707 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2707}

2707.1 A subdivision, prior to being recorded, and when deemed necessary by the Surveyor, may be marked on the ground in such a manner as he or she determines.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2708** RECORDING OR PLAT: SUBDIVIDE LAND AND GROUND {#sec-10-b2708 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2708}

2708.1 Upon compliance with all provisions of this chapter, the Surveyor shall approve for record all plats of subdivision, which shall thereafter become the property of the District of Columbia.

2708.2 The original document shall be recorded and filed in the Office of the Surveyor, and one (1) true copy shall be filed in the records of the Property Tax Division, Finance Office, D.C.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2709** STREETS (PERMANENT SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS PLAN) {#sec-10-b2709 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2709}

2709.1 All subdivisions shall conform to the Plan of the Permanent System of Highways prepared and adopted under the provisions of the Act of Congress entitled, "An Act to provide a Permanent System of Highways in that part of the District of Columbia lying outside of cities," approved March 2, 1893 (27 Stat. 532), and subsequent amendments thereto.

2709.2 The streets shown on the Plan of the Permanent System of Highways shall comply with the provisions of D.C. Code §7-117 (1981).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2710** MINOR STREETS {#sec-10-b2710 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2710}

2710.1 The dedication of a minor street not less than fifty-five feet (55 ft.) wide with building restriction lines at least ten feet (10 ft.) back of the property lines may be accepted by the Mayor when the minor street is desirable and not adverse to the public interest; Provided, that the following occurs:

(a) The distance between streets shall be sufficient to allow for two (2) tiers of lots of a size not less than provided as a minimum by the Zoning Regulations of the District of Columbia;

(b) The minor street shall be located so as to provide for the reasonable continuation of the alignment and of streets of adjoining subdivision or their proper projection when adjoining property is subdivided in accordance with the judgment of the Surveyor; and

(c) When building restriction lines are required, the space between the lines and the street lines shall be subject to the same regulations and rights of the District of Columbia as is the space between building restriction lines and street lines on Highway Plan Streets as set forth in §2709.2.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2711** CUL-DE-SAC STREETS {#sec-10-b2711 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2711}

2711.1 All cul-de-sac streets shall meet the following requirements:

(a) All requirements of §2709.2;

(b) Not be over six hundred feet (600 ft.) in length, unless topographical conditions render this provision impracticable; and

2711.2 All dead end streets shall be provided with a turning area at the end thereof with a minimum radius of sixty feet (60 ft.) and with building restriction lines ten feet (10 ft.) back of the property line.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2712** RESERVED STRIPS {#sec-10-b2712 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2712}

2712.1 Reserved strips between a dedicated street or alley and the boundary line of any tract of land proposed to be subdivided shall not be permitted.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2713** PUBLIC ALLEYS {#sec-10-b2713 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2713}

2713.1 When alleys are provided, they shall be a not less than sixteen feet (16 ft.) in special purpose or residential zoning classifications and not less than twenty feet (20 ft.) in commercial or industrial zoning classifications.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2714** PUBLIC SPACES, RESERVATIONS {#sec-10-b2714 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2714}

2714.1 Triangular or other shaped areas of less than two hundred fifty square feet (250 ft. 2) entirely surrounded by streets, whether or not indicated as reservations or open spaces on the map of the Permanent System of Highways shall be included within the dedicated street lines of any proposed subdivision.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2715** HISTORIC SITES SUBDIVISION {#sec-10-b2715 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2715}

2715.1 Before any subdivision is admitted to record which contains any land in the District of Columbia which includes a district, area, place or site, or part thereof, listed on the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the Historic Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act (49 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.) and the Act of October 15, 1966 (80 Stat. 915; 16 U.S.C. 470a-470m), or on which is situated a building or structure located within a district or site listed on the National Register, or on which is situated a building or structure listed in the District of Columbia's inventory of historic sites contained in the comprehensive statewide historic perseveration survey and plan prepared pursuant to §101(a) of the Act of October 15, 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470a(a)), the Surveyor shall submit the application for that subdivision to the Mayor of the District of Columbia or his or her designated agent, who shall place notice of the application for the subdivision in the District of Columbia Register.

2715.2 The Mayor, or his or her designated agent, acting with the advice of the District of Columbia Professional Review Committee for Nominations to the National Register of Historic Places, and within those geographical areas established pursuant to the Act of May 16, 1930 (46 Stat. 366; 40 U.S.C. 121) or the Act of September 22, 1950 (D.C. Code §5-801 et seq. (1981)), with the advice of the Commission of Fine Arts, shall within sixty (60) days determine whether the subdivision is contrary to the public interest and should be delayed for a designated period of up to one hundred eighty (180) days following the determination to permit the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Officer and Professional Review Committee to negotiate with the owner or owners of the land which is the subject of the application for subdivision, and with civic groups, public agencies and interested citizens, to find a means of preserving the land.

2715.3 Before issuing any order delaying the subdivision, the Mayor or his or her designated agent shall afford the applicant and any interested parties an opportunity to offer any evidence they may desire to present concerning the proposed order.

2715.4 Any person or class of persons aggrieved by a decision of the Mayor, or his or her designated agent, or by any failure on the part of the Mayor, or his or her designated agent, to act, with respect to any action relating to historic subdivisions which is authorized by the amendment made by this section, may seek judicial review of the decision or failure to act by filing a petition for review in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals within thirty (30) days after the decision has been made or such act should have been taken.

**History**
- *SOURCE: §§2 and 4 of the Historic Sites Subdivision Amendment of 1976, D.C. Law 1-80, 22 DCR 7240 (June 29, 1976).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2716** LOTS {#sec-10-b2716 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2716}

2716.1 The size and shape of all lots on a plat of subdivision shall be appropriate as regards the location of the subdivision, and be the size and shape as to permit compliance with all requirements of the Zoning Regulations.

2716.2 The orientation and location of all lots on a subdivision shall provide for sewer, water, storm drainage ingress and egress in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

2716.3 All lots on a plat of subdivision shall have frontage on a public street or public alley. So called land-locked lots shall not be permitted on a plat of subdivision. Except for commercial purposes or those uses permitted on alley lots by the Zoning Regulations, a proposed lot in a plat of subdivision shall have a street frontage.

2716.4 Except for those uses permitted on alley lots by the Zoning Regulations, a lot shall have a minimum frontage of fourteen feet (14 ft.) measured along the front lot line; Provided, that if the front line is other than at right angles to the side lot line, the minimum distance shall be determined as the minimum distance between the side lot lines.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2717** NUMBERING SYSTEM {#sec-10-b2717 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2717}

2717.1 No lot number shall be assigned to any lot until the time of recording in the Office of the Surveyor.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2718** VARIANCES PROCEDURE {#sec-10-b2718 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2718}

2718.1 Variations from the requirements of this chapter may be made, in the discretion of the Mayor, in cases of practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship when not in conflict with any mandatory law or other regulations of the District of Columbia.

2718.2 The owner of the property for which variation is requested shall submit his or her request, in writing, through the Surveyor to the Mayor.

2718.3 The request shall be in ink or typewritten, and signed in ink by the owner or owners, and the request shall include the following:

(a) A clear statement of the variation sought and reason for so requesting;

(b) A map or sketch sufficiently clear to convey the nature of the variance requested; and

(c) The report of the Surveyor and such other reports from the District officials as may, in the Surveyor 's judgment, be necessary.

2718.4 Upon request for variance, a notice shall be published in one (1) daily newspaper once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks. The notice shall provide that any person opposing the variance may file with the Surveyor of the District of Columbia within thirty (30) days after the last notice, and that statements of opposition will be forwarded to the Mayor or his or her designated agent, together with recommendations by the Surveyor.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2719** SEPARABILITY CLAUSE {#sec-10-b2719 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2719}

2719.1 If any section or provision of this chapter is decided by the courts to be unconstitutional or invalid, the decision shall not affect the validity of this, chapter as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2799** INTERPRETATION AND DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2799 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2799}

2799.1 For the purposes of this section certain terms and words are defined in this chapter, but the definitions shall not be held to modify or affect in any way the meaning of the terms or words where used in other regulations of this title.

2799.2 For the purposes of this section, the word "lot" includes the word "parcel"; the word "square" includes the word "block"; and the word "person" includes a corporation, as well as an individual.

2799.3 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Lot - the land bounded by definite lines, including but not limited to, plot, tract or parcel. Lot, Alley - a lot facing or abutting an alley and at no point facing or abutting a street.

Lot of Record - a lot platted and recorded on the records of the Surveyor, in accordance with the Act and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

Plot - an area of ground.

Public Alley - a public way designated as an alley on the records of the Surveyor of the District of Columbia.

Record Plat - a plat showing lots, streets, public alleys, etc., recorded in the Office of the Surveyor.

Street - a public highway designated as a street, avenue, lane, terrace, road, etc., on the records of the Surveyor.

Subdivision - is the division or assembly of land into one or more lots of record. Surveyor - an official designated to head the Office of the Surveyor.

Zoning District - the zoning classification of various areas.

Zoning Regulations - regulations promulgated by authority of the Zoning

**History**
- *SOURCE: Commissioners' Order 67-651(a), §3, effective May 16, 1967, 13 DCR 270 (June 19, 1967).*

### **10-B28** REGISTERED LAND SURVEYORS

##### **10-B DCMR § 2800** PURPOSE {#sec-10-b2800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2800}

2800.1 This chapter shall establish requirements for an individual to be certified as a Registered Land Surveyor permitted to perform and certify property surveys and wall examinations in the District of Columbia pursuant to the Surveyor User Charges Act of 1978 (D.C. Law 2-149; D.C. Code § 1-929 (1987)). This chapter shall also establish minimum technical standards pertaining to these survey services and the procedures for persons to obtain the services of a Registered Land Surveyor.

2800.2 Authorization for the practice of surveying as provided by this chapter shall not be construed to prohibit any registered or unregistered person from a surveying activity that is not within the scope of this chapter. However, for the character of surveying services not within the scope of this chapter the specific prohibition on use of the seal of registration as specified by §2804.4 shall apply.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §1503 of An Act to Establish a Code of Law for the District of Columbia, approved March 3, 1901, 31 Stat. 1426; as amended by §2(c) of the Surveyor User Charges Act of 1978, D.C. Law 2-149, Mayor's Order 79-48.*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2801** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b2801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2801}

##### **10-B DCMR § 2802** SURVEYING SERVICES {#sec-10-b2802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2802}

2802.1 Surveying services to be performed by a Registered Land Surveyor shall be limited to boundary surveys, location surveys and wall examinations pursuant to this chapter.

2802.2 If the Office of the Surveyor of the District of Columbia is unable to complete and record a survey or to perform a wall examination within ninety (90) days after a written request for a survey service has been filed, the Office of the Surveyor shall advise the service requestor of an estimated date when the service will be performed and that he or she may elect to reaffirm the request, or to withdraw it and proceed to retain a Registered Land Surveyor to perform the service.

2802.3 If an individual has first ordered a service and paid the required fee for the Office of the Surveyor to perform the work and then elects to proceed with the services of a Registered Land Surveyor, the individual may obtain a refund on that portion of the fee not already charged against the service order by making a written request to the Office of the Surveyor for a refund.

2802.4 Where the retention of the services of a Registered Land Surveyor is elected, the Office of the Surveyor shall prepare a work order for the requestor's use to present a Registered Land Surveyor of the requestor's choice.

2802.5 Prior to commencement of services, a Registered Land Surveyor shall sign and submit the work order request to the Office of the Surveyor.

2802.6 Upon completion of the services by the Registered Land Surveyor, as evidenced by the recording of a plat or filing of a wall examination report, the Office of the Surveyor shall note completion of the services on the work order request form.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2132 (April 12, 1991)*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2803** APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION {#sec-10-b2803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2803}

2803.1 Persons desiring certification as a Registered Land Surveyor in the District of Columbia shall file an application with the Office of the Surveyor of the District of Columbia accompanied with a non-refundable prescribed application fee.

2803.2 The application for registration as a Registered Land Surveyor shall be signed and notarized, be on the form as prescribed by the Office of the Surveyor and shall contain the following provision:

"Upon certification as a Registered Land Surveyor I hereby agree to indemnify and save harmless the District of Columbia, its officers, and employees for all claims or liability arising from, based upon, or as a consequence or result of any act, omission or default of myself or of my employees in the performance of, or in connection with, any survey work I perform or that I certify pursuant to chapter 28 of title 10 DCMR."

2803.3 Each person applying for registration shall clearly describe the diversity and extent of experience attained in both field and office, together with the periods of each level of responsibility or authority in performing the duties relating to the experience.

2803.4 The person applying for registration shall arrange to have statements submitted to the Office of the Surveyor by not less than three (3) people who are not related to that applicant, who have known that applicant for a least three (3) years and who are registered land surveyors or registered professional engineers in the United States of America. The statements shall attest to the applicant's good character, reputation, experience, and knowledge of property line surveying in the District of Columbia.

2803.5 Persons applying for registration shall meet at least one of the following requirements and the requirement of §2803.6:

(a) Be currently licensed to practice boundary surveying in the United States of America and has at least four (4) years of the qualifying practical surveying experience in the District of Columbia, as set forth in §2899; or

(b) Be a registered civil engineer in the District of Columbia with at least four (4) years of the qualifying practical experience surveying in the District of Columbia, as set forth in §2899; Provided, that the person must have had at least one semester of plane surveying as a requirement for graduation that occurred prior to the effective date of this chapter.

2803.6 A person who meets the requirement of §2803.5 shall also pass a written examination prescribed by the Office of the Surveyor for evaluating the person's knowledge level of the system of records and surveying practices of the Office of the Surveyor.

2803.7 Notwithstanding the requirements of this section, the D.C. Surveyor may register persons who have worked in the Office of the Surveyor in a capacity as either a field party chief, a chief of the field survey division, the D.C. Surveyor, or the D.C. Deputy division; Provided, that a field party chief, or a chief or surveys shall have served a period of at least ten (10) years in one or a combination of these positions and the D.C. Surveyor or the D.C. Deputy Surveyor shall have served for at least six (6) years in one or a combination these positions.

2803.9 Prior to approving the application, the Office of the Surveyor may verify any information submitted by a person who applies for registration.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2132 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2804** SEAL OF REGISTRANT {#sec-10-b2804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2804}

2804.1 The seal of a Registered Land Surveyor shall be of the following design:

2804.2 The seal shall not be larger than one and three-quarters inches (13/4in.) or less than one and five-eighths inches (15/8 in.).

2804.3 The seal shall be impressed on all plats and wall reports or a facsimile imprint of same shall be stamped on all plats and wall examination reports submitted to the Office of the Surveyor for recording or filing.

2804.4 It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to apply or affix the registration seal on any plat or on any document that is not submitted for recording or filing in the Office of the Surveyor pursuant to this chapter.

2804.5 It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to use the seal during the period that registration of the holder is expired, suspended or revoked.

2804.6 It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to use the seal of any design not in accordance with this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2134 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2805** EXPIRATION, RENEWAL AND REINSTATEMENT {#sec-10-b2805 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2805}

2805.1 Certificates of registration shall expire on September 30th of each even numbered year.

2805.2 A person whose registration has expired and who has not applied for renewal of the certification by October 30th, shall pay a prescribed late renewal fee. The period open for late renewal applications shall terminate not later than two (2) years after the expiration date.

2805.3 A person who registration has not been renewed within two (2) years of the expiration date pursuant to §2805.2 may file for reinstatement by submitting an updated application form and paying a non-refundable prescribed fee.

2805.4 Failure to receive a notice of renewal shall not relieve the person of responsibility to renew or obtain reinstatement.

2805.5 It shall be unlawful for any Registered Land Surveyor who fails to renew his or her registration to continue the practice of surveying within the auspices of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2135 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2806** DENIAL, SUSPENSION, AND REVOCATION OF REGISTRATION {#sec-10-b2806 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2806}

2806.1 The D.C. Surveyor may deny, suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew the certification of any Registered Land Surveyor who:

(a) Fails to meet the qualification requirements contained in §2803;

(b) Fails to comply with the standards and operating procedures established by this chapter;

(c) Has committed fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation in becoming certified as a Registered Land Surveyor with the Office of the Surveyor;

(d) Has been found guilty of any gross negligence, incompetence, or misconduct in the practice of land surveying;

(e) Has willfully destroyed, mutilated, misplaced or stolen any survey papers parcel papers, maps or other records of the Office of the Surveyor; or

(f) Has willfully destroyed, or has without authorization moved or otherwise altered survey points established by the Office of the Surveyor.

2806.2 For any action to deny, revoke, or suspend the certification of a Registered Land Surveyor, the D.C. Surveyor shall comply with the contested case procedures contained in the D.C. Administrative Procedure Act, D.C. Code §1-1509 (1990 Supp.) and the requirements of this section.

2806.3 If the D.C. Surveyor proposes to revoke or suspend the registration of a Registered Land Surveyor, the D.C. Surveyor shall give written notice to the Registered Land Surveyor. The notice shall contain the following:

(a) A statement setting forth the nature of evidence that the D.C. Surveyor has which, if proven to be true, justifies taking the proposed action;

(b) A statement that the D.C. Surveyor may take the proposed action, unless the Registered Land Surveyor requests a hearing before the D.C. Surveyor by a letter addressed to the Surveyor, sent by certified mail or delivered in person, within twenty (20) days after service of the notice; and

(c) A statement that the D.C. Surveyor may take the proposed action if the Registered Land Surveyor fails to appear at a scheduled hearing.

2806.4 Where a registrant has been suspended twice, a third cause for action shall be for revocation.

2806.5 If the D.C. Surveyor determines that suspension is the appropriate penalty, the period of suspension shall be not less than thirty (30) days nor more than one (1) year.

2806.6 If the D.C. Surveyor proposes to deny a registration or renewal of a registration, the D.C. Surveyor shall give written notice to the applicant. The notice shall contain the following:

(a) A statement that the applicant has failed to satisfy the qualifications for certification as a Registered Land Surveyor;

(b) A statement that specifies in what respect the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements;

(c) A statement that the D.C. Surveyor may deny the registration unless the applicant request within twenty (20) days after service of the notice, a hearing before the D.C. Surveyor by a letter addressed to the D.C. Surveyor and sent by certified mail or delivered in person; and

(d) A statement that the D.C. Surveyor may take the proposed action if the applicant fails to appear at the scheduled hearing.

2806.7 If a person who was sent a notice of a proposed action does not send by certified mail, or deliver in person a request for a hearing within twenty (20) days of receiving the notice of the proposed action, the D.C. Surveyor may, without a hearing, take the action proposed in the notice.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2136 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2807** SERVICE OF NOTICE {#sec-10-b2807 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2807}

2807.1 Any notice required by §2806 shall be served upon the party or upon the representative designated by the party to receive service of papers. If a party has appeared through counsel, service may be made upon the counsel of record.

2807.2 Service may be completed by one of the following methods:

(a) By personal delivery;

(b) By leaving it at the party's office with a person in charge or an employee or, if the office is closed or the party to be served has no office, by leaving it at the party's usual place of residence with a person of suitable discretion sixteen (16) years of age or older residing there; or

2807.3 Proof of service, stating the name and address of the person on whom service is made and the manner and date of service, may be shown by one of the following methods:

(a) Written acknowledgment by the party, the party's counsel, or other person served in accordance with §2806.9(b); or

(b) A return receipt of service made by certified mail.

2807.4 If service is by personal delivery, it shall be deemed to have been served at the time when delivery is made to the party or other person served in accordance with §2806.9(b).

2807.5 If service is by certified mail, it shall be deemed to have been made on the date shown on the return receipt showing delivery of the notice to the party or refusal of the party to accept delivery.

2807.6 If the party is no longer at the last known address as shown by the records of the Office of the Surveyor, and no forwarding address is available, service shall be deemed to have been made on the date the return receipt bearing that notification is received by the Office of the Surveyor.

2807.7 A person aggrieved by a decision issued by the D.C. Surveyor, after a hearing, may seek review of the decision by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in accordance with the District of Columbia Administrative Procedures Act, D.C. Code §1-1510 (1989 Supp.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2138 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2808** PLATS OF SURVEY {#sec-10-b2808 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2808}

2808.1 Plats or certificates of survey shall be filed for recording in the Office of the Surveyor within five (5) calendar days after certification of the plat as required by §2809.1.

2808.2 All plats shall contain the name, the business address and telephone number of the Registered Land Surveyor.

2808.3 The original drawing of the plat shall be in black waterproof India ink on polyester film (mylar) of four mil (0.004 mil.) thickness with matte surface on the drawing side only.

2808.4 Except as provided in §2808.7, the standard sheet sizes shall be twelve inches by eighteen inches (12 in. x 18 in.), or eighteen inches by twenty-four inches (18 in. x 24 in.), with the smaller dimension being across the top of the sheet.

2808.5 A one and one-half inch (11/2 in.) wide binding margin shall be drawn on the left size of each standard size sheet.

2808.6 The property shown on the standard size sheet shall be without a directional arrow but oriented so that north is toward and perpendicular to the top of the sheet.

2808.7 The Office of the Surveyor shall expressly approve, prior to its use, a sheet size twenty-four inches by thirty-six inches (24 in. x 36 in.) or a width of forty-eight inches (48 in.) by a length needed to depict a survey.

2808.8 The twenty-four by thirty-six inch (24 in. x 36 in.) sheet shall be oriented so that a thirty-six inch (36 in.) side is at the top with a three inch (3 in.) wide binding margin drawn along the top of the sheet.

2808.9 The property shown on the approved oversized sheet may be oriented as appropriate to accommodate the property configuration and the drawing shall include a north arrow symbol.

2808.10 The use of transfer lettering, decals, or any application of adhesive material shall be unacceptable.

2808.11 For consistency in the presentation of information and uniformity of records in the Office of the Surveyor, all plats shall be drafted according to standards currently in use by the Office of the Surveyor, which are generally illustrated by the following examples, and when a curved lot line is shown, the line shall be annotated with its radius, arc length and central angle:

Survey to mark in outline:

Survey Book

Page

202

Surveys to mark and locate wall and encroachments

Survey Book

Page

202

Surveys of mark, show actual angles, distances and area by measurements:

Survey Book

Page

202

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2139 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2809** RECORDATION OF PLATS OF SURVEY {#sec-10-b2809 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2809}

2809.1 Each plat for recording shall bear the registration seal and contain a certification in the following format:

I certify that the survey shown hereon was made by me or under my direction in accordance with chapter 28 of title 10 DCMR.

(Seal of registration to be placed here)

(Signature) (Date)

2809.2 The plat shall contain a statement for use by the Office of the Surveyor in the following format:

OFFICE OF THE SURVEYOR, D.C.

This plat is accepted for recordation in accordance with chapter 28 of title 10 DCMR.

(Date) (Surveyor, D.C.)

2809.3 The plat shall also contain a provision for use by the Office of the Surveyor in the following format:

Recorded at＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿

Recorded in Survey Book＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿Page

2809.4 The plat for recording shall be accompanied by the field notes prepared in accordance with §2811.

2809.5 The D.C. Surveyor may review the plat to determine compliance with §§2808 and 2811.

2809.6 The acceptance of the field notes for filing and the recordation of the plat by the D.C. Surveyor shall not be construed as, nor constitute, an official approval or certification by the D.C. Surveyor or the District of Columbia government of the accuracy of the survey performed by the Registered Land Surveyor.

2809.7 The Registered Land Surveyor may be furnished one certified print of the recorded plat, free of charge.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2140 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2810** WALL EXAMINATIONS AND PREPARATION OF REPORTS {#sec-10-b2810 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2810}

2810.1 Wall examinations required by the D.C. Building Code may be made and certified by Registered Land Surveyors. However, a Registered Land Surveyor shall not perform any wall examination wherein the construction layout work was done by that Registered Land Surveyor or by persons related to or affiliated with that Registered Land Surveyor or is in any manner affiliated with the firm for which that Registered Land Surveyor is employed.

2810.2 The result of each wall examination shall be reported in the following format:

(a) The report shall be on white tracing paper of one hundred percent (100%) rag content, approximately sixteen pounds (16 lbs.), twenty-eight thousandths of an inch (0.0028 in.) thick, or equivalent to Clearprint Co., designation 100-H;

(b) Sheet sizes shall be twelve inches by fifteen inches (12 in. x 15 in.) or eighteen inches by twenty-three inches (18 in. x 23 in.);

(c) All property lines and property line dimensions shall be in black lead pencil or in black ink on the original of the report, and the second copy for the building inspector may be a carbon copy, or a duplication of the original in either pencil or black ink;

(d) Walls shall be shown in ink, on both copies, of the same color used in the field notes for the particular job, and any previously existing wall pertinent to the wall examination shall be shown on both copies in ink of a different color;

(e) Line work and lettering may be done with the standard type drafting pen or felt tip pen; drawing ink shall be Higgins waterproof ink or equivalent for drafting pen use and the felt tip shall be a stylist brand fine-line waterproof pen or equivalent;

(f) The property shall be oriented so that the north direction is toward and perpendicular to the top of the sheet; and

(g) Wall reports shall be drawn according to standards currently employed by the Office of the Surveyor, such as illustrated by wall reports filed for the following:

Square

Lot

152

193

2810.3 Each wall examination report shall bear the registration seal and contain a certification in the following format:

I certify that the wall locations shown hereon have been determined by me, or under my direction in accordance with this chapter and that I have not engaged in the construction layout on this site.

(Seal of registration to be placed here)

(Signature) (Date)

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2141 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2811** FILING WALL REPORTS {#sec-10-b2811 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2811}

2811.1 The original drawing of the wall report shall be filed with the Office of the Surveyor only after it has been stamped with the certification required pursuant to §2810.3 and accompanied with the field notes made pursuant to §2812.

2811.2 Each copy of the certified wall report shall be stamped by the Office of the Surveyor to indicate that the report is received for filing in accordance with this chapter.

2811.3 The acceptance of the wall report and field notes for filing by the Office of the Surveyor shall not constitute or be construed as an official approval or certification, by the D.C. Surveyor or the Government of the District of Columbia, of the accuracy of the wall report performed by the Registered Land Surveyor.

2811.4 It shall be the responsibility of the Registered Land Surveyor to furnish a copy of the completed report to the Building Inspector's Office of the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2143 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2812** FIELD NOTES {#sec-10-b2812 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2812}

2812.1 The field notes shall be color coded as in the system in use by the Office of the Surveyor.

2812.2 The Registered Land Surveyor shall submit to the Office of the Surveyor the original field notes with a full size color copy of the notes for every survey and wall examination made pursuant to this chapter.

2812.3 The originals shall be on eight and one-half by eleven inch (81/2 in. x 11 in.) sheets of a white paper base, fifty percent (50%) rag content, twenty-four pound (24 lb.) stock having a water resistant surface with three (3) hole standard punched centers of four and one-quarter by four and one-quarter inches (41/4 in. x 41/4 in.).

2812.4 The color copy required by §2812.2 shall be machine made on a sheet being the same size required for the original and being a two (2) mil thickness, non-tear white coated polyester material with three (3) holes standard punched centers of four and one-quarter by four and one-quarter inches (41/4 in. x 41/4 in.).

2812.5 Each sheet of notes shall be numbered, legible and in the English language.

2812.6 A cover sheet shall accompany the field notes to reflect the type, location, field party chief, date, and name of the Land Surveyor with his or her certification and signature that the notes comply with this chapter.

2812.7 The field notes shall contain, as a minimum, the following information:

(a) A sketch of the site, including the location and character of the points found and used for control of the survey work;

(b) The amount of variation or discrepancy found in points recovered, in terms of hundredths of a foot east-west; north-south; southerly or westerly, etc.;

(d) Identification of previously observed angles and distance measurements that were held in performing the work;

(e) Indication of survey technique used, such as the following:

(1) Tape and transit;

(2) EDM;

(3) Tape only; and

(4) Other (specify);

(f) Location of offset lines with respect to the property line; and

(g) The identity of the lot(s) or parcel(s) shown on the sketch.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2143 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2813** MARKERS AND MONUMENTS {#sec-10-b2813 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2813}

2813.1 No marker or monument of a type used exclusively by the Office of the Surveyor shall be used by a Registered Land Surveyor.

2813.2 No marker or monument of the Office of the Surveyor shall be removed by a Registered Land Surveyor without approval by the D.C. Surveyor.

2813.3 With the exception of drill holes and cross cuts in masonry, points set by the Registered Land Surveyor shall be appropriately tagged with the registration number.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2145 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2814** OVERLAPS AND VACANCIES {#sec-10-b2814 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2814}

2814.1 When an overlap or vacancy is encountered after apportioning for any fullness or shortage the Land Surveyor shall bring it to the attention of the D.C. Surveyor, for a resolution, if feasible.

2814.2 When the resolution requires correcting an error or inconsistency appearing on a plat of subdivision, the correction of the plat shall be made only by the D.C. Surveyor.

2814.3 Where the resolution requires correcting or amending a deed description, the owner of record shall be responsible for correcting or amending the deed description.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2145 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2815** PROCEDURES {#sec-10-b2815 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2815}

2815.1 In addition to the requirements of this chapter, the surveying procedures shall be in accordance with the Manual of Practices for Real Property Surveying in the District of Columbia, prepared by the Office of the Surveyor, which is incorporated in this chapter by reference and is on file in the Office of the Surveyor and at D.C. Public Libraries.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2145 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2816** AMENDMENTS OR CORRECTIONS TO PLATS {#sec-10-b2816 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2816}

2816.1 Any plat which has been prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor and recorded pursuant to the provisions of this chapter may be amended or corrected contingent upon providing a written notification to the D.C. Surveyor's Office.

2816.2 Amendments or corrections to recorded plats may be made by the Registered Land Surveyor who certified the original plat or by another D.C. Registered Land Surveyor; Provided, that he or she is then currently employed by the firm which prepared the original recorded plat.

2816.3 Amendments or corrections shall be made by recording a new plat with appropriate referencing to that which it supersedes and by placing an appropriate notation upon the original plat which alerts all readers to the survey book and page number where the amendment is recorded.

2816.4 All amended plats and plats of correction shall be dated, certified, signed and sealed by the Registered Land Surveyor as set forth in §2816.2 and the plat shall bear amendment notes which clearly explain the nature and purpose of the amendment or correction.

2816.5 Revised field notes shall also be submitted to support any amendment or correction to a recorded plat, unless the amendment is being made to correct an error which is not inconsistent with, or contrary to, the original field notes.

2816.6 Amendments or corrections to wall examination reports shall be performed in a manner similar to the amending of Recorded Plats.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2146 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2817** DISCREPANCIES {#sec-10-b2817 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2817}

2817.1 Where a discrepancy in any of the records is found by the Registered Land Surveyor, he or she shall make an effort to resolve the discrepancy in consultation with the Office of the Surveyor.

2817.2 Where a discrepancy is found by the D.C. Surveyor in any data developed or established by a Registered Land Surveyor, the D.C. Surveyor shall make an effort to resolve the discrepancy in consultation with the Registered Land Surveyor.

2817.3 A discrepancy that apparently cannot be resolved in accordance with provisions of this chapter shall be subject to the procedures contained in the D.C. Administrative Procedure Act, D.C. Code §1-1509 (1989 Supp.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2146 (April 12, 1991).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2899** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b2899 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2899}

2899.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrase shall have the meanings ascribed:

Applicant - a person who, as an individual, applies for certification as a Registered Land Surveyor.

Construction layout - survey work associated specifically with defining or establishing control lines or points for use by a contractor for building purposes.

D.C. Surveyor or Surveyor - the person in charge of the Office of the Surveyor.

Office of the Surveyor - the office under the D.C. Surveyor and the legal office of record relative to real property surveys, wall examinations and the subdivision of real property.

Qualifying practical experience - work on property line surveying in the District of Columbia wherein the applicant was responsible for researching and interpreting pertinent surveying records of the Office of the Surveyor and in the execution of office and field work requiring the exercise of independent judgment and initiative without first referring to higher authority for approval, except where approval is a matter of form, and which is of a character determined by the D.C. Surveyor to meet the time requirement specified for qualifying practical experience under §2803.4.

Registered Land Surveyor - any individual, including a person who is a civil engineer registered in the District of Columbia, who is approved and permitted by the D.C. Surveyor to prepare and certify real property surveys and to perform wall examinations pursuant to this chapter.

Under the direction of the Surveyor - performing surveys and wall examinations pursuant to the rules of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 38 DCR 2131, 2147 (April 12, 1991).*

### **10-B29** OFFICE OF THE SURVEYOR: SCHEDULE OF FEES

##### **10-B DCMR § 2900** GENERAL PROVISION {#sec-10-b2900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2900}

2900.1 The purpose for this chapter is to fix certain fees for services rendered by the Office of the Surveyor.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is Mayor's Order 79-68 issued April 12, 1979, 25 DCR 9567 (April 20, 1979).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 3465 (August 8, 1980), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 2832 (June 27, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking Published at 39 DCR 5744 (July 31, 1992).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 2901** SCHEDULE OF FEES {#sec-10-b2901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B2901}

2901.1 The schedule of fees shall include the following two (2) categories:

(a) Category A - Services for which specific charges are proposed; and

(b) Category B - Services for which charges will be calculated at the time the work is done based on an hourly rate. The hourly rates are as follows:

(1)

Field work

$71.00 per hour;

(2)

Drafting

$19.00 per hour; and

(3)

Computing

$28.99 per hour.

2901.2 The following fees for services shall apply to the following categories:

(a) Boundary surveys - All services are Category "B":

(1) For researching, surveying property boundaries to mark, preparation and recording of plat on same request;

(2) For researching, surveying property boundaries to mark in outline of more than one lot on same request;

(3) For researching, surveying property boundaries to mark groups of lots not adjoining, preparation and recording of plat; and

(4) For researching, surveying property boundaries to mark irregular shaped lots or any parcel of land not contained in a record subdivision, preparation and recording of plat;

(b) Building plats:

For preparation of plat required by D.C. Building Regulations to obtain building permits:

(1)

Up to three usual - shaped contiguous lots

$22.00 per plat;

(2)

Usual - shaped contiguous lots in excess of three adjoining lots

$22.00 per lot plus $11.00 per each additional lot; and

(3)

For unusual - shaped lots or large size tracts of land

$22.00 per hour but less than the fee for usual - shaped lots;

Certification of office records, prints,

photostats, etc. $15.00;

(d) Change of highway plan:

Amendment to the permanent system of highways (D.C. Code §7-122):

(1)

For research, computation, preparation of plat circulation to District departments for department reports

$1,435.00;

and

(2)

For public hearing and recording of plat

$900.00;

(e) Compilation plats (Compilation of walls):

For preparation of plat showing location of building according to office records:

Each Building $45.00;

(f) Computations and descriptions:

For research, computation, preparation and recording of plat for the following:

(1)

Up to three usual - shaped contiguous sites and

$130.00 per plat;

(2)

Usual - shaped contiguous sites in excess of three

$130.00 per plat plus $45.00 per additional site.

(3)

Irregular - shaped sites

$45.00 per hour but not less than the fee for usual-shaped lot;

(4)

Analysis of deed description (Deed analysis)

$6.00

(5)

Preparing written metes and bounds: Description and

$50.00;

(6)

Property line analysis statement:

(A)

Issuance of written statement and

$80.00;

(B)

Site visit - no statement

$50.00;

(g) Establishment or abandonment or easements:

Establish or abandon $178.00

(h) Miscellaneous plat

For preparation, circulation, and recordation of plat in Category

connection with request for variance to subdivision

regulations and other miscellaneous plats Category"B";

(i) Prints from document or from microfilm:

(1)

Normal service

$3.00;

(2)

If plat must be obtained from archival storage

$30.00 per document plus $3.00 per print;

(3)

Unbound volume storage

$6.00 per document plus $3.00 per print; and

(4)

Unusually large prints

$6.00;

(j) Private surveyors plat:

(1)

Recording and

$75.00 per sheet;

(2)

Filing wall examination report

$3.00 per site;

(k) Recordation of private surveyor condominium plats:

(1)

Recording of plats and plans

$300.00 plus $15.00 per sheet for initial recordation;

(2)

Recording amended plat or plans

$150.00plus$15.00 for each amended sheet;

(3)

Minor correction of the plat or plans

$75.00 plus $15.00 for each corrected sheet; and

(4)

Cancellation of recorded condominium

$75.00;

(l) Registration of land surveyors:

(1)

Application for registration

$70.00;

(2)

Examination

$35.00;

(3)

Retake of examination

$30.00;

(4)

Renewal of certification

$25.00;

(5)

Late renewal of certification and

$75.00;

(6)

Reinstatement after expiration of the late renewal period

$105.00;

(m) Street and alley closings or revisions:

(1)

Closing application:

(A)

Initial processing stage

$1,435.00; and

(B)

Final processing stage

$900.00;

(2)

Application revision:

(A)

Prior to completion of agency reviews and

$100.00;

(B)

After initial agency review

$1,435.00;

(3)

Dedication only of street and alley

$55.00;

(4)

Changing application basis after legislative package is prepared and

$55.00;

(5)

After recordation

$77.00;

(n) Subdivision of land:

Plats for:

(1)

Up to three usual - shaped continguous lots

$130.00 per plat;

(2)

Usual - shaded contiguous lots in excess of three

$130.00 per lot plus 45.00 per each additional lot in excess of three;

(3)

For irregular - shaped lots

$45.00 per hour per plat plus $20.00 per lot but not less than the fee for usual - shaped lots.

(4)

Recordation

$20.00;

(5)

Redrawing plat of subdivision

$50.00;and

(6)

Correcting or amending plat or subdivision prior to recordation

$18.00;

(o) Surveys:

All types except wall examinations

$195.00plus$90.00 per hour with a minimum of two hours charged;

(p) Transfer of jurisdiction: $322.00;

$45.00 each building;

and

(q) Wall compilation:

$140.00 plus $90.00 per hour. An additional penalty charge will be assessed for each trip to the job site when the job is not ready.

(r) Wall examination:

2901.3 Service descriptions under current fee schedule which are not being continued shall be as follows:

(a) Subdivision (condominium);

(b) Topographical; and

2901.4 A minimum of one hundred forty dollars ($140.00) shall be charged prior to undertaking the wall examination. There shall be an adjustment of ninety dollars ($90.00) per hour in obtaining the final fee for the service.

2901.5 No fee shall be charged for District government ordered services.

2901.6 Fee charges shall apply to the U.S. Government and foreign governments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 3465 (August 8, 1980), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 2832 (June 27, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 39 DCR 5744, 5745 (July 31, 1992).*

### **10-B30** BOARD FOR THE CONDEMNATION OF INSANITARY BUILDINGS

##### **10-B DCMR § 3000** BOARD FOR THE CONDEMNATION OF INSANITARY BUILDINGS {#sec-10-b3000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3000}

3000.1 The Board for the Condemnation of Insanitary Buildings (also referred to in this chapter as the "Board") shall operate in accordance with the provisions of Organization Order No. 102, as amended (September 27, 1954), and the provisions of D.C. Official Code § 6-901 et seq. (2001), as amended by the Abatement and Condemnation of Nuisance Properties Omnibus Amendment Act of 2000 (D.C. Law 13-281).

3000.2 The Board may, in its discretion, delegate to officials or employees of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs those ministerial duties and responsibilities as the Board may from time to time determine. This authority shall be exercised in accordance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations.

3000.3 The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs shall furnish the Board with technical facilities, advice, and assistance, and with administrative and fiscal services that may be required to permit the effective operation of the Board.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is An Act to create a board for the condemnation of Insanitary buildings in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes, approved May 1, 1906, as amended by An Act approved August 8, 1954, P.L. 682, 68 Stat. 884, ch. 1032, D.C. Code §5-701 (1981); and Part Ill of Organizational Order No. 102, Commissioners' Order 54-2034, 1 DCR 75 (October 11, 1954).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 760 (May 15, 1972); as amended at Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 9493 (October 18 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3001** CLERK OF THE BOARD {#sec-10-b3001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3001}

3001.1 The Clerk of the Board for the Condemnation of Insanitary Buildings shall maintain a docket of all cases filed with the Board.

3001.2 A case shall be filed with the Board only upon the approval of the Board.

3001.3 Each case shall be assigned a Board Case Number in the order of filing.

3001.4 The Clerk shall maintain an agenda of all cases to be presented to the Board.

3001.5 Cases shall generally be placed upon the agenda in the order in which they are filed, unless the Board directs otherwise.

3001.6 The Clerk shall maintain a separate case file for each case before the Board. This file shall contain exhibits, together with all papers and requests files in the proceeding.

3001.7 The case file, together with the tapes and minutes of the proceedings, shall constitute the exclusive record for order or decision by the Board.

3001.8 The Clerk shall maintain the Official Rules of the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 761 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3002** INSPECTION OF BOARD RECORDS {#sec-10-b3002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3002}

3002.1 The Official Rules of the Board, and the docket and the agenda of the Board shall be available for public inspection at the office of the Board during regular business hours.

3002.2 The Board's individual case files shall be available for inspection during regular business hours.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 762 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3003** APPEARANCE BEFORE THE BOARD {#sec-10-b3003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3003}

3003.1 Each owner shall have the right to present to the Board in person, through counsel, or through other representatives, his or her case or defense by oral and documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal evidence, and to conduct examination and cross-examination that may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.

3003.2 Unless a more limited roll is prescribed by the Board, any other party, other than the owner, to a proceeding before the Board may present oral and documentary evidence, submit rebuttal evidence, and conduct examination and cross-examination that may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 763 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3004** AUTHORITY FOR REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE BOARD {#sec-10-b3004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3004}

3004.1 Any owner desiring a person to appear before or transact business with the Board. as agent of the owner, shall furnish the Board with his or her written authorization for that person to appear as his or her agent.

3004.2 The signature of an attorney who is a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia, or a real estate broker who is licensed in the District, shall be sufficient to comply with the requirements of this section.

3004.3 Forms for persons other than attorneys or real estate brokers shall be supplied by the Board.

3004.4 Where two (2) or more ,persons have been authorized to appear before or transact business with the Board as agents for the same owner, service upon either one (1) of the agents shall constitute service upon the owner unless the owner has filed with the Board a designation of the agent to receive service, in which case service shall be upon the agent so designated.

3004.5 Any person who has been authorized to act as agent for an owner in a case shall be deemed to continue to represent the owner until a notice of withdrawal of authority for representation signed by the agent or by the owner, together with proof of service of that notice upon the agent or owner. Forms for this purpose shall be furnished by the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 765 and 769 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3005** BOARD HEARINGS {#sec-10-b3005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3005}

3005.1 The place, date, and hour of each hearing shall be fixed by the Board.

3005.2 The Board shall give an owner at least five (5) days notice, exclusive of Sundays and legal holidays, after the date of service of the notice, of the date, hour, and place of the hearing.

3005.3 Decorum and good order shall be maintained at all times during hearings. The Chairperson may exclude or have removed from the hearing room any person violating any reasonable order of the Chairperson.

3005.4 Persons may, for contumacious conduct, after having been afforded an opportunity to be heard, be barred from further participation in the proceedings.

3005.5 The owner shall be entitled to make an oral argument before the Board prior to the decision of the Board, subject to control by the Board of the time, extent, and manner or presentation of the oral argument.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 755, 762 (May 15, 1972), as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49DCR 9493 (October 18, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3006** CONTINUANCES {#sec-10-b3006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3006}

3006.1 A hearing scheduled to be conducted by the Board shall not necessarily be delayed by a request for a continuance unless a written request is received within two (2) days before the date on which the hearing is scheduled to be held, and in the opinion of the Board, sets forth good and sufficient cause for a continuance.

3006.2 Conflicting engagements of agents, absence of agents, or the employment of new agents will not be regarded as good grounds for continuance unless set forth in a written request filed promptly after notice of the hearing has been given, The Board, in its discretion, may waive this requirement for good cause shown.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 765 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3007** TESTIMONY AND WITNESSES {#sec-10-b3007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3007}

3007.1 All testimony at hearing before the Board shall be under oath or affirmation.

3007.2 Witnesses before the Board shall be examined orally, under oath or affirmation.

3007.3 Any member of the Board may question any witness at any time during or after examination or cross-examination.

3007.4 During the course of a hearing, the Board shall give all owners before it, and subject to §3003.2 any other party before it, reasonable opportunity for the presentation of evidence, the examination and cross-examination of witnesses, arguments in support of or in opposition to motions, and objections to rulings of the Board and arguments to the merits.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published al 18 DCR 760, 766 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3008** EVIDENCE {#sec-10-b3008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3008}

3008.1 Evidence presented at hearings before the Board shall be limited to material evidence relative to the issue arising in the proceeding.

3008.3 Evidence will be excluded in the discretion of the Board if it is irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious.

3008.4 The Board shall determine the materiality, relevance, and probative value of any evidence submitted.

3008.5 Any person making objections to the admissibility of evidence shall be prepared to state the grounds of the objection(s) relied upon.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 766 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3009** OFFERS OF PROOF {#sec-10-b3009 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3009}

3009.1 Any offer of proof made in connection with an objection taken to any ruling of the Board rejecting or excluding proffered oral testimony, shall consist of a statement for the record of the substance of the evidence which the person contends would be adduced by that testimony.

3009.2 If the excluded evidence consists of evidence in written form, or reference to documents or records, a copy of that written evidence shall be marked for identification and shall constitute the offer of proof.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 767 (May 15, 1972)*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3010** EXHIBITS {#sec-10-b3010 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3010}

3010.1 Exhibits offered in evidence at any hearing before the Board shall, if received by the Board, be retained by it and may be examined by a person at any time, during usual business hours.

3010.2 In its discretion, the Board may permit the withdrawal of original documents offered and received in evidence and substitute certified copies in place of the originals.

3010.3 When relevant and material matter offered in evidence is embraced in a book, paper, or document containing other matter not material or relevant, the person offering the document shall plainly designate the matter so offered, and the immaterial and irrelevant parts shall be excluded and shall be segregated insofar as is practicable.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 767 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3011** TRANSCRIPTS OF HEARINGS {#sec-10-b3011 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3011}

3011.1 Hearings shall be recorded under Board supervision.

3011.2 Approved transcripts of hearings shall be supplied by the Board to an individual affected by the proceedings upon request and the payment of the costs of the transcript.

3011.3 Changes in the official transcript may be made only when they involve errors affecting substantive matters.

3011.4 A motion to correct a transcript shall be filed with the Board within ten (10) days of receipt of the transcript. The Board shall rule on all motions to correct the transcript.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 768 (May 15, 1972).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3099** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3099 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3099}

3099.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Board - the Board of Condemnation of Insanitary Buildings.

Chairperson - the chairperson of the Board.

Department - the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

Insanitary - that which pertains to unhealthy conditions, with special reference to habitability, uncleanliness, and lack of freedom from infective and deleterious influences, including but not limited to non-watertight roofs, walls, floors, doors, or windows; improper grading or drainage; decayed roofs, walls, doors, floors, windows, or supporting structures; insufficient light or ventilation; open plumbing or sewer lines; lack of adequate plumbing or sewer lines; defective electrical system; danger from fire; presence of rodents, disease carrying insects, or conditions which facilitate their breeding; and general filthy conditions.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia or his or her designated agent or agents.

Parties - the owner of property subject to an Order of Condemnation and the Board for the Condemnation of Insanitary Buildings.

Person - an individual, association, partnership, limited liability company, or corporation.

Petitioner - the owner of property subject to an Order of Condemnation.

Uninhabitable or uninhabitability - the condition of being in an unlivable condition due to deterioration and infestation, improper maintenance, decaying structures, insufficient light or ventilation, inadequate plumbing, defective electrical system, or general filthy conditions that may cause health and safety concerns for the public, or that is a fire hazard or nuisance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 19 DCR 60 (July 24, 1972) incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 18 DCR 760, 759 (May 15, 1972), as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 9493 (October 18, 2002).*

### **10-B32** DHCD: DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY

##### **10-B DCMR § 3200** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b3200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3200}

3200.1 The purpose of this chapter is to set forth the policies and basic procedures for disposition of real property owned by the District of Columbia and under the control of the Department of Housing and Community Development. This chapter incorporates by reference U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations made applicable to the disposition process by the use of several funds from the acquisition or development of real property.

3200.2 The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all property owned by the District of Columbia and under the control of the Department of Housing and Community Development which is proposed for redevelopment or a combination of redevelopment and rehabilitation, whether the disposition of the property is for public or private reuse.

3200.3 This chapter shall apply only to the following actions:

(a) Determination of the types of dispositions;

(b) Form of offering;

(d) Selection criteria;

(e) Selection process;

(f) Changes subsequent to selection; and

(g) Modification of the Land Disposition Agreement.

3200.4 The timing of dispositions, the monitoring of the selection process, and post-contract or lease activities shall be determined by the Department of Housing and Community Development (also referred to in this chapter as the "Department") unless otherwise set forth in this chapter.

3200.5 The Department may, for good cause, extend times for submission of proposals or other documents required to be submitted under the provisions of this chapter, a prospectus, or an Exclusive Right Agreement, or otherwise modify the requirements of those documents.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §5 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, D.C. Law 1-39, D.C. Code §5-904 (1994), and Mayor's Order No. 76-111, May 3, 1976.*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3201** CONFLICT OF INTEREST {#sec-10-b3201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3201}

3201.1 A person shall be disqualified from participating as a member of a development team or from having any ownership interest in a proposed development if that participation would be a conflict of interest under the laws and regulations of the District.

3201.2 No individual may represent a community group, Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) or residents' association in meetings or public hearings conducted by the Department or in written communications if that individual has any direct, personal financial interest in the development team or development entity or will acquire any direct, personal benefit from the development of the site(s).

3201.3 The provisions of this chapter incorporate by reference the applicable requirements of the "District of Columbia Community Development Act of 1975" and the "Disposal of District Owned Surplus Real Property Amendment Act of 1989" and any amendments thereto.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7049 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3202** OFFERING POLICY {#sec-10-b3202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3202}

3202.1 The interest of the District normally is best served when the publicly owned land is disposed of through a competitive public process. Therefore, all land to be disposed of for private reuse (whether residential, commercial, or non-profit) shall normally be offered by a publicly announced competitive bid process, except as provided in §3202.3.

3202.2 Dispositions for public use (whether to the District government, the federal government or any other public instrumentality) shall be subject only to the provisions of §3212.1.

3202.3 The Department may waive its policy of competitive disposition if any of the following conditions exist:

(a) If a non-profit sponsor proposes to acquire a site for subsidized, owned or rented residential use or for the development of a community facility;

(b) If a non-profit sponsor proposes to acquire a site for retail or commercial use;

(c) If an existing property owner proposes to acquire an adjacent site to permit the expansion or improvement of the existing business or enterprise conducted on that owner's property;

(d) If a HUD-approved sponsor has qualified or is in the process of qualifying, for financial assistance under a HUD-administered housing assistance program; or

(e) If, in the opinion of the Director of the Department, such opinion being based upon a written recommendation resulting from objective economic analysis and reasonable development, forecasts, a competitive offering would be unlikely to significantly improve the quality of the development sought for site.

3202.4 For purposes of this section, the term "community facility" shall mean any facility which has as its primary purpose the provisions of educational, social, recreational, or spiritual services to all or part of the community on a not-for-profit basis.

3202.5 The Department, through the Director, may waive the requirement for competitive dispositions. The waiver shall be in writing and be based upon written recommendations resulting from objective economic analysis and reasonable development forecasts or some overriding public policy.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7050 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3203** OFFERING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-b3203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3203}

3203.1 Each offering shall be announced publicly, and the notices shall be given as widespread a dissemination as is practicable.

3203.2 All announcements shall be published one (1) or more times in the local press. Announcements shall also be distributed to all parties on record with the Department as desiring to receive announcements of site offerings, including Project Area Committees ("PAC"), directly-affected ANC's, community development corporations and other community organizations, as considered appropriate by the Department.

3203.3 If, under the conditions set forth in §3204, the Department authorizes an offering other than by prospectus, that offering shall be set forth in the public announcement of site availability.

3203.4 The public announcement of site availability shall contain the following:

(a) The parcel being offered;

(b) The use to which the parcel may be put;

(d) The material that must be submitted as part of a qualified proposal;

(e) Where and when the offering documents may be secured;

(f) The length of time the offering will be kept open and the deadline for submission of the proposals;

(g) The cost, if any, of securing the offering document and supporting materials;

(h) The criteria the Department will use in evaluating the proposals;

(i) The procedure the Department will follow to determine an acceptable proposal, including the time limits applicable to the procedure; and

(j) The procedure which will be used following acceptance of a proposal until execution of a disposition agreement.

3203.5 If final designation takes place more than six (6) months after the appraisal required under §3203.4(c), a new price shall be determined by an updated appraisal.

3203.6 An announcement shall be published in the local press when the offering documents and supporting materials are available for public distribution.

3203.7 Normally each offering document shall consist of a prospectus and supporting material.

3203.8 Each prospectus shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department before it is made available for public distribution. The Director shall approve the prospectus and authorize its publication.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7051 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3204** COUNCIL REVIEW OF OFFERING DOCUMENTS {#sec-10-b3204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3204}

3204.1 The provisions of this section shall apply to documents issued under §§3203 and 3205.

3204.2 Prior to the issuance of a prospectus, request for proposals or bids, or other notification to solicit offers ("offering documents") for properties controlled by the Department, the Department shall submit a draft copy of the offering document to the Council of the District of Columbia ("Council") for a ninety-day (90) period of review and approval, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, holidays and days of Council recess.

3204.3 Until approved by the Council during the review period, no offering document may be issued until the end of the thirty-day (30) period of review beginning the day the offering document is transmitted by the Department and received by the Chairperson of the Council, subject to the provisions of §3204.4.

3204.4 If, during the ninety-day (90) review period, the Council adopts a resolution disapproving the offering document, the document shall not be issued.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7052 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3205** OFFERING WITHOUT PROSPECTUS {#sec-10-b3205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3205}

3205.1 If the Director determines that appropriate circumstances exist, he or she may authorize the site to be offered other than through a prospectus.

3205.2 The form and content of each offering document issued under this section shall be reviewed and approved by the Director.

3205.3 The Director's determination that an offering should be made without the issuance of a prospectus shall be based on the following factors:

(a) The size of the site to be offered;

(b) The use(s) to which the site is to be put;

(d) The existence of exigencies warranting a shorter marketing period.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7053 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3206** PROSPECTUS: FORM AND CONTENT {#sec-10-b3206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3206}

3206.1 In general, each prospectus shall contain the following sections:

(a) Request for Proposals;

(b) Parcel and Neighborhood Information;

(d) Developer Submissions

(e) Selection Process;

(f) Developer's Kit; and

(g) Further information.

3206.2 The Director may, at his or her discretion, modify the content, of the sections listed in §3206.1 (and described in this section) to take account of relevant site and marketing conditions and legal requirements.

3206.3 The "Request for Proposals" section shall set forth clearly the site being offered, the general uses to which the site may be put, and other significant information affecting the development of the site.

3206.4 The "Parcel and Neighborhood Information" section shall include the following:

(a) A specific identification of the site being offered, the size of the site, and maximum permitted development;

(b) The sales price or lease rate for the site, if established and timing for the establishment of the sales price or lease rate;

(c) Whether the land price or lease rate is fixed or whether it shall be competitive (a minimum rate, but no maximum rate); and

(d) A summary of the land use controls that apply to site, if any.

3206.5 Where appropriate, the applicable land use controls shall be attached as part of the supporting materials in the "Parcel and Neighborhood Information" section.

3206.6 In the "Selection Criteria" section, the following criteria (and other criteria that may be established by the Director) shall be clearly set forth so that prospective developers will clearly understand the factors to be used in evaluation of the proposals:

(a) Experience of development team;

(b) Financial capacity;

(c) Development program proposed for site; (including any special development considerations that will be considered by the Department);

(d) Design concept, to the extent applicable, which shall set forth the process by which designs will be reviewed and any special design considerations that will be considered by the Department; and

(e) Minority and local participation program, which shall indicate the areas in which participation is sought, and any standards established for the participation.

3206.7 The "Developer Submission" section shall require the following materials to be submitted in response to an offering:

(a) A proposal letter indicating amount and type of deposit (if required). A form letter shall be included as part of the supporting materials;

(b) A resume setting forth the previous experience of each member of the development team with developments comparable to that being offered, including specific examples of those developments with their commencement and completion dates. The development team includes the prospective developer, the architect, the legal representative(s), the financial entity and other professional advisors on the project;

(d) A completed Form 6004, Part II - "Redeveloper's Statement of Financial Responsibility," together with current financial statements of the redeveloper or principals of the redeveloper;

(f) A narrative description of proposed development, describing magnitude of development, type and location of proposed uses, as well as approximate area for each proposed use, where appropriate;

(g) Statements regarding minority and local participation in the planning, ownership and management of proposed development;

(i) An indication of the number of copies of submission documents that are required.

3206.8 The statements submitted under §3206.7(g) regarding minority and local participation shall include the following:

(a) Identification of all minorities and women on or expected to be part of the development team;

(b) A description of efforts to be made to provide minority and local residents with employment and business opportunities during the life of proposed development; and

(c) A description of previous efforts and accomplishments in the hiring of minorities and women in the development process, where applicable.

3206.9 The "Selection Process" section shall set forth in sufficient detail the sequence of events that will occur from the time the submissions are received by the Department until a Land Disposition Agreement (or Contract For Sale Of Land) is executed. In general this sequence shall consist of the following stages:

(a) Stage I: Review of submissions leading to selection by the Director0;

(b) Stage II: Refinement of proposals through the Exclusive Right Agreement process or otherwise - which will lead to. final scheduling of public hearing and consideration of final selection; and

3206.10 The "Further Information" section shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the specific person or office to which inquiries should be directed. This section may also set forth any procedures the Department may establish to provide clarification of the submissions.

3206.11 The "Developer's Kit" section shall list all supporting materials that are to be supplied to a prospective developer. The material shall provide the following:

(a) Detailed specific information regarding the development controls that apply to the site;

(b) Official maps showing dimensions of site and location of any specific building restrictions (including easements, set-backs, and similar restrictions);

(d) Any instruction, guidelines, laws and regulations that must be complied with as part of the required submission; and

(e) Other information which may assist a prospective developer in the preparation of the required submission.

3206.12 A reasonable fee may be charged for the information provided in the prospectus or other offering document. This fee shall bear a reasonable relationship to the Department's cost in preparing and assembling the information.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7054 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3207** PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-b3207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3207}

3207.1 In the case of private development, the Department shall only give final designation to a developer and dispose of a site after holding a duly authorized public hearing in accordance with applicable law.

3207.2 The Department shall hold a public hearing when it is satisfied that the following criteria have been met:

(a) The prospective developer is organized consistent with the conditions established by the Department at the time of selection;

(b) The proposal for development has sufficiently progressed, and adequate documentation has been submitted, to assure the Department that the proposed development will be economically feasible, meet public policy objectives, and satisfy all legal and Department requirements;

(d) The prospective developer has demonstrated the ability to finance the proposed development;

(e) The Affirmative Action Plan and Community Participation Program are approved; and

(f) There is agreement on the substantive provisions of the Land Disposition Agreement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7058 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3208** PRE-HEARING REVIEW {#sec-10-b3208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3208}

3208.1 Prior to public hearing, the proposals shall be reviewed under the procedures set forth in this section.

3208.2 Proposals received as the result of a public offering document shall be reviewed by the Department staff.

3208.3 The Department shall transmit, for review and comment, all proposals to community organizations, including the Project Area Committee ("PAC") in the project area in which the offered site is located, the local Advisory Neighborhood Commission(s) ("ANC's") and the local community development corporations whose boundaries encompass the offered site and, when appropriate, other organizations within the community surrounding the offered site which, in the opinion of the Department, represent a broad cross-section of the community.

3208.4 The Department shall make a reasonable number of copies of the submission documents constituting the proposal available to each community organization. However, if large architectural plans are submitted, the Department shall not be required to reproduce those plans, but may distribute whatever extra copies of the plans that are received as part of the submission.

3208.5 The community organizations shall have thirty (30) days from the date copies of proposals are received to provide the Department with written comments and recommendations. For good cause, the Department may shorten this time consistent with applicable law.

3208.6 When necessary to the selection process, within a reasonable time after distribution of the proposals to the community groups, the Department shall schedule interviews with each of the prospective developers submitting a proposal.

3208.7 Notices of interview schedules shall be distributed to each community organization receiving a copy of the proposal. Notices shall indicate the date, time and place for each interview.

3208.8 The interviews shall be conducted by a panel consisting of member of the staff selected by the Director of the Department, one (1) of whom shall act as chairperson.

3208.9 Community representatives may be invited to sit on the interview panel.

3208.10 Each member of the interview panel shall have the right to ask questions and to request the interviewee to supply additional information or clarification that may be needed to complete the review of the submission.

3208.11 Prior to the interviews, the Department shall prepare and submit to the Director a written analysis of the proposals. The analysis shall reflect any community group comments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7059 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3209** SELECTION PROCESS {#sec-10-b3209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3209}

3209.1 The Director shall select a developer, reject all proposals or direct the Department to provide further evaluation of one (1) or more of the proposals based upon specific stated concerns.

3209.2 If the Department is directed to provide further evaluation, upon receipt of that evaluation, the Director shall select a developer or reject all proposals.

3209.3 The selection of a developer shall, in accordance with the offering document, be either in the form of a grant of an Exclusive Right Agreement to prepare a developmental proposal ("Exclusive Right") or a tentative designation ("Tentative Designation").

3209.4 Developers or members of the development team entity whose names are on the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) list of debarred, suspended or ineligible bidders, shall be disqualified from participating in the development. The Department shall review the list and advise the developer of any names.

3209.5 Final selection or designation of a redeveloper under either an Exclusive Right Agreement or a Tentative Designation shall be made by the Director following a public hearing in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

3209.6 Notification of proposed final developer selection by the Department shall be mailed or delivered to the Project Area Committees, the directly-affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, local community development corporations and other community organizations considered appropriate by the Department.

3209.7 Normally, notice shall be mailed or delivered thirty (30) days prior to the date of the proposed action, but shorter notice may be given where necessary and as may be permitted by law.

3209.8 The Director's final selection or designation shall be in writing and shall set forth the findings the Department has made upon which the final selection or designation of the redeveloper is based.

3209.9 Comments by the ANC shall be given great weight and adverse comments shall be considered specifically in the Director's findings.

3209.10 The Director's written designation shall also approve the terms and conditions of the proposed Land Disposition Agreement (or Contract For The Sale Of Land) and authorize its execution by either a date certain or within thirty (30) days of the Director's approval.

3209.11 The written designation shall also approve the land price or lease rate, if that price or rate has not been previously approved by the Department.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7060 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3210** EXCLUSIVE RIGHT SELECTION {#sec-10-b3210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3210}

3210.1 An exclusive right designation shall be used in competitive dispositions when the Department determines that because of market conditions, size of the site, or use of the site, selection of a developer should be made on the basis of the developer's qualifications and the substance of the development proposal or where the prospectus is to be supplemented to control the relationship with the prospective developer prior to final designation.

3210.2 An Exclusive Right Agreement (ERA) shall provide that the grantee shall have the exclusive right to prepare and submit a development proposal to the Department and that during the time the ERA is in effect, the Department will neither solicit nor negotiate any other development proposal for the site.

3210.3 The Director may accept, reject or request modifications to the proposal submitted.

3210.4 The Director, following acceptance of a development proposal, shall authorize the scheduling of a public hearing on the designation of the developer and the terms and conditions or the Land Disposition Agreement.

3210.5 The grant of an exclusive right by the Department shall be conditioned upon prompt execution of an Exclusive Right Agreement.

3210.6 Where appropriate, a form copy of the ERA shall be included as part of supporting materials referred to in the offering document.

3210.7 The Exclusive Right Agreement shall set forth in appropriate detail, the requirements for submission of a development proposal and a schedule of the submission of the requirements. The Agreement shall contain the following provisions:

(a) The terms and conditions for the submission, and the amount and conditions for the return of the good faith deposit;

(b) A description of the Community Participation Program designed to ensure reasonable community participation in the preparation of the development proposal;

(f) A list of documents and materials that will constitute the final proposal submission; and

(g) The provisions for the granting of the extensions under the Agreement, including, at the discretion of the Department, reasonable charges as consideration for the Director's granting of any such extensions.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7062 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3211** TENTATIVE DESIGNATION SELECTION {#sec-10-b3211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3211}

3211.1 A tentative designation selection shall be used in competitive dispositions where, in the judgment of the Department, marketing conditions the size of the site, or the use of site will permit the Director to impose more detailed requirements in the submission of proposals or where the designation is required by the federal or local program to which the sponsor has or intends to apply.

3211.2 A tentative designation shall provide that upon satisfactory and timely completion of the terms and conditions of the prospectus and any other conditions imposed in connection with the tentative designation, the Department will schedule a public hearing on the designation of the developer and the proposed land disposition agreement.

3211.3 Upon completion of the public hearing, the Director may authorize the execution of the Land Disposition Agreement.

3211.4 The responsibilities of the tentatively designated developer shall include the following:

(a) Time for submission of a development schedule covering activities from tentative designation through execution of the land disposition agreement;

(b) Submission of evidence of construction and permanent financing;

(d) Submission of additional architectural plans.

3211.5 The responsibilities of the Department during the period shall include the following:

(a) Preparation of draft Land Disposition Agreement;

(b) Establishment of land price;

(d) Review and approval. of financial plans;

(e) Review and approval of Affirmative Action Plans;

(f) Review and approval of Citizen Participation Plans; and

(g) Scheduling of a public hearing to dispose of the site to the developer.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7063 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3212** UNSOLICITED OFFERS FOR DEVELOPMENT {#sec-10-b3212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3212}

3212.1 All unsolicited offers for Department sites sent or referred to the Department shall be forwarded to the Director of the Department for appropriate action.

3212.2 The Director or an assigned member of the Department shall immediately acknowledge the offer for development and advise the offeror that the Director will do the following:

(a) Authorize negotiations;

(b) Deny the request for negotiations; or

3212.3 When the Director decides to authorize under §3212.2(a), the authorization shall be based upon a finding of the existence of one (1) or more of the conditions set forth in §3202.3.

3212.4 The Department shall notify the offeror in writing that the request for negotiation is to be considered by the Director.

3212.5 The Director shall either reject or conditionally accept the offer of the developer and shall stipulate a time by which negotiations are to be completed. The Director may also require periodic reports on the status of the negotiations.

3212.6 If the offer is rejected, the Department shall forward a copy of the Director's decision to the offeror.

3212.7 If the offer is conditionally accepted, the Director shall instruct the staff to submit to proposal to the Council for a ninety-day (90) review and approval period and to simultaneously begin negotiations with the offeror.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7065 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3213** NEGOTIATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b3213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3213}

3213.1 When the Director authorizes the Department to negotiate the disposition of a site with a named prospective developer, the staff shall do the following:

(a) Notify the prospective developer in writing that the Director has authorized the Department to commence negotiations and that the negotiations must be completed within a stipulated period of time; and

(b) Provide the prospective developer with a list of concerns that must be addressed by the prospective developer during the negotiation period.

3213.2 The concerns to be addressed by the developer shall include the following:

(a) The nature and extent of the proposed use, as well as the procedure and timing for the submission of plans, drawings, and other graphic material. This material shall be in sufficient detail to permit the Department to make a reasonable judgment as to the design and financial feasibility of the proposed development;

(b) The nature and extent of the proposed financing, including source of both debt and equity funds, as well as the procedure and timing for the submission of financing documents. This information shall be in sufficient detail as to permit the Department to make a reasonable judgment as to financial feasibility of the proposed development;

(c) The purchase price or lease rate for the site or the schedule for the Department's determination of the price or lease rate;

(d) The nature and extent of the steps the prospective developer proposes to take to ensure community participation in the planning and development of the project;

(e) The nature and extent of the Affirmative Action Program the prospective developer proposes to follow to ensure adequate opportunities are made available to minorities and women in the planning, management, and development of the project and in leasing of commercial space in the completed project;

(f) The qualifications of each of the members of the development team. The required information shall include materials regarding the background, experience and capability of each team member, as well as any organizational document relating to the offeror's legal entity;

(g) The extent to which minorities and women and local groups participate in the equity ownership of the proposed project; and

(h) The terms and conditions of the proposed Land Disposition Agreement. A draft agreement should be made available to the prospective developer as quickly as possible.

3213.3 The Department shall arrange meetings or conferences, and provide other assistance that may be necessary to ensure that a formal proposal that addresses the concerns set forth in this section is submitted within the time stipulated in the Director's decision. If the Department is of the opinion that for good and sufficient reasons the deadlines cannot be met, it shall request the Director to extend the negotiation time for a reasonable period.

3213.4 When negotiations have been completed and a formal proposal is submitted to the Department, the Department shall review the proposal and shall submit the proposal to the appropriate community organizations (see § 3208.3 for definition of "appropriate community organizations"). These organizations shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of the proposal to provide the Department with written comments.

3213.5 Prior to final designation, the Department shall prepare and submit to the Director a written analysis of the proposal along with any comments by Council issued during the ninety-day (90) Council review and comment period, and any written community comments.

3213.6 The Director may accept, reject, or direct the Department to further negotiate the proposal.

3213.7 If further negotiations are directed, the Director shall indicate the specific area to be renegotiated and the reason for renegotiation.

3213.8 The decision accepting the proposal shall be in accordance with the provisions of §§ 3209.5 through 3209.11.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7066 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3214** MODIFICATIONS PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGNATION {#sec-10-b3214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3214}

3214.1 When the Director authorizes an exclusive right or tentative designation, he or she shall make certain findings regarding major elements of the prospective redeveloper's proposal. Consequently, if prior to the submission of final proposal the redeveloper desires to substantially modify any of these elements, then the Department shall advise the Director in writing so that the Director will have the opportunity to determine whether to continue the Director's exclusive right or tentative designation.

3214.2 Modification, including but not limited to, the following elements of the redeveloper's proposal shall be submitted to the Director for consideration:

(a) Substantial change in the land use;

(b) Substantial change in size, or type of improvement;

(d) Substantial change in membership of the development team; or

(e) Substantial change in minority or local participation in the ownership or management of the redevelopers;

3214.3 Any change in the redeveloper, the proposal, or membership of the redeveloper's team after final selection, but prior to execution of the Land Disposition: Agreement, shall be governed by §3206.1.

3214.4 A modification subsequent to execution of the Land Disposition Agreement shall be governed by the terms of the agreement.

3214.5 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in the land use" shall mean any change requiring a modification of the Department-approved development plan.

3214.6 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in size, or type of improvement" shall mean any size change in excess of ten percent (10%) of the total square footage of the building, or any change that would result in a change in the primary use for which the building was designed. A change of some office use to retail use, or vice versa, would not require Department approval if the building remains primarily an office building or retail facility.

3214.7 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in ownership of developer" shall mean any ownership change that would result in a change of a general partner or corporate officer or more than ten percent (10%) of the ownership interest of limited partners or shareholders.

3214.8 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in membership of the development team" shall mean any change in the developer, architect, builder, attorney, lender leasing agent, financial advisor, management consultant, or other major component from that previously presented to the Department.

3214.9 For purposes of this section, the phrase "substantial change in minority or local participation in the ownership or management of the redevelopers" shall mean any change the result of which will be to alter the percentage of minority or local participation more than ten percent (10%) from that previously presented to the Director, or a change that results in loss of majority status.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7068 (October 28, 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3215** RELOCATION, FINANCIAL AND OTHER ASSISTANCE FOR DISPLACED PERSONS OR BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b3215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3215}

3215.1 Persons or businesses displaced by the Department's disposition activities shall be entitled to and may exercise benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. (42 USCA §4601 et seq., as amended).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulernaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7070 (October 28. 1994).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3216** APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR DISPLACED PERSONS OR BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b3216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3216}

3216.1 After receipt of a written decision by the Department, a qualified person or business may file an appeal within fifteen (15) days with the Administration for Neighborhood Preservation and Commercial Development, on any case in which he or she believes the Department has done any of the following:

(a) Failed to property determine eligibility under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USCA §4601, et seq., as amended); or

(b) Failed to follow the procedures set forth in the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USCA §4601, et seq., as amended).

3216.2 The appeal shall be in writing, and may include any related statement; of fact or other material.

3216.3 Within fifteen (15) days after receipt of all information submitted by a person in support of his or her appeal, the Administrator of the Neighborhood Preservation and Commercial Development, or his or her designee, shall make a written determination on the appeal and shall furnish the person with a copy.

3216.4 The written determination shall include at least the following:

(a) The Department's decision, upon review of the appeal;

(b) The factual and legal basis upon which the decision is based, including any relevant explanation; and

3216.5 An appeal to the Director of the Department shall be in writing, and may include any additional information pertinent to the case not earlier submitted to the Administrator.

3216.6 Within thirty (30) days after receipt of all information submitted by the person making the appeal, the Director, DHCD, or his or her designee shall review the case and make a written determination on the appeal.

3216.7 A copy of the written determination made pursuant to §3216.6 shall be furnished to the person making the appeal and shall include at least the following:

(a) The decision on review of the appeal;

(b) The factual and legal basis upon which the decision is based; and

3216.8 Nothing in this section shall preclude a person from seeking judicial review of his or her appeal on its merits after exhaustion of all administrative remedies available under this section.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 41 DCR 7048, 7070 (October 28, 1994).*

### **10-B33** DISTRESSED PROPERTIES IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 3300** PROGRAM SCOPE {#sec-10-b3300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3300}

3300.1 This chapter shall govern the application and certification requirements for deferral or moratorium of up to five (5) years on real property taxes, and for tax deferral of any indebtedness owed the District including deferral or forgiveness of tax liens and water/sewer fees, for occupied rental properties that are distressed as authorized in §§804 and 805 of the Rental Housing Act of 1985 (the "Act").

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §§802(e) and 804(a) of the Rental Housing Act of 1985, D.C. Law 6-10, D.C. Code §45-2584(a) (1981); and Mayor 's Order 86-27, as amended, 33 DCR 1651 (March 14, 1986).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3301** DISTRESS PROPERTY {#sec-10-b3301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3301}

3301.1 In accordance with §103 of the Act, for purposes of eligibility to receive the benefits of this Program, a distressed property means a rental housing accommodation that meets all of the following criteria:

(a) Is experiencing and has experienced a negative cash flow as defined in §3399 of this chapter for the most recent two (2) years of operation and that this negative cashs flow status has directly affected the ability of the housing provider to make normal and routine repairs and scheduled improvements to the property;

(b) Has been cited by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) as being in substantial non-compliance with the Housing Regulations of the District of Columbia and that DCRA has conducted inspection(s) of the property and cited deficiencies to the property and significant deficiencies have been abated and the property has remained in non-compliance for at least the last two (2) years;

(d) Has been in arrears for a period of one hundred eighty (180) days or more on either permanent mortgage loan payments, property tax payments, fuel and utility payments or water and sewer fee payments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3302** DISTRESSED PROPERTIES IMPROVEMENT PLAN {#sec-10-b3302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3302}

3302.1 For purposes of this Program, a Distressed Properties Improvement Plan (the Plan) shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) A schedule of proposed repairs and capital improvements to bring the property into total or substantial compliance with the District's Housing Code;

(b) A schedule of proposed services and facilities to adequately maintain the property;

(d) A schedule of mortgage payments, which may reflect proposed additional long-term loans to the housing provider for the housing accommodation;

(e) A schedule of additional capital investment in the housing accommodation proposed by the housing provider;

(f) A schedule of proposed property tax payments which may include deferral or moratoria on real property taxes of up to five (5) years or the deferral or forgiveness of up to one hundred percent (100%) of any taxes or charges owed to the District on the rental housing accommodation;

(g) Tenant occupancy characteristics, income and tenant rent arrearages;

(h) A description of the involvement of the Tenant's or Tenant's Association in the development of the Plan; and

(i) A program for training and counseling tenants and housing providers on their rights and responsibilities and a proposed plan for information exchange or other involvement of tenants concerning management of the property.3302.2 The detailed requirements of the Plan shall be established by DHCD in the application package provided by DHCD in the application package provided by DHCD, consistent with the components of the Plan as outlined in this section.

3202.3 If the Plan developed proposes increases in rents beyond the rent ceilings allowed under the Rent Stabilization Program of the Act for the rental housing accommodation, the applicant shall be required to justify the rent increases in one of the following ways:

(a) A properly executed claim of exemption from the Rent Stabilization Program has been filed for the property under the Act pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2515 (1981) (chapter 41 of Title 14, DCMR) based on federal or District subsidies of the mortgage or rents, an executed building improvement plan under the apartment improvement program, or other authorized exemptions; or

(b) The property has received an adjustment in rent ceiling under the Act pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2517 (1981) (§4208 of Title 14, DCMR) including capital improvement petitions, hardship petitions or other authorized adjustment methods. A property for which the housing provider has applied for, but not received, such an adjustment may be received for review by DHCD.3302.4 If the Plan is dependent on obtaining an exemption from rent ceilings as provided in §3302.3(a), and the exemption requires approval of an application for a subsidy program, then the applicant shall be required to meet the requirements of that subsidy program also, in its Plan and application under this program.

3302.5 If the Plan is dependent on receiving approval of an adjustment in rent ceilings as provided in §3302.3(b), then the Director may request the Rent Administrator of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to provide an expedited preliminary review of the requested adjustment.

3302.6 In developing the Plan, the housing provider may provide for a schedule of rents which would yield a rate of return not to exceed twelve percent (12%), consistent with the definition of rate of return in the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2542 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3303** PRE-APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b3303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3303}

3303.1 The Department of Housing and Community Development may contract with a service provider to provide preliminary technical assistance to housing providers who contemplate making application to the Department under the Program. This technical assistance may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Assisting the housing provider in the preparation of financial spread sheets and in the analysis of financial information to chart an approach which will offer the property a more acceptable cash flow;

(b) Offering the housing provider guidance in the securing of specific technical services such as a market appraisal or a household survey; and

3303.2 The use of these services, if provided, shall not be a requirement for any applicant under the program, and each applicant shall have the right to submit an application without receiving any assistance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2544 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3304** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b3304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3304}

3304.1 All applicants for benefits or assistance under the Program shall apply to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) on an application form prescribed by the DHCD.

3304.2 The application shall include, but not be limited to, the Plan required by §3302.

3304.3 Applications which do not contain all of the information and materials required by the application form shall not be considered by the DHCD.

3304.4 All complete applications and corroborating documents submitted in support of the application, shall be reviewed for program eligibility consistent with this chapter, by the Neighborhood Improvement Administration (NIA) of DHCD.

3304.5 In making the determination of eligibility, DHCD may take official notice of any information in the records of DHCD or of any other District of Columbia Agency.

3304.6 As part of its application review, DHCD may require an applicant to provide any additional information needed to determine the eligibility of the project. This may include requiring applicants to provide copies of any tax return the applicant is required to file under Title 45 or 47 of the D.C. Code, and authorization for DHCD to confirm the contents of these returns with the Department of Finance and Revenue.

3304.7 Applicants whose applications are determined not to meet eligibility criteria shall be sent a letter of rejection from the Administrator of NIA. Applications which meet the eligibility criteria shall be forwarded to the Director of DHCD for final determination and written notification of eligibility to the applicant.

3404.8 A determination of eligibility for one type of abatement or incentive under the Program shall not provide eligibility for another type of abatement or incentive.

3404.9 Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as creating a right or entitlement for any applicant.

3404.10 The DHCD may establish application submission timing requirements, which may include the establishment of time periods during the year when applications will be accepted, including coordination with the timing requirements of §3306.12,

3404.11 Applications may be accepted from one of the following:

(a) A housing provider, as defined in §3399; or

(b) A potential housing provider for a rental housing accommodation provided that the following conditions are met:

(1) The application has a binding contract (or other firm evidence of site control acceptable to DHCD) to purchase the rental housing accommodation;

(2) The existing owner of the property has fully complied with the provisions of District law concerning tenants' first right to purchase;

(3) The applicant meets all other requirements of this chapter; and

(4) The proposed contract purchase price is determined by DHCD to not reflect unreasonable enhancement in value of the property in anticipation of receiving benefits under this Program.

3304.12 The DHCD may establish selective review criteria to assist in choosing which applications best meet the interest of the District among proposals which meet all other eligibility and certification criteria of the Program.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2545 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3305** CERTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM {#sec-10-b3305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3305}

3305.1 A rental housing accommodation which meets all the criteria for a distressed property as defined in §3302 may be eligible for consideration of tax deferral, moratorium or forgiveness if it also meets the certification criteria of this section.

3305.2 At least fifteen percent (15%) of the units (referred to as "reserved units") in the rental housing accommodation shall be made available at rents which are affordable by lower and moderate income households during the ten (10) year period of the rent regulatory agreement under §3309. In determining compliance with this requirement, the following shall apply:

(a) Affordable rents shall not exceed an amount to be determined periodically by DHCD which shall be no higher than thirty percent (30%) of. the monthly gross income of lower and moderate income households of appropriate household size in relation to unit size;

(b) In determining the number of units for compliance with the fifteen percent (15%) requirement of this subsection, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded up to the next highest whole number; and

(c) Where essential utilities are not provided as part of the rent, a reasonable allowance for utilities as determined by DHCD shall be subtracted from the maximum allowable rent in determining compliance with affordable rent requirements.

3305.3 The maximum allowable rents for reserved units including utilities, determined periodically by DHCD pursuant to §3305.2, shall be based on thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of annual income limits for very low income families under the Federal Section 8 Program, applied as follows:

Type of Unit

Applicable Section 8 Very Low Income Unit

Efficiency

1 Bedroom

2 Bedroom

3 Bedroom

4 Bedroom

5 Bedroom

One person limit

Two person limit

Three person limit

Five person limit

Seven person limit

Eight person limit

3305.4 The housing provider shall certify to DHCD that he or she shall rent all reserved units in the project only to lower and moderate income households.

3305.5 Thirty-five percent (35%) of the units in the project, which shall be in addition to the percentage of units required in §3305.2, shall be made available on a priority basis for a period of five (5) years to households in possession of a Certificate of Eligibility from DHCD under the Section 8 Existing Housing Program or the Tenant Assistance Program; Provided, that nothing shall prevent the housing provider from renting these units to other households under the following conditions:

(a) The proposed rental rates exceed the maximum rents allowed under the Section 8 or Tenant Assistance Programs;

(b) Insufficient households with certificates actually apply for the units; or

3305.6 The units specified in §3305.3 shall be considered made available on a priority basis if the housing provider gives advance notice to DHCD of the actual or expected availability of units for the following priority periods:

(a) For units offered for initial occupancy, a period of ninety (90) days; or

(b) For units becoming available after initial occupancy, a period of thirty (30) days.

3305.7 For projects containing forty (40) or more units, not less than fifty percent (50%) of reserved units in the completed project shall contain two (2) or more bedrooms.

3305.8 In determining the number of units for compliance with the fifty percent (50%) requirement, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded down to the next lowest whole number.

3305.9 The housing provider shall be required to enter into a rent regulatory agreement with DHCD, covering the reserved units, consistent with §3310.

3305.10 The housing provider shall have certified to DHCD that none of the rental units in the project which are subject to a condominium regime at any time during the term of the rent regulatory agreement, shall be offered for sale or sold during the term of the rent regulatory agreement.

3305.11 The requirement of §3305.8 may be waived by the Director upon a finding of the following:

(a) There are not a sufficient number of existing two (2) or more bedroom units in the project prior to rehabilitation to meet the requirement; or

(b) It would be physically or economically infeasible for the project to convert existing units to two (2) or more bedrooms to meet the requirement, or that the conversion would displace existing tenants in the project.

3305.12 For projects where the Director has provided a waiver under §§3305.11, DHCD may require that all existing two-bedroom or larger units in the project be reserved units.

3305.13 For projects which have lower and moderate income households in residence, adequate provision shall be made in the Plan or application for assistance to assure that rents remain affordable and that relocation assistance is provided for those persons required to move.

3305.14 Funding to provide relocation assistance and affordable rents for existing lower and moderate income tenants shall be assured by the housing provider, and may include, but shall not be limited to, one or more of the following:

(a) If funds are available, a request for funding under the Tenant Assistance Program (TAP), or the Section 8 Rental Rehabilitation or Moderate Rehabilitation Programs, to subsidize the rents of eligible tenants needing assistance in relation to the proposed rents in the Plan (requests for TAP funding under this Program shall receive priority consideration);

(b) Requests for other District or federal funding available to subsidize proposed improvements to the property at a level which will keep rents affordable to existing tenants; or

3305.15 Lower and moderate income tenants living in the property, at the time the Plan under this program is approved, shall be entitled to affordable rents by one or more of the following methods:

(a) Approval and acceptance of subsidies to the tenant(s) under the District’s Tenant Assistance Program or the federal Section 8 Program;

(b) Placement of the tenant(s) in a reserved unit, as defined in §3305.2; Provided, that the rent level of the reserved unit does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income;

(c) Assurance that the existing rent level of the tenant shall be maintained for a period of four (4) years; Provided, that the following adjustments to the existing rent level shall be allowed:

(1) If thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant 's annual income is higher than the existing rent level, that amount may be charged during the four (4) year period, with allowance for the housing provider making an annual redetermination of income of the tenant during the four (4) year period; and

(2) The existing rent level may be increased during the four (4) year period by the amount of the adjustment of general applicability in the rent ceiling as determined annually pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2516 (1981); or

(d) Creation of an adequate special fund for the property which provides a subsidy between the rent level required under paragraph (c) of this subsection and the proposed rent level of the unit under the Plan for the four (4) year period.

3305.16 Tenants who are required to move, as determined at the time the Plan is approved, because of housing overcrowding, and who cannot be accommodated by a move within the property or by proposed improvements to the building, shall be entitled to receive the following:

(a) Payment for relocation moving expenses at least equivalent to the assistance payable for displaced tenants under Title VII of the Act as set forth in D.C. Code §45-2573; and

(b) For lower and moderate income tenants living in the property at the time the Plan under this program is approved, the housing provider shall provide either a TAP or Section 8 Existing Housing Certificate or a housing assistance payment equal to forty-eight (48) times the amount obtained by subtracting the existing rent level of the tenant, or thirty percent (30%) of one twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income if that is higher, from the lesser of the following:

(1) The monthly rent of a comparable replacement dwelling, not to exceed the fair market rent level established by the federal government for the Section 8 existing housing program; or

(2) The monthly rent of the unit the tenant actually moves to; Provided, that the unit is in substantial compliance with the D.C. Housing Code.

3305.17 Housing providers may make the housing assistance payment on a lump sum basis or, with the tenant's consent, on a monthly basis.

3305.18 Low and moderate income tenants who are not required to move under the Plan, but who freely elect to move from the property after approval of the Plan, shall not be eligible for the relocation or other assistance as provided in this section.

3305.19 Tenants who are required to move on a temporary basis to allow for rehabilitation work on the property shall be provided adequate interim housing accommodations at affordable rents consistent with this section.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2547 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3306** REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b3306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3306}

3306.1 A rental housing accommodation which meets the eligibility and certification criteria of §3300 through §3305 shall be reviewed for consideration of tax deferral, moratorium or forgiveness in accordance with this section. This may include the deferral or moratorium on real property taxes for up to five (5) years, or the deferral or forgiveness or any indebtedness owed to the District, including but not limited to any outstanding tax liens, real property taxes, and unpaid water and sewer fees.

3306.2 The granting of tax or debt adjustments shall be based on a determination by DHCD that the action is in the best interest of the District, and consistent with the District 's rental housing needs in terms of its location, type and variety of sizes of rental units, as specified in this chapter.

3306.3 In reviewing applications and related plans, DHCD may consider the following:

(a) The interests of tenants in achieving decent, safe, and sanitary housing at affordable rents;

(b) The long-term interest of the housing provider in achieving a sound investment and a reasonable return on the housing provider's investment;

(d) The long-term interest of the District in achieving a decent, safe, and sanitary housing accommodation which is fiscally sound and which generates and pays its fair property tax assessment.

3306.4 The DHCD shall review each application for financial feasibility, based on commonly accepted underwriting criteria established by the Department and disclosed to applicants as part of the application package for the program.

3306.5 The DHCD review shall establish the amounts of deferral, moratorium or forgiveness which create the minimum financial loss to the District and also make the project financially feasible.

3306.6 In determining specific amounts of deferral or forgiveness, DHCD shall use the following order of priorities:

(a) Deferral of some or all real property taxes owed only;

(b) Some deferral and some forgiveness of real property taxes owed only;

(d) Forgiveness of all real property taxes owed and deferral of some or all water and sewer fees owed;

(e) Forgiveness of all real property taxes owed plus some deferral and some forgiveness of water and sewer fees owed;

(f) Forgiveness of all real property taxes owed and all water and sewer fees owed; and

(g) Up to five (5) years deferral or moratorium of future real property tax liability.

3306.7 In reviewing the Plan in each application, DHCD shall determine whether any proposed rent increases are authorized consistent with the Act, or consistent with other program requirements or rent restriction if the property is exempt under the Act.

3306.8 The Director may incorporate all of the increases to the rent ceilings approved by the Rent Administrator consistent with §3302.3(b).

3306.9 In determining whether to incorporate part or all of the rent increase proposed, pursuant to either paragraph (a) or (b) of §3302.3, the Director shall take into consideration the impact of these increases on the tenants of the property.

3306.10 Applicants approved under this Program may only implement rent ceiling increases consistent with the final schedule of rents and rent increases approved by the Director.

3306.11 An applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary approvals of rent increases required by District law and regulations from the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

3306.12 Applicants for projects financed under a Multi-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program of the D.C. Housing and Finance Agency may be certified by DHCD for tax or debt adjustments; Provided, that the following has occurred:

(a) The project has a firm written commitment of financing from the D.C. Housing Finance Agency;

(b) The D.C. Housing Finance Agency has certified in writing to the Director of DHCD that the project will be financially infeasible without the granting of deferral or forgiveness to the District in the amounts and under the terms and conditions proposed by the D.C. Housing Finance Agency, which are consistent with this chapter;

(c) The Director of DHCD has not received any information pursuant to the provisions of §§3304.5 and 3304.6 which would cause him or her to determine that the granting of deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness would not be in the best interest of the District; and

(d) The D.C. Housing Finance Agency has certified in writing, and DHCD has confirmed, that the project meets the requirements of §§3305.5 and 3305.13 through 3305.19.

3306.13 All other applicants may be certified by DHCD for tax or debt adjustment; Provided, that the following requirements are met:

(a) All certification criteria of §3305 and review requirements of §3306 have been met;

(b) The DHCD has made a determination that the project is infeasible without deferral or forgiveness, based on the feasibility analysis under §3306.4;

(d) The Director of DHCD has made a determination, where applicable based on the feasibility analysis under §3306.4, that project income is insufficient, and that a deferral or moratorium of future real property tax liability appears to be in the best interest of the District and consistent with the program intent.

3306.14 In order for a project certified eligible for tax deferral or moratorium of future real property tax liability to receive the first year of deferral or moratorium, the following shall be delivered to, and stamped "received" by the D.C. Department of Finance and Revenue not later than the, close of business on the last business day prior to the start of a new tax year on July 1st:

(a) An executed Certificate of Occupancy for all units in the project; and

(b) All additional documentation as specified by DHCD in accordance with this chapter.3306.15 If the Certificate of Occupancy or other required documents are received after the time specified in §3306.14, the project shall not receive real property tax deferral or moratorium until the tax year which begins on July 1st of the following calendar year.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2552 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3307** ANNUAL FORGIVENESS AND DEFERRAL CEILINGS {#sec-10-b3307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3307}

3307.1 Projects considered for forgiveness or deferral under this Program shall also be subject to the annual forgiveness and deferral ceiling established in §§3205.1 through 3205.3 of chapter 32 of this title.

3307.2 Projects meeting the criteria for forgiveness or deferral of taxes or other debt owed the District consistent with §§3306.5(a) through (f), shall be certified by DHCD as eligible for forgiveness and/or deferral, up to the annual debt forgiveness ceiling and/or the annual debt deferral ceiling.

3307.3 Eligible projects which would bring the total debt forgiven or deferred for that fiscal year above the annual debt forgiveness ceiling or the annual debt deferral ceiling, may be issued a preliminary certificate of forgiveness or deferral by DHCD.

3307.4 All applicants of projects with preliminary certificates of forgiveness or deferral which are submitted with new request for forgiveness or deferral within the first thirty (30) calendar days of the next fiscal year following issuance shall receive priority consideration.

3307.5 If DHCD review indicates these projects are still eligible, they shall receive the first allocations of forgiveness and deferral of indebtedness available in the new fiscal year, with priority given in chronological order, based on the date of issuance of their preliminary certificate of forgiveness or deferral.

3307.6 Projects with preliminary certificates submitted after the first thirty (30) calendar days of a new fiscal year shall be treated on the same basis as other projects submitted that fiscal year.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2555 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3308** SCHEDULE, TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF DEFERRAL AND FORGIVENESS AND OF DEFERRAL OR MORATORIUM {#sec-10-b3308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3308}

3308.1 The schedule for repayment of any deferred indebtedness to the District under §§3306.5(a) through (f) shall be determined by DHCD, based on the financial feasibility review and analysis required in §3306. In determining the schedule, DHCD shall use the following criteria:

(a) The period of initial deferral, during which no payment of the amount deferred is due, shall not exceed a maximum of five (5) tax years commencing the date a Conditional Agreement for Deferral is executed by DHCD under §3310.6; and

(b) The total period of deferral, including the period for repayment of deferred indebtedness, shall not exceed ten (10) full tax years from the date established in paragraph (a).

3308.2 The schedule for repayment of future real property tax liability which is subject to deferral or moratorium under §3306.5(g) shall be determined by DHCD based on the following:

(a) The financial feasibility review and analysis provided for in §3306;

(b) The period of initial deferral or moratorium during which no payment of the amount deferred is due, shall not exceed a maximum of five (5) years commencing the first full tax year after the project is certified consistent with §3306.12; and

(c) The total period of deferral, including the period for repayment of deferred real property taxes, shall not exceed ten (10) full tax years from the date established in paragraph (b).3308.3 When a project has been certified eligible for deferral of indebtedness under §3307.2 and a Conditional Agreement for Deferral has been executed by DHCD under §3310.6, no further interest or penalties shall accrue on that portion of the unpaid indebtedness which has been deferred beyond that which had accrued through the date of the Conditional Agreement for Deferral.

3308.4 Penalties and interest on any indebtedness which have not been deferred shall continue-to accrue and be charged as provided elsewhere in D.C. law.

3308.5 If the housing provider, or his or her successor, fails to meet the schedule for payment of deferred indebtedness established under §3308.1 or §3308.2, any indebtedness due under the schedule shall remain and be considered as taxes due, water or sewer fees due, or other indebtedness, if any, due to the District as of the date established in the schedule.

3308.6 The District shall collect the indebtedness using all legally available means, including but not limited to, the imposition of tax liens on the property, and the sale of the property at the next scheduled tax sale.

3308.7 All deferrals of indebtedness under §3308.1 or §3308.2 shall be considered conditional during the entire period of the rent regulatory agreement provided in §3309. This provision shall be enforced as follows:

(a) Each housing provider granted a deferred of indebtedness under this program shall execute and deliver to the District at the time the deferral takes effect, a Deed of Trust note ("Note") for the entire amount of deferred indebtedness; and

(b) The terms of the note shall include, but not be limited to, the provisions under §3308.8 through §3308.12.

3308.8 The entire amount of indebtedness shall become due and payable immediately upon a finding by DHCD that the housing provider has violated any provision of the rent regulatory agreement executed with and attached to the note.

3308.9 The amount of indebtedness shall be considered paid in full and cancelled upon the payment in full of the deferred indebtedness according to the established schedule, and upon the completion of the term of the rent regulatory agreement without violation of the provisions of the agreement.

3308.10 The amount of indebtedness shall be secured by a Deed of Trust given by the owner of the property to the District, in form and content acceptable to the District.

3308.11 The District may, at the request of the housing provider, allow for the subordination of the Deed of Trust securing the note to other liens, securing private financing for the rehabilitation of the subject property as the District may, in its discretion, accept as necessary for the rehabilitation of the property.

3308.12 The District shall not unreasonably withhold an agreement to subordinate the subject Deed of Trust to private financing.

3308.13 All forgiveness of indebtedness owed to the District under this Program shall be considered conditional during the entire period of this rent regulatory agreement provided for in §3315.

3308.14 The provision of §3308.13 shall be enforced by means of a Deed of Trust Note, executed by each housing provider granted a forgiveness of indebtedness under this Program, similar in form and content to the Deed of Trust Note established in §3308.7 through §3308.12, but substituting provisions appropriate to the forgiveness of indebtedness in place of deferral of indebtedness.

3308.15 The Plan shall include provision for all taxes, water and sewer fees and other indebtedness owed to the District which are not explicitly deferred or forgiven under this Program to be paid when due, whether or not a project has received a deferral or forgiveness of any past indebtedness to the District under this Program.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2556 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3309** RENT REGULATORY AGREEMENTS {#sec-10-b3309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3309}

3309.1 The owner of each project determined to be eligible for real property tax deferral or moratorium, or for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness to the District under this chapter, shall be required to enter into a rent regulatory agreement with the DHCD prior to the issuance by the DHCD of a Conditional Agreement for Deferral or Forgiveness under §3310.

3309.2 Each rent regulatory agreement ("agreement") shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:

(a) Provide that the project shall be completed in conformity with the plans and specifications submitted for the project with the application;

(b) Establish the basis for the approval or disapproval of rent increase in the reserved units during the term of the agreement;

(c) Provide for marketing and tenant selection policies to be followed by the housing provider consistent with the requirements of §§3305, 3306 and other related provisions of this chapter.

(d) Provide that the housing provider shall give priority in renting vacant reserved units in the project to persons on the DHCD public housing waiting list, the Department's waiting list for Section 8 Certificates, Tenant Assistance Program Certificates, or other similar forms of rental assistance as may be available;

(e) Provide that the house provider shall rent vacant non-reserved units in the project to persons specified in paragraph (d) of this subsection at all times on an equal basis with any other applicant;

(f) Provide that all indebtedness of the property which has been deferred or forgiven under §§3308.1, 3308.2 or 3308.13 shall become immediately due and payable upon the transfer or sale of the property, or the majority of any ownership interest in the property, from the property with whom the rent regulatory agreement has been executed to any other party;

(g) Provide that the housing provider shall execute Note(s) and Deed(s) of Trust as provided for in §§3308.5 through 3308.14; and

(h) Provide that DHCD may establish any other means of enforcement of the provisions of the rent regulatory agreement as it determines to be necessary consistent with this chapter and other provisions of D.C. law.

3309.3 The requirement of §3309.2(f) may be waived by the DHCD if the party to whom the property or the ownership interest in the property is transferred shall agree in writing to all the terms and conditions of the rent regulatory agreement and there are at least two (2) years remaining in the term of the agreement.

3309.4 The term of each rent regulatory agreement for a project determined to be eligible for tax deferral or moratorium, or deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness, shall be ten (10) years.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2558 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3310** PROCEDURES FOR CERTIFICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-b3310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3310}

3310.1 When DHCD has determined that a project is eligible for real property tax deferral or moratorium, deferral of indebtedness or forgiveness of indebtedness to the District under this chapter, the implementation procedures of this section shall be followed.

3310.2 If DHCD determines that a project is eligible for real property tax deferral or moratorium under this chapter, DHCD shall issue a Certificate of Eligibility for Tax Deferral or Moratorium to the owner of the project. This certificate shall be conditioned upon the continuing compliance by the project with the rent regulatory agreement for the project during the entire term of the deferral or moratorium.

3310.3 The Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue shall, upon delivery of a Certificate of Eligibility and a valid Certificate of Occupancy for housing use, cause the amount of real property taxes owed by the project to be deferred, consistent with the provisions of §§3306.5, 3306.12, 3308.2 and all other provisions of this chapter.

3310.4 If DHCD determines that a project is eligible for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness owed to the District under this chapter, DHCD shall consult with the Departments of Finance and Revenue, Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, and Public Works, as appropriate, to determine the current status of debt collection efforts regarding the project.

3310.5 Based on the consultation required by §3310.4, DHCD shall include appropriate provisions regarding the terms and conditions of deferral or forgiveness in any agreement or certificate provided to the project by DHCD. The terms and conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) A deadline(s) for the completion of some or all of the rehabilitation work planned at the project; and

(b) The execution by the applicant of a consent judgment or agreement before a court of competent jurisdiction specifying the applicant 's acceptance and agreement to the indebtedness proposed to be deferred or forgiven.

3310.6 If DHCD determines, under this chapter, that a project is eligible for deferral or indebtedness to the District, and has certified that the project is within the annual debt deferral ceiling as required by §3307.2, DHCD shall execute a Conditional Agreement for Deferral with the housing provider for the subject project (the "deferral agreement"), which shall include, but not be limited, to the following requirements:

(a) The amount and type of indebtedness to be deferred, the period for which the payment of the amount is to be deferred, and the schedule for the subsequent repayment of the indebtedness;

(b) Other provisions as may be required by DHCD under §3310.5;

(d) Provisions for the enforcement of the agreement consistent with §3308.5 and §3308.6.

3310.7 For projects eligible for deferral or moratorium under §3310.2, DHCD shall execute a Conditional Agreement for Deferral with the housing provider consistent with the applicable requirements of §3310.6.

3310.8 Upon delivery of a properly executed deferral agreement, the Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue or the Department of Public Works shall cause the payment of any indebtedness specified to be deferred, consistent with the terms of the deferral agreement.

3310.9 If DHCD makes a determination, under this chapter, that an applicant is eligible for forgiveness of any indebtedness owed to the District, and has certified that the project is within the annual debt forgiveness ceiling as required by §3307.2, DHCD shall issue the applicant a Conditional Certificate of Forgiveness which shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions:

(a) The amount and type of indebtedness to be forgiven;

(b) Other provisions as may be required by the DHCD under §3310.5;

(d) A provision for enforcement of the Agreement consistent with §3308.14.

3310.10 Upon delivery of a properly executed Conditional Certificate of Forgiveness, the Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue or the Department of Public Works shall cause any indebtedness specified to be forgiven, and shall cause any liens securing the indebtedness to be released, consistent with the terms of the certificate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2560 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3311** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3311}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3312** WAIVER {#sec-10-b3312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3312}

3312.1 The Director of DHCD may, for good shown, in writing, waive any provision of this chapter, consistent with applicable law, except for the provisions of §3307.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2562 (April 8, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3399** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3399 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3399}

3399.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Rental Housing Act of 1985 (D.C. Law 6-10, D.C. Code §45-2501 et seq. (1981).

Administrator - the Administrator of the Neighborhood Improvement Administration (NIA).

Deferral of indebtedness - the delaying of the date by which any indebtedness owed to the District is due. Deferral of indebtedness applies only to indebtedness which is past due at the time deferral is sought under the Program.

Deferral or Moratorium - the delay or suspension, for a period up to five (5) years, of the date by which any future real property tax liability which would be owed to the District is due.

Deferred maintenance - the postponement or failure to perform, due to negative cash flow, routine repairs and maintenance functions which has resulted in the physical deterioration of the property or the depreciation of the property's value.

DHCD - the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development

Director - the Director of the Department of Housing and Community Development. District - the District of Columbia government.

Equity - an amount of investment which includes the following:

(a) Cash invested by an applicant in a project under the Program, after submission of an application under the Program, which is not derived from any loan, whose repayment is not required, and whose repayment is not secured in any way by any lien or encumbrance on the property under this Program or on any other property owned by the applicant or any of the applicant entity's principal owner's, or in any other way;

(b) The cash value of materials or services contributed by an applicant to a project under the Program, after the submission of an application under the Program, based on the DHCD 's estimation of the items ' comparable market value; and

(c) Fifty percent (50%) of the out-of-pocket expenses paid by an applicant to maintain, heat, repair or provide other essential services to a property which is the subject of an application under the Program, during the three (3) years immediately prior to the date of submission of the application, based on documentation acceptable to DHCD.

Forgiveness of indebtedness - the cancelling or forgiving of the required payment of any indebtedness owed to the District pursuant to the Act and this chapter. Forgiveness of indebtedness applies only to indebtedness which is past due at the time forgiveness is sought under the Program.Housing provider - a landlord, an owner, lessor, sublessor, assignee, or their agent, or any other person receiving or entitled to receive rents or benefits for the use or occupancy of any rental unit within a rental housing accommodation,

Indebtedness - the outstanding amount(s) owed to the District related to any real property in the District of Columbia as specified in §3306.1, and any penalties and interest on this indebtedness.

In the best interest of the District - a course of action which results in the most favorable financial position for the District, maximizes the achievement of the policies established in the Act, and meets the specific eligibility and other criteria established in this chapter.

Lower and moderate income household - a family whose annual income is within the lower income limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1437f.

Negative cash flow - the absence of a measure of project worth that is determined by net income after taxes, expenses and non-cash charge against income, including making allowances for reserves, depreciation and depletion, and that this negative cash flow status has directly affected the ability of the housing provider to make normal and routine repairs and scheduled improvements to the property.

NIA - the Neighborhood Improvement Administration of DHCD.

Program - the Distressed Properties Improvement Program established by Title VIII of the Act.

Project - the entire rental housing accommodation owned by the same legal entity or related legal entities which is the subject of an application for assistance under this Program, is covered by a Certificate of Occupancy for housing use issued after April 30, 1985, and is located on one or more contiguous lots and squares as specified in the tax assessment records of the District, including any part of the rental housing accommodation which is listed and assessed separately for taxation purposes in the land records of the District.

Rental Housing Accommodation - a building(s) in the District of Columbia containing one (1) or more rental units and the land appurtenant thereto. The term "Rental Housing Accommodation" does not include hotel or inn or any building, including any room in the structure, used primarily for transient occupancy.

Rental unit - any part of rental housing accommodation which is rented or offered for rent for residential occupancy and includes any apartment, efficiency apartment, room, single-family house, suite of rooms, or duplex and the land appurtenant thereto.

Reserved units - those rental units within an eligible project who rents do not exceed the rents affordable by lower and moderate income households, and which are reserved for rental to households whose incomes do not exceed the lower and moderate income levels established in this chapter.

Substantial compliance with the housing code - the absence of any substantial housing violations as defined in §103(35) of the Act, including but not limited to, the following:

(a) Frequent lack of sufficient water supply;

(b) Frequent lack of hot water;

(d) Curtailment of utility service, such as gas or electricity;

(e) Defective electrical wiring, outlets, or fixtures;

(f) Exposed electrical wiring or outlets not properly covered;

(g) Leaks in the roof or walls;

(h) Defective drains, sewage system, or toilet facilities;

(i) Infestation of insects or rodents;

(j) Lead paint on the interior of the dwelling, or on the exterior of the dwelling where the paint is in a location or in a condition which creates a hazard of lead poisoning to children or the occupants;

(k) Insufficient number of acceptable exits for a dwelling, or from each floor of a rooming house;

(l) Obstructed exits;

(m) Accumulation of garbage or rubbish in common areas;

(n) Plaster falling or in immediate danger of falling;

(o) Dangerous porches, stairs, or railings;

(p) Floor, wall or ceilings with substantial holes;

(q) Doors or windows which are not sufficiently tight to maintain the required temperature or to prevent excessive heat loss;

(r) Doors lacking required locks;

(s) Fire hazards or absence or required fire prevention or fire control;

(t) Inadequate ventilation of interior bathrooms; and

(u) Large number of housing code violations, each of which may be either substantial or non-substantial, the aggregate of which is substantial, because of the number of violations.

TAP - the Tenant Assistance Program, as authorized by Title III of the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 2541, 2562 (April 8, 1988).*

### **10-B34** LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 3400** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b3400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3400}

3400.1 Section 252 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (the "Act") establishes a federal income tax credit for investments in residential rental housing which provide housing for low income persons. The Act authorizes the District of Columbia to allocate available tax credits to eligible housing developments.

3400.2 The Department of Housing and Community Development shall be the designated housing credit agency of the Government of the District of Columbia for allocation of available tax credits.

3400.3 The provisions of this chapter shall set forth the procedures to be followed and criteria to be employed by the Department in deciding who shall be awarded tax credits.

3400.4 No housing credit allocation from the Department shall be required in order to claim a tax credit for that portion of a qualified low income housing project that is financed with appropriate tax-exempt bond financing, such as the tax-exempt bond financing of the D.C. Housing Finance Agency.

3400.5 The amount of such credits (other than credits for developments financed with certain tax-exempt bonds) available for allocation for calendar years 1987, 1988, 1989 by the District of Columbia shall equal one dollar and twenty-five cents ($1.25) for every District resident.

3400.6 The maximum credit that may be claimed by a taxpayer depends on the following:

(a) Whether the project involves expenditures for new construction, rehabilitation or acquisition of existing buildings;

(b) The percentage of low income occupancy;

(d) When it was or shall be placed in service.

3400.7 If any provision of the Act or Federal regulations issued pursuant to the Act conflicts with this chapter, the Federal Act or regulations shall apply.

3400.8 Upon determination of good cause, the Director may waive provision of this chapter, subject to the limitations of Federal and District law. Each waiver shall be in writing and shall be supported by the facts and basis for the waiver.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §252 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, P.L. 99-514, 26 U.S.C. 42.*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308 (November 13, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3401** APPLICATION FOR TAX CREDITS {#sec-10-b3401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3401}

3401.1 Applications for tax credits shall be in a form and include information as required by the Department.

3401.2 The Department may establish time periods for acceptance of applications for tax credits for calendar years 1987, 1988, and 1989. A public notice shall be given specifying the time for submission of applications.

3401.3 Any application accepted during the period emergency rules are in effect may, upon issuance of final rules, be retained for consideration by the Department at its discretion.

3401.4 The Department may establish a fee for application as follows:

(a) For non-profit developer applicants, application fees shall not exceed two hundred dollars ($2.00); and

(b) For other developer applicants, application fees shall not exceed live hundred dollars ($500).

3401.5 Applications for tax credits shall not create any entitlement for tax credits.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7309 (November 13, 1987); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7652 (August 6, 2004)[EXPIRE].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3402** ELIGIBLE PROJECTS {#sec-10-b3402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3402}

3402.1 Projects eligible to apply to the Department for tax credits shall meet the requirements of this section.

3402.2 Projects shall meet the requirement of §252 of the Act including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) The project shall meet the following minimum rent-restricted low income unit set-aside:

(1) At least twenty percent (20%) of the rental units in the project shall be rented to households with incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of the area median income adjusted by household size;

(2) At least forty percent (40%) of the rental units in the project shall be rented to households with incomes at or below sixty percent (60%) of the area median income adjusted by household size;

(b) The gross rent of rent-restricted low income units shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the applicable qualifying income by household size;

(c) The project shall remain as rental housing, and the minimum rent-restricted low income set-aside shall be maintained, for a period of at least fifteen (15) years from the first taxable year of the credit period for the building; and

(d) The project shall be new construction, rehabilitation or acquisition of existing housing as defined by the Act.

3402.3 Applicants shall only be accepted for multi-family housing projects.

3402.4 Applications shall be complete and be submitted during time periods specified for receipt, as determined by the Department.

3402.5 The applicant shall establish that he or she has adequate control of the property, as determined by the Department.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7309 (November 13, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3403** REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b3403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3403}

3403.1 At the end of an application acceptance period, all applications for tax credits submitted shall be reviewed by the Department for completeness and eligibility.

3403.2 The Department may, at its sole discretion, request additional information or clarification to complete its review of applications.

3403.3 The Department shall evaluate applications which meet the eligibility requirements of §3402 of this chapter on the basis of how well applications meet selective criteria. Selective criteria which the Department may consider may include, but not be limited to the following:

(a) The location of project;

(b) The relation of project to other Community Development plans, objectives and priorities;

(d) The number of units to be set-aside for low income households;

(e) Assurance that the project shall be undertaken and placed in service on a timely basis;

(f) Extent to which the project avoids or prevents displacements;

(g) The need for the tax credit, and the degree to which the tax credit will leverage additional low income units;

(h) The amount of other government funds required for the project; and

(i) The demonstrated capacity of the development entity to complete the project as planned.

3403.4 The Director shall select and approve projects for tax credit based on the evaluation of how well applications meet selective criteria. Applicants shall be notified in writing of the approval or rejection of their application.

3403.5 The Director may give preference to projects which include assistance under the programs administered by the Department.

3403.6 The Director shall allocate no less than ten percent (10%) of the tax credits available for each calendar year for non-profit developer applicants.

3403.7 The Director may approve tax credits in amounts less than requested by approving a credit percentage or a qualified basis amount which is less than the maximum allowed by the Act.

3403.8 The Director may approve tax credits in amounts less than requested or less than authorized by the Act.

3403.9 The Director may approve applications and conditional reservations for tax credits for calendar years subsequent to the year of application.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7310 (November 13, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3404** RESERVATION OF TAX CREDIT {#sec-10-b3404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3404}

3404.1 Upon approval of an application, the Department shall issue a letter of conditional reservation of tax credits, setting forth a reservation agreement, which shall be accepted in writing by the applicant.

3404.2 This reservation agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The credit percentage and qualified basis amount conditionally approved; and

(b) A schedule for project completion, reporting, monitoring, and verification requirements.

3404.3 This reservation agreement shall include, but not be limited to, a schedule for project completion, reporting, monitoring, and verification requirements.

3404.4 The agreement may only be amended by written consent of all parties.

3404.5 If a credit applicant fails, in any way, to adhere to the terms of the conditional reservation will not be used, the Department may revoke or reduce the conditional reservation of tax credits.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7312 (November 13, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3405** PROJECT CERTIFICATION AND TAX CREDIT AWARDS {#sec-10-b3405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3405}

3405.1 When a project is placed in service, the owner shall certify to the Department, in an acceptable format, the owner's and the project's compliance with the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and provide any documentation requested by the Department.

3405.2 After review and acceptance by the Department of the owner's certifications and other documentation, the Department shall award housing tax credits to the project consistent with the Act.

3405.3 The Department shall not certify a housing credit allocation prior to the calendar year in which the project is placed in service.

3405.4 All certifications of housing credit allocations shall be made in a time and manner consistent with the Act and its implementing regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7312 (November 13, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3499** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3499 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3499}

3499 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-514).

Area median income - the median income for the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area as determined by HUD for the Section 8 Program.

Department - the District of Columbia Department of Housing and Community Development.

Director - the Director of the District of Columbia Department of Housing and Community Development.

Low income units - units set-aside for households meeting the income and other requirements of the Act.

Multi-family housing - a rental housing accommodation containing five (5) or more dwelling units.

Non-profit developer applicants - an organization eligible under §501(c)(3) or (4) of the Internal Revenue Code, one of whose purposes includes the fostering of low income housing.

Placed in service - the date a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for an eligible property.

Tax credit - the credit which may be claimed on a federal income tax return for investment in low income housing, pursuant to §252 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 7308, 7313 (November 13, 1987); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7652 (August 6, 2004)[EXPIRE].*

### **10-B35** HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY

##### **10-B DCMR § 3500** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b3500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3500}

3500.1 The District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency (also referred to in this chapter as the "Agency") shall have its principal office in the District. Other offices of the Agency shall be in places deemed necessary and appropriate by the Board of Directors or the Executive Director.

3500.2 The corporate seal of the Agency shall be of a design approved and adopted from time to time by the Board of Directors, and may be affixed to any document by impression, by printing, by rubber stamp, or otherwise.

3500.3 The fiscal year of the Agency shall end on the thirtieth (30th) day of September of each year.

3500.4 The Board of Directors may authorize the use of facsimile and or electronic signatures instead of manual signatures.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3500*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3501** BOARD OF DIRECTORS {#sec-10-b3501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3501}

3501.1 General policies governing the operations of the Agency shall be determined by the Board of Directors.

Each member shall hold office for the term for which he or she is appointed, unless he or she is removed in accordance with the law.

The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson may be chosen by the Board at any meeting of the Board from among the members, and their tenure shall commence immediately and continue until the next succeeding annual meeting of the Board or until their successors are chosen, whichever first occurs.

The Chairperson, and in his or her absence the Vice-Chairperson, shall be the presiding officer at all meetings of the Board of Directors. The Chairperson shall also have such powers and perform other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe.

In the absence of both the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson, the member of the Board who has the longest tenure of all other members of the Board present at the meeting shall preside.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5428 (October 21, 1983); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3501*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3502** MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS {#sec-10-b3502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3502}

3502.1 The Board of Directors shall have a regular meeting on the second (2nd) and fourth (4th) Tuesday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in the principal office of the Agency, or, if such day, time, or location is not practicable, at such other day, hour, and/or location as may be established by the Board of Directors; provided, that if the day of the regular meeting falls on a holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next succeeding business day. Notice of each regular meeting shall be provided in accordance with applicable District of Columbia open meeting law.

3502.2 Other meetings of the Board of Directors may be held upon the call of the Chairperson, Secretary, or of a majority of the incumbent members of the Board. Notice of each other meeting shall be provided in accordance with applicable District of Columbia open meeting law.

3502.3 Special meetings shall be held at the principal office of the Agency, or at such locations as may be established by the Board of Directors. Notice of each special meeting shall be provided in accordance with applicable District of Columbia open meeting law.

3502.4 The annual meeting of the Board shall be held on the second (2nd) Tuesday of January of each year at 5:30 p.m. at the principal office of the Agency, or at such other day, time, and/or location as may be established by the Board of Directors; provided, that if the date falls on a holiday, the annual meeting shall be held on the next succeeding business day. Notice of each annual meeting shall be provided in accordance with applicable District of Columbia open meeting law.

3502.5 Except as provided in Section 3503 of this chapter, each meeting of the Board shall be open to the public.

3502.6 No person or representative of any person or group shall have the right to be heard or to present oral or written evidence at a meeting of the Board without permission of the presiding officer of the meeting. The presiding officer may impose reasonable conditions in granting permission.

3502.7 Meetings of the Board may be conducted through the use of teleconference, videoconference, or other electronic means by which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other, and the public can hear those participating in the meeting. Participation by such electronic means by a Board member shall constitute attendance at the meeting for all quorum and voting purposes.

3502.8 Notice of all meetings shall be provided in accordance with the applicable laws of the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 3479 (August 7, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 2462 (May 29, 1981); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 5428 (October 21, 1983); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 001932 (February 23, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3502*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3503** CLOSED SESSIONS {#sec-10-b3503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3503}

CLOSED SESSIONS

3503.1 The Board may hold a closed session at the times and places it determines to be in the interest of the Agency.

3503.2 Closed sessions shall not be open to the public.

3503.3 Minutes of closed sessions shall be kept and made a part of the Agency's permanent records.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3503*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3504** VOTING {#sec-10-b3504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3504}

3504.1 Members may not be represented by proxy at any meeting of the Board of Directors.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3504*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3505** COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD {#sec-10-b3505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3505}

3505.1 The Board of Directors may by resolution designate from among its members one (1) or more committees, each of which, to the extent provided by resolution of the Board, shall perform the duties and exercise powers specified in the resolution.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3505*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3506** OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD {#sec-10-b3506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3506}

3506.1 The principal officers of the Agency shall consist of a Chairperson of the Board of Directors, a Vice-Chairperson, an Executive Director, who shall also act as Secretary, and other principal officers that may be designated by the Board of Directors from time to time.

3506.2 There shall also be other officers, agents and employees as deemed necessary by the Board.

3506.3 All officers, agents, and employees of the Agency shall have the authority and perform the duties in the management and conduct of the business of the Agency as are provided in this chapter, as may be established by resolution of the Board of Directors not inconsistent with this chapter, or as may be delegated to them in a manner not inconsistent with this chapter.

3506.4 The compensation of the officers, agents and employees of the Board shall be fixed, from time to time, by the Board of Directors.

3506.5 The principal officers, agents and employees of the Board shall be selected by the Board of Directors.

3506.6 Each officer shall hold office until his or her successor is chosen and qualified, or until he or she dies, resigns, retires, or is removed from office, whichever event shall first occur.

3506.7 Selection or appointment without express tenure of an officer, agent or employee of the Board shall not itself create contract rights.

3506.8 Any officer, agent or employee of the Board may be removed by the Board of Directors.

3506.9 Any removal of an officer, agent or employee of the Board shall require an affirmative vote of three (3) members of the Board, and shall be without prejudice to the contract rights, if any, of the person removed.

3506.10 Any vacancy in any office shall be filled in the manner prescribed in this chapter for selection or appointment to the office.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3506*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3507** EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR {#sec-10-b3507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3507}

3507.1 The Executive Director shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the Agency and shall have the powers and perform duties prescribed by the Board of Directors.

3507.2 The Executive Director shall be the Secretary to the Board of Directors and in that capacity he or she shall have powers in accordance with § 203 of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42.2703.03(b)) and in general, perform all the duties ordinarily incident to the office of the Secretary.

3507.3 The Secretary, and his or her designee, shall be expressly empowered to attest signatures of officers of the Agency and to affix the seal of the Agency to documents.

3507.4 The Executive Director and each Board member shall be bonded in accordance with § 205 of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42.2702.05).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3507*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3508** AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS {#sec-10-b3508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3508}

3508.1 The power to alter, amend, or repeal the provisions of §§ 3500 through 3899 of this chapter (the bylaws of the Agency), or to adopt new bylaws, not inconsistent with this law, is vested in the Board of Directors.

3508.2 The affirmative vote of three members of the Board of Directors shall be necessary to effect an amendment of the bylaws or the adoption of new bylaws.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 902 (February 27, 1981), incorporating text of Proposed Rulemaking published at 27 DCR 4824 (October 31, 1980); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3508*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3509** CONFLICT OF INTERESTS {#sec-10-b3509 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3509}

3509.1 Any member, officer, or employee of the Agency who, either directly or indirectly, has an ownership or other financial interest in, or who is an officer or employee of, any firm or agency interested directly or indirectly in any transaction with the Agency or whose relationship to that firm or agency creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, shall disclose this interest to the Agency.

3509.2 For purposes of this section, a "transaction with the Agency" shall include, but shall not be limited to, any loan to any sponsor, builder, or developer.

3509.3 Each disclosure shall be set forth in the public record of the Agency.

3509.4 The member, officer, or employee having the interest or relationship, as described in § 3509.1 of this chapter, shall not participate on behalf of the Agency in the deliberation, authorization, or implementation of any transaction with the Agency.

3509.5 It shall not be considered having a prohibited interest in a firm or agency if the only relationship is one of depositor in a bank or savings and loan or of customer or vendor in an arms’ length business relationship with the firm or agency.

3509.6 At a public session of the Board, the Board may by a two-thirds majority vote of the incumbent Members, on the public record, waive a conflict of interest that a Member or Officer may have in regards to a particular transaction, sponsor, builder, firm, developer, business, corporation, bank, partnership, limited partnership, person, government agency or other legal entity after the conflict has been specifically identified on the public record (i) outlining the relationship of the Officer or Member to the particular transaction, sponsor, builder, firm, developer, business, corporation, bank, partnership, limited partnership, person, government agency or other legal entity, and (ii) stating any benefit, advantage or gain (financial or otherwise), direct or indirect, received by the Officer or Member.

3509.7 The Board may waive a conflict of interest by a two-thirds majority vote of the incumbent Members, on the public record, in cases where the Officer or Member is merely an employee of the sponsor, builder, firm, developer, business, corporation, bank, partnership, limited partnership, person, government agency or other legal entity and the Officer or Member has no decision making authority with respect to or influence over the matter presented to the Board for a waiver of conflict.

3509.8 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the Board may waive a conflict of interest by a two-thirds majority vote of the incumbent Members if the Board determines on the public record that the interest will not adversely affect the Agency.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3509*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3510** PROCEDURES FOR EVICTIONS AND PROTECTIONS FROM RETALIATORY ACTION {#sec-10-b3510 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3510}

3510.1 Tenants of Housing Projects shall be protected from eviction as well as retaliatory action in accordance with Section 501 and Section 502 of the Rental Housing Act, effective July 17, 1985 (D.C. Law 6-10; D.C. Official Code §§ 42-3505.01 & 42-3505.02).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 66 DCR 3896 (March 29, 2019). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3510*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3511** CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b3511 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3511}

3511.1 Tenants displaced from Housing Projects shall be given relocation assistance in accordance with 14 DCMR § 4401, as amended.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3511*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3512** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3512 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3512}

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3512*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3513** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3513 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3513}

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 4544, 4551 (October 23, 1981); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3513*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3514** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3514 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3514}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3515** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3515 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3515}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3516** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3516 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3516}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3517** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3517 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3517}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3599** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3599 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3599}

3599.1 When used in Chapters 35, 36 and 38 of this title, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency Act, effective March 3, 1979, as amended (D.C. Law 2-135; D.C. Official Code §§ 42-2701.01 et seq.).

Agency Housing Program - a program for financing or assisting housing that has been formally adopted by the Agency.

Annual income - the anticipated total annual income of eligible persons from all sources for the twelve (12) month period following the date of determination of income. All payments from all sources received by the family head (even if temporarily absent) and each additional member of the household who is not a minor shall be included in the annual income.

Applicant - a corporation, partnership, limited partnership, joint venture, trust, firm, association, sponsor, individual, family, public body, or other legal entity or any combination of these applicants, applying to receive Agency monies, assistance, or services under the Act.

Application - a request for Agency assistance under the Act made on forms furnished by the Agency and containing information required by the Executive Director.

Construction loan - a short term advance of monies authorized for the purpose of constructing or rehabilitating residential housing or housing projects, and which is secured or is to be secured as provided in the Act and in Chapters 35, 36, and 38.

Eligible persons - individuals and families who qualify for housing under a given program according to the requirements of the program as established by the Agency.

Executive Director - the person and his or her designee, employed by the Agency Board who is the chief executive officer of the Agency and who serves as Secretary to the Board.

Feasible housing project - a proposed housing project where the Agency has made a determination that the project can reasonably be expected to be operated in a fiscally sound manner in conformance with the housing goals and policies of the Agency and the requirements of the Act.

Housing project - one (1) or more housing units located in the District assisted by the Agency under the provisions of this act including, but not limited to, units acquired, financed, refinanced, constructed, rehabilitated or converted to a condominium or a cooperative with the assistance of the Agency. A Housing project may incorporate ancillary facilities which may include:

(a) Necessary or desirable appurtenances to residential housing such as, but not limited to, streets, sewers, utilities, parks, and stores, as the Agency determines to be appropriate;

(b) Community facilities including, but not limited to, health, welfare, recreational, and educational facilities that the Agency determines to be appropriate; and

(c) Ancillary commercial facilities which the Agency determines to be appropriate; Provided, that the primary use (consistent with the I.R.S. regulations concerning tax exempt financing) of the project shall be for residential housing.

Housing unit - living accommodations within a housing project that are intended for occupancy by eligible persons.

Low-income persons - eligible persons whose annual income as determined by the Agency does not exceed the low-income limits established by resolution of the Agency, from time to time, in accordance with § 102(1) of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42.2702.12).

Moderate-income persons - persons and families whose annual income as determined by the Agency does not exceed the moderate-income limits established by resolution of the Agency, from time to time, in accordance with § 102(m) of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42.2702.13).

Mortgage finance rate reduction - the differential between prevailing mortgage interest rates and a lower rate which is paid by a sponsor of a project for which financing has been made available, directly by the Agency or through a mortgage lender, from the proceeds of bonds issued by the Agency.

Permanent mortgage loan - a mortgage loan that is authorized by resolution of the Agency, or by a mortgage loan commitment issued on behalf of the Agency, and which is made available to a sponsor or eligible person from the proceeds of the sale of the Agency's bonds or any other funds available to the Agency for the purpose of providing long-term financing to develop or purchase housing projects or housing units, the repayment of which is secured or is to be secured as provided in the Act and in this chapter.

### **10-B36** HFA: MULTIFAMILY FINANCING AND LOAN PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 3600** AGENCY HOUSING PROGRAM {#sec-10-b3600 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3600}

3600.1 The Board may adopt an Agency housing program or programs which shall set forth, as Agency goals, the number, location, and other characteristics of housing units to be financed by the Agency, specifically those which the Agency desires to be occupied by low- and moderate-income persons. Agency housing programs may be amended from time to time.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3601** SCOPE OF AGENCY FINANCING AUTHORITY {#sec-10-b3601 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3601}

3601.1 The agency shall be empowered to make or originate the following:

Loans to sponsors for the acquisition, construction, equipping, rehabilitation, mezzanine financing, interim financing, or permanent financing of rental projects for Eligible persons;

Funds available for rent subsidy to be utilized by Eligible persons;

Funds available in a loan guarantee fund to be used by the Agency to guarantee or insure loans in accordance with criteria established by the Agency; and

Counseling programs, as part of residential services, available to low-income and moderate-income families who participate in rental projects funded by the Agency.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3602** FUNDING OF AGENCY PROJECTS {#sec-10-b3602 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3602}

3602.1 The undertakings of the Agency as provided in the Act or this chapter may be funded in whole or in part by the issuance of bonds, notes, or other obligations on whatever terms and conditions the Agency determines.

3602.2 In addition to proceeds from bonds, notes, or other obligations issued by the Agency, the Agency may receive gifts, grants, loans, appropriations, or other funds, property or other assets, or any other type of financial assistance (including insurance and guarantees) from any federal, District, private, or other source, and may do any and all things necessary to avail itself of that aid.

3602.3 Funds or other forms of assistance may be used to finance, or assist the financing of, any of the following activities:

(a) Loans to sponsors for the acquisition, equipping, construction, rehabilitation, mezzanine financing, interim financing, or permanent financing of rental Housing projects for Eligible persons;

(b) Rent subsidy programs to be utilized by Eligible persons;

(c) A loan guarantee fund to be used by the Agency to guarantee or insure loans in accordance with criteria established by the Agency;

(d) Counseling programs for low-income and moderate-income families who participate in rental projects funded by the Agency; and

(e) Any other activities permitted in the Act.

3602.4 Agency funds or other forms of assistance may also be used in the furtherance of the exercise of Agency powers as contemplated in the Act with respect to any of the programs permitted in § 3602.3.

3602.5 In the furtherance of the Agency's program or programs to finance housing, there may be created by resolution of the Board from time to time, reserve and other funds as may be necessary or appropriate to secure bonds, notes, and other forms of indebtedness issued by the Agency.

3602.6 Funds created or set aside under § 3602.5 shall be administered as provided in applicable indentures, resolutions, or other agreements concerning security for bondholders, noteholders, or creditors holding other forms of indebtedness issued by the Agency.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3603** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3603 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3603}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3604** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3604 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3604}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3605** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3605 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3605}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3606** EQUAL OPPORTUNITY {#sec-10-b3606 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3606}

3606.1 All Housing projects financed or otherwise assisted under the Act shall be open to all persons in accordance with applicable District and federal laws including, but not limited to, the Human Rights Act of 1977, effective December 13, 1977, as amended (D.C. Law 2-38; D.C. Official Code § 2-1401.1 et seq.), and the Equal Opportunity for Local, Small, and Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Act of 2005, effective October 20, 2005, as amended (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq.).

3606.2 All mortgagors, contractors, and subcontractors engaged in the construction, acquisition, equipping, rehabilitation, sale, or rental of housing financed or assisted under the Act shall provide equal opportunity for employment, without discrimination, in accordance with the laws referred to in § 3606.1.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3607** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3607 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3607}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3608** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3608 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3608}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3609** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b3609 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3609}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3610** LOANS: GENERAL {#sec-10-b3610 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3610}

3610.1 The provisions of Chapters 36 shall implement the provisions of the District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency Act, effective March 3, 1979, as amended (D.C. Law 2-135, D.C. Official Code §§ 42-2701 et seq.) (the "Act").

3610.2 Procedures, instructions, guidelines, and appropriate forms for the solicitation, receipt, processing, and evaluation of applications for Agency financing and other assistance and the taking of other actions that may be necessary or desirable for the implementation and administration of all aspects of the Agency's programs may be established and modified from time to time by the Executive Director (or in the absence of the Executive Director, a designee(s) of the Board), with the approval or ratification of the Agency Board.

3610.3 Agency procedures, instructions, guidelines, and forms shall be consistent with the requirements of the Act and this chapter.

3610.4 The Agency staff may provide technical assistance to applicants seeking to complete applications.

3610.5 The Board, by resolution, may waive or vary particular provisions of Chapter 36 to the extent not inconsistent with the Act for the following reasons:

(a) To conform to the requirements of the federal government in connection with any Housing project or housing unit with respect to which federal assistance is sought; or

(b) In exceptional circumstances if, in the determination of the Board, the application of the rule(s) to a specific case or under an emergency situation may result in undue hardship.

3610.6 If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of Chapter 36 is adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, that judgment shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder of this chapter, but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part directly involved in the controversy in which the judgment has been rendered.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3611** LOANS: FEDERALLY ASSISTED {#sec-10-b3611 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3611}

3611.1 When housing financed by the District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency (the "Agency") loan is, in whole or in part, federally insured or otherwise directly or indirectly assisted by the federal government, the regulations of the federal government program pursuant to which that assistance is provided shall apply to the extent they are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act and Chapter 36 of this title.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3612** LOANS TO SPONSORS: RENTAL HOUSING {#sec-10-b3612 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3612}

3612.1 As set forth in § 302 of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42-2703.02(a)), the Agency may make or participate in making construction, permanent, mezzanine, and interim loan financing available to sponsors for the development of rental Housing projects for Eligible persons.

3612.2 Financing under § 302 of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42-2703.02(a)) shall be on whatever terms and conditions the Agency determines to be appropriate in the circumstances. The terms and conditions of financing shall be established in the Agency procedures and guidelines.

3612.3 The terms and conditions of financing may include, but shall not be limited to the following:

(a) Interest rates;

(b) Repayment terms;

(d) Collateral and other security arrangements;

(e) Maximum loan term;

(f) Debt service requirements;

(g) Pre-payment penalties; and

(h) Refinancing terms.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3613** APPLICATIONS AND PROCESSING OF LOANS {#sec-10-b3613 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3613}

3613.1 Specific instructions concerning applications for Agency predevelopment loans, permanent loans, construction loans, mezzanine loans, interim loans, or for other assistance, and the processing, evaluation, and approval of the applications shall be contained in the Agency's processing procedures, instructions, and guidelines promulgated pursuant to § 3610.

3613.2 Applications and allocation plans, if any, for Agency financing shall be available to all applicants requesting them from the Agency. Such applications or allocations plans may contain information relating to rent levels, tenant relocation, and underwriting expectations.

3613.3 Upon receipt of a completed application, the Agency staff shall, pursuant to agency guidelines and allocation plans, undertake appropriate analyses, investigations, and reviews in order to evaluate the proposed Housing project in accordance with the Agency's requirements, goals, policies, and selection criteria. The staff shall then make recommendations pursuant to Agency guidelines and allocations plans to the Board on the feasibility of the project for Agency financing.

3613.4 If the Board preliminarily determines a proposed Housing project to be feasible for financing with an Agency predevelopment, construction, mezzanine, interim, or permanent loan, the Executive Director (or in his or her absence, designee(s) of the Board) shall issue to the sponsor a conditional commitment or financing feasibility letter.

3613.5 The financing feasibility or conditional commitment letter may be issued for whatever term the Executive Director determines is appropriate in the circumstances.

3613.6 The conditional commitment letter shall constitute the Agency’s intent to fund, as approved by the Board, the Housing project, subject to the completion of the terms and conditions as enumerated in the letter.

3613.7 The financing feasibility letter shall not constitute a commitment on behalf of the Agency, but shall constitute a determination by the Agency staff that the proposed Housing project is feasible for financing by the Agency on the basis of preliminary reviews and analyses of the proposed site, market, design, development costs, operating budget, management plan, housing sponsor qualifications, and compliance with legal requirements.

3613.8 The financing feasibility or conditional commitment letter shall specify that upon satisfaction of the terms and conditions contained in the letter, and upon submission of a satisfactorily completed final application for Agency financing, or due diligence as may be required, the entire loan application shall be processed. Loans requiring a financial feasibility letter shall be presented to the Board for action with respect to the authorization of an Agency construction loan, permanent loan, or both.

3613.9 The financing feasibility or conditional commitment letter shall establish submission requirements, as determined appropriate by the Executive Director (such as the submission of preliminary designs), prior to submission of final application.

3613.10 Upon satisfaction of the terms and conditions contained in the financing feasibility letter and completion of the processing of the final loan application by the Agency staff, the Executive shall present to the Board his or her recommendations with respect to the application together with the Agency's analysis of the completed application. The Board shall make a determination by resolution whether the proposed Housing project is a feasible housing project and is approved by the Agency for construction or permanent financing or other assistance.

3613.11 The Board resolution shall authorize the issuance of an Agency construction or permanent financing commitment, or both, to the sponsor with respect to the proposed Housing project. The commitment may be issued for whatever term the Board determines to be appropriate in the circumstances.

3613.12 The resolution may include any conditions that the Agency considers appropriate with respect to the commencement of construction of the proposed Housing project, the marketing and occupancy of the housing development, the use, disbursement and repayment of the construction or permanent loan authorized, and all other matters relating to the acquisition, equipping, development, construction, or rehabilitation and operation of the proposed housing project.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3614** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3614 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3614}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3615** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3615 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3615}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3616** REGULATIONS OF HOUSING SPONSORS {#sec-10-b3616 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3616}

3616.1 It shall be the policy of the Agency to ensure the operational stability of Housing projects to the greatest extent possible. To that end, the Agency's processing procedures, instructions, and guidelines may require the submission of any organizational documents necessary to determine the qualification of the applicant as a housing sponsor and desirable recipient of Agency financing.

3616.2 As a condition precedent to the closing of an Agency loan, the sponsor may be required to execute a regulatory agreement with the Agency and any other related documents that the Executive Director (or designee(s) of the Board) determines to be necessary or appropriate.

3616.3 The regulatory agreement or other documents related to the financing of the proposed housing project shall authorize the Agency to regulate any aspects of the development of the proposed housing project that the Executive Director (or designee(s) of the Board) determines to be necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the Agency and permit fulfillment of the Agency's duties and responsibilities under the Act, particularly, §§ 302(b)(1)(B) and 306(b)(1), (2), and (3) of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42.2703.02 and § 42.2703.06).

##### **10-B DCMR § 3617** COLLATERAL AND SECURITY {#sec-10-b3617 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3617}

3617.1 The Executive Director may, from time to time, establish the type and amount of collateral or other security to be provided by borrowers necessary to ensure repayment of permanent loans, repayment of construction loans, or successful completion of the proposed Housing projects.

3617.2 Collateral and security may be in the form of letters of credit, guarantees, cash benefit or other insurance, payment bonds, performance bonds, or other types approved by the Executive Director.

3617.3 The requirements for collateral and security shall be set forth in the Agency procedures, guidelines, and loan contract forms.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3618** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3618 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3618}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3619** FEES {#sec-10-b3619 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3619}

3619.1 The Agency may charge reasonable fees for the processing and evaluation of applications.

3619.2 The Agency may charge fees or require letters of credit to cover other appropriate costs of the Agency, non-asset bonds, security deficiencies, and other costs, as determined by the Agency.

3619.3 The terms and conditions under which fees or letters of credit will be required shall be provided in the Agency procedures and guidelines.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 28 DCR 4544, 4551 (October 23, 1981). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3619*

### **10-B37** [REPEALED]

##### **10-B DCMR § 3700** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3700}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3701** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3701}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3702** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3702}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3703** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3703}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3704** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3704}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3705** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3705}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3706** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3706 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3706}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3707** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3707 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3707}

##### **10-B DCMR § 3799** [REPEALED] {#sec-10-b3799 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3799}

### **10-B38** HFA: SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 3800** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b3800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3800}

3800.1 The provisions of this chapter shall establish the procedures for the administration of the Program.

3800.2 In order to generate funds from private and public sources to increase the supply and lower the cost of funds available for residential Mortgages and thereby help alleviate the critical shortage of adequate affordable housing for Low-income and Moderate-income persons in the District, the Agency is authorized under § 303 of the Act (D.C. Official Code § 42-2703.03) to invest in, purchase, make commitments to purchase, and take assignments from Approved Mortgage Lenders of Mortgage loans made to Low and Moderate-income persons for the financing of eligible residential housing that meets the requirements established by the Act and the Agency.

3800.3 The Agency shall be empowered to make or originate the following:

(a) Loans to sponsors for the acquisition, equipping, construction, rehabilitation, or permanent Mortgage financing of home ownership housing projects for Eligible persons;

(b) Loans through Approved Mortgage Lenders for the purchase of owner occupied residential housing by Eligible persons;

(d) Loans to Eligible persons for the rehabilitation of residential housing;

(e) Funds available to assist eligible prospective home purchasers to meet down payment requirements in order to obtain Mortgage financing;

(f) Funds available in a Mortgage loan guarantee fund to be used by the Agency to guarantee or insure Mortgage loans in accordance with criteria established by the Agency;

(g) Counseling programs available to Low-income and Moderate-income families; and

(h) Loans for the prevention of foreclosures.

3800.4 The purchase of Mortgage loans shall be on whatever terms and conditions that the Agency determines to be appropriate in the circumstances.

3800.5 Terms and conditions shall be established in the Agency's Program documents.

3800.6 The Agency shall fund the purchase or origination of Mortgage loans or Mortgaged-backed securities with the proceeds of its Bonds or other available money.

3800.7 The Agency's obligation to purchase or originate Mortgage loans or Mortgaged backed securities shall be contingent on its ability to issue Bonds or acquire funds at a rate and upon other conditions acceptable to the Agency.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4930 (September 23, 1983); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 61 DCR 4156 (April 25, 2014). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 3800*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3801** ELIGIBLE MORTGAGE LENDERS AND INVITATION TO RESERVE FUNDS {#sec-10-b3801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3801}

3801.1 The Agency may accept as participants in the Program those Approved Mortgage Lenders which have demonstrated to the Agency, among other things, that they have the ability to originate and service Mortgage loans in the District and that they are in compliance with applicable local and federal statutes and regulations.

3801.2 The Agency shall invite interested Approved Mortgage Lenders to enter into a Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement in connection with the Program.

3801.3 Mortgage lenders may request, from time to time, an allocation of funds expected to be available for the purchase of Mortgage loans.

3801.4 Specific instructions concerning the following shall be contained in the Agency's program documents:

(a) The Agency's availability of funds;

(b) Terms for purchasing qualified Mortgage loans; and

##### **10-B DCMR § 3802** ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SPECIAL PROGRAMS {#sec-10-b3802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3802}

3802.1 The Agency may from time to time, establish Special Programs on the basis of the following:

(a) The availability of adequate funds;

(b) The effect of the allocation on the marketability of the Agency's Bonds;

(c) The requirements of the Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and applicable I.R.S. regulations regarding the use of Bond proceeds;

(d) The effect of the allocation in achieving the Agency's housing goals in the District; and

(e) Other criteria that may be established by the Agency.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3803** MORTGAGE LOAN TERMS {#sec-10-b3803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3803}

3803.1 Each Mortgage loan shall be secured by a Mortgage which constitutes a lien on the interest in the Single-family residency encumbered by the mortgage or on the leasehold interest in the Single-family residence having an unexpired term equal to or longer than the term in which the Mortgage loan secured is to be amortized.

3803.2 Mortgage loan terms shall be established as the Agency determines to be appropriate in the circumstances.

3803.3 Mortgage loan terms shall be specified in the program documents and may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Maximum and minimum terms;

(b) Type of financing (e.g., graduated payment loan, variable rate loan);

(d) Prepayment penalties;

(e) Fee, charges, and other conditions of originating and servicing requirements;

(f) Maximum loan-to-value ratio;

(g) Down payment requirements;

(h) Interest rates; and

(i) Acceleration provisions.

3803.4 The Agency shall establish the interest rate to be charged on the Mortgage loans, taking into account the Agency's costs of borrowing the funds required to purchase the Mortgage loans, administrative costs of the Agency, and possible losses due to Mortgage loan defaults.

3803.5 The interest rate on Mortgage loans financed with tax-exempt Bond proceeds shall not exceed the maximum permitted by application of the provisions of § 103 and § 141 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) regulations.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3804** ELIGIBLE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES {#sec-10-b3804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3804}

3804.1 The Agency may finance single family residences located in the District which satisfy the applicable requirements of the Act , I.R.S. regulations, the Department of Housing and Urban Development or other laws, rules, regulations, Program documents and guidelines applicable under the Agency’s financing plan.

3804.2 The Program documents for eligible Single-family residences may provide the following:

(a) Types of units to be financed (attached or detached single family, condominiums, cooperatives, new construction, substantial rehabilitation, existing homes);

(b) Maximum purchase price for each type of unit;

(d) In the case of condominium or cooperative units, pre-sale requirements, approval requirements, and maximum number of units to be financed in any building or project; and

(e) Targeted areas.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3805** DISTRIBUTION OF LENDABLE BOND PROCEEDS {#sec-10-b3805 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3805}

3805.1 In order to comply with § 103 and § 141 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable I.R.S. regulations, and to carry out the policy for which the Agency was created, the Agency shall provide a mechanism assuring that a necessary or reasonable amount of lendable Bond proceeds are distributed in Targeted areas and to such persons as the Agency determines suffer from a critical shortage of affordable financing, or are otherwise in need of appropriate financing for Single-family residences.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3806** ELIGIBLE MORTGAGORS {#sec-10-b3806 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3806}

3806.1 The Agency may purchase or originate Mortgage loans or Mortgage-backed securities made to eligible persons and families who satisfy the requirements of §103 and § 141 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, applicable I.R.S. regulations, and the Act and who meet certain additional criteria or goals as may, from time to time, be established by the Agency in its Program Documents.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3807** PROGRAM FEES {#sec-10-b3807 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3807}

3807.1 The Agency may charge and collect from an Approved Mortgage Lender a reasonable fee to participate in the Program and to cover the Agency's cost of administering the Program and certain other costs as the Agency determines are necessary to cover cash flow or security deficiencies in connection with the issuance of the Program's Bonds.

3807.2 The Agency may also allow Approved Mortgage Lenders to charge the mortgagors or the sellers of Single-family residences reasonable fees to participate in the Program and defray the costs of originating and servicing the Mortgage loans to the extent permitted by applicable law.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3808** LOAN PROCESSING AND PROGRAM DOCUMENTS {#sec-10-b3808 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3808}

3808.1 Mortgage loans to be purchased under the Program shall be originated by Approved Mortgage Lenders and serviced by Approved Mortgage Lenders or a Master servicer.

3808.2 Each Approved Mortgage Lender shall originate all Mortgage loans in accordance with the lender's then current standard underwriting policies, the standards of FNMA, FHA or FHLMC (or their respective successors), as applicable, and of the Agency or its designee.

3808.3 Each Approved Mortgage Lender or Master servicer shall service all Mortgage loans in accordance with the standards set by the Program documents.

3808.4 The standards for originating and servicing Mortgage loans may be modified from time to time by the Agency.

3808.5 The implementation of the Program may include the production and execution of certain Program documents, including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement;

(b) Invitation to reserve funds; and

3808.6 The Program documents shall be provided by the Agency and may be amended by the Agency from time to time. The Program documents shall be consulted in conjunction with the applicable provisions of this chapter to fully describe the Program and its procedures.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3809** AFFIRMATIVE MARKETING GOALS {#sec-10-b3809 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3809}

3809.1 The Agency may establish a monitoring system to ensure that Approved Mortgage Lenders do the following:

(a) Conduct outreach efforts and inform members of the community of the availability of the Agency's funding or Mortgage loans, particularly those groups identified by the Agency as having a need for increased housing opportunities; and

(b) Make Mortgage loans to Eligible persons and families on a nondiscriminatory basis.

##### **10-B DCMR § 3899** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3899 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3899}

3899.1 When used in this chapter, unless defined herein, words and phrases shall have their common industry meaning ascribed:

Approved Mortgage Lender:

(a) The Agency, any bank, Mortgage banking company, trust company, savings bank, savings and loan association, credit union, national banking association, federal savings and loan or federal credit union which maintains an office in the District, an FHA approved lender; or meets other requirements as set forth by the Board of Directors of the Agency; and

(b) Any insurance company that is authorized to do business in the District and meets the financial stability and sufficient net worth criteria established, from time to time, by the Agency.

Bonds - the bonds or other evidences of financial obligations of the Agency used to finance Mortgage loans.

Eligible person or family - one (1) or more persons or a family determined by the Agency to be of Low or Moderate-income who qualify for housing under the Program according to the requirements of the Program documents as established by the Agency and whose Gross income does not exceed the percentages, set forth in the Act, of the median family income, as revised from time to time, for the SMSA in which the District is located.

Gross income - the income shown on the last filed federal income tax return(s) which reflects gross income (total income including deductions) as well as verification of current income by the lender.

Master Servicer – the servicer designated, by and on behalf of the Agency, to service Mortgage loans originated by the Agency, Approved Mortgage Lenders or the Master Servicer in accordance with the provisions of the Agency’s Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement, servicing agreement, and the Program documents.

Mortgage - a Mortgage or deed of trust or any other owner-financing instrument as defined in § 102(n) of the Act, encumbering a Single-family residence located in the District and securing a Mortgage loan in the form and containing terms and provisions required in the applicable program documents and approved by the Agency pursuant to this Part.

Mortgage-backed securities - are asset-backed securities that represent a claim on the cash flows from Mortgage loans through a process known as securitization.

Mortgage loan - a loan to an Eligible person or family for the purposes of financing residential housing, committed by an Approved Mortgage Lender, pursuant to the applicable Program documents, which is evidenced by a Mortgage note secured by the related Mortgage and which the Agency purchases pursuant to a Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement with the Approved Mortgage Lender.

Mortgage note - a promissory note evidencing a Mortgage loan and secured by the related Mortgage in the form and containing terms required in the applicable Program documents and approved by the Agency.

Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement - an agreement between the Agency and an Approved Mortgage Lender, except where the Agency originates the loan, pursuant to which the Approved Mortgage Lender becomes a participant in the Program and in accordance with which Mortgage loans are originated, securitized, or purchased by the Agency, and serviced by the Approved Mortgage Lender or Master Servicer and which sets forth the requirements of the Act and this Participating Mortgage Lender Single Family Program Agreement .

Program - the Agency's single family mortgage program pursuant to which the Agency originates or purchases Mortgage loans, or Mortgage-backed securities from Approved Mortgage Lenders, including, but not limited to, refinancing loans and acquisition rehabilitation loans.

Program documents - any and all documents required by the Agency setting forth the terms and conditions under which the Agency shall originate or purchase Mortgage Loans from Approved Mortgage Lenders, or purchase Mortgage-backed securities from other entities.

Single-family residence - an owner-occupied single family residence, including a condominium and cooperative unit, that is located in the District and satisfies all the requirements of the Program documents.

SMSA - a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the United States Office of Management and Budget.

Special Programs - means programs that the DCHFA may establish from time to time to set aside Mortgage loan capacity for specific purposes or specific borrowers.

Targeted area - a qualified census tract or an area of chronic economic distress located in the District within the meaning of Section 143(j) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable I.R.S. regulations, and any other areas that the Agency may, from time to time, designate.

### **10-B39** TAX ABATEMENT AND INCENTIVES PROGRAM FOR NEW AND VACANT REHABILITATED RENTAL HOUSING

##### **10-B DCMR § 3900** SCOPE OF PROGRAM {#sec-10-b3900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3900}

3900.1 This chapter shall govern the application and certification requirements for tax abatements and the deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness owed the District, including deferral or forgiveness of tax liens and sewer and water fees, for newly constructed rental housing accommodations as authorized in §§802 and 803 of the Rental Housing Act of 1985, D.C. Law 6-10, D.C. Code §45-2582-§45-2583 (1981).

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §§802(e) and 803(b) of the Rental Housing Act of 1985, D.C. Law 6-10, D.C. Code §45-2582 and §45-2583 (1981), and Mayor's Order 86-27, 33 DCR 1651 (March 14, 1986), as amended by Mayor's Order 86-166, 33 DCR 6949 (September 19, 1986).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3901** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b3901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3901}

3901.1 All applicants for benefits or assistance under the program shall apply to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

3901.2 Applications shall be submitted on an application form prescribed by the DHCD.

3901.3 Applications which do no contain all of the information and materials required by the application form shall not be considered by the DHCD.

3901.4 All complete applications and corroborating documents submitted in support of the application, shall be reviewed for program eligibility, consistent with this chapter, by the Neighborhood Improvement Administration (NIA) of DHCD.

3901.5 In making the determination of eligibility, the DHCD may take official notice of any information in the records of the DHCD or of any other District of Columbia Agency.

3901.6 As part of its application review, the DHCD may require an applicant to provide any additional information needed to determine the eligibility of the project. This may include requiring applicants to provide copies of the applicant's income tax returns filed under D.C. Code §§47-1805.1 and 47-2003, and authorization for DHCD to confirm the contents of with the Department of Finance and Revenue.

3901.7 Applicants whose applications are determined not to meet eligibility criteria shall be sent a letter of rejection from the Administrator of NIA. Applications which meet the eligibility criteria shall be forwarded to the Director of the DHCD for final determination and written notification of eligibility to the applicant.

3901.8 A determination of eligibility for one type of abatement or incentive under the program shall not provide eligibility for any other type of abatement or incentive. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as creating a right or entitlement for any applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 981 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3902** CERTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR TAX ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b3902 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3902}

3902.1 Tax abatements as specified in §802(a) of the Act (D.C. Code §45-2582 (1981)) shall be granted to any newly constructed rental housing accommodation or any vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated where it is determined that such abatements are in the best interest of the District and consistent with the District's rental housing needs.

3902.2 Granting of the tax abatement to newly constructed rental housing accommodations shall be in the best interest of the District and consistent with the District's rental housing needs if the project meets the requirements of §§3902.3 through 3902.9.

3902.3 At least five percent (5%) of the units in the project shall be made available at rents which are affordable by lower and moderate income households during the applicable period of the rent regulatory agreement under §3907.3 of this chapter. In determining compliance with this requirement, the following shall apply:

(a) Affordable rents shall not exceed an amount to be determined periodically by DHCD which shall be no higher than thirty percent (30%) of the monthly gross income of lower and moderate income households of appropriate household size in. relation to unit size;

(b) In determining the number of units for compliance with the five percent (5%) requirement of this subsection, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded up to the next highest whole number;

(c) Where essential utilities are not provided as part of the rent, a reasonable allowance for utilities as determined by the DHCD shall be subtracted from the maximum allowable rent in determining compliance with affordable rent requirements; and

(d) The current maximum allowable rents, including utilities, as determined by the DHCD under §3902.3(a) shall be as follows:

Type of Unit

Maximum Allowance Monthly Rent

Efficiency

$408

1 bedroom

$498

2 bedrooms

$582

3 bedrooms

$687

4 bedrooms or more

$750

3902.4 Ten percent (10%) of the units in the project, which shall be in addition to the percentage of units required in §3902.3, shall be made available, at market rental rates, on a priority basis to households in possession of a Certificate of Eligibility from DHCD under the Section 8 Existing Housing Program or the Tenant Assistance Program, and all other units in the project shall be made available as specified in §3907.2(e) of this chapter; Provided, that nothing shall prevent the housing provider from renting these units to other households under one (1) of the following conditions:

(a) The proposed market rental rates exceed the maximum rents allowed under the Section 8 or Tenant Assistance Programs;

(b) Insufficient households with certificates actually apply for the units; or

3902.5 The units specified in §3902.4 shall be considered made available on a priority basis if the housing provider gives advance notice to DHCD of the actual or expected availability of units for the following priority periods:

(a) For units offered for initial occupancy, a period of ninety (90) days; or

(b) For units becoming available after initial occupancy, a period of thirty (30) days.

3902.6 Units meeting the affordable rent requirements of §3902.3 shall be termed reserved units, and the housing provider shall certify to the DHCD that he or she shall rent all reserved units in the project only to lower and moderate income households.

3902.7 For projects containing forty (40) or more units, not less than fifty percent (50%) of reserved units in the completed project shall contain two (2) or more bedrooms (in determining the number of units for compliance with the fifty percent (50%) requirement, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded down to the next lowest whole number); Provided, that the Director may waive this requirement if the housing provider agrees to rent all units in the project exclusively to elderly households (head of household is sixty-two (62) years or older).

3902.8 The housing provider shall have entered into a rent regulatory agreement with DHCD, covering the reserved units, consistent with §3907 of this chapter.

3902.9 The housing provider shall have certified to DHCD that none of the rental units in the project which are subject to a condominium regime at any time during the term of the rent regulatory agreement, shall be offered for sale or sold during the term of the rent regulatory agreement.

3902.10 The requirement of §3902.7 may be waived by the Director for vacant rental housing accommodations which have been rehabilitated upon a finding of the following:

(a) There are not a sufficient number of existing two (2) or more bedroom units in the project prior to rehabilitation to meet the requirement; and

(b) It would be physically or economically infeasible for the project to convert sufficient existing units to two (2) or more bedrooms to meet the requirement.

3902.11 For projects where the Director has provided a waiver under §3902.10, DHCD may require that all existing two-bedroom or larger units in the project be reserved units.

3902.12 Granting of the tax abatement to a vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated shall be in the best interest of the District and consistent with the District's rental housing needs; Provided, that the requirements of §§3902.3 through 3902.11 have been met.

3902.13 A newly constructed rental housing accommodation or a vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated shall be granted tax abatement if the project is receiving financing through the District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency's multi-family programs without the need to meet the requirements of §§3902.3 through 3902.12.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 982 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3903** SCHEDULE OF TAX ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b3903 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3903}

3903.1 A newly constructed rental housing accommodation certified eligible for tax abatement under the program shall be entitled to the abatement of eighty percent (80%) of its total District of Columbia property tax liability during the first property tax year following the date on which the project becomes available for rent.

3903.2 The tax liability of certified eligible newly constructed rental housing accommodations shall be increased by increments of sixteen percent (16%) of the full tax liability in each succeeding tax year after the first year of eligibility for tax abatement, until the time that full tax liability is reached, as follows:

Tax Year After Availability

Percentage of Assessed Tax Amount Owed

1st

20%

2nd

36%

3rd

52%

4th

68%

5th

84%

6th or later

100%

3903.3 A certified eligible vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated shall be entitled to tax abatement under §§3903.1 and 3903.2 for that amount of its District of Columbia property tax which was increased due to the rehabilitation.

3903.4 Determination of the amount by which District property tax was increased due to rehabilitation shall be made by the Department of Finance and Revenue, based on the building permits for rehabilitation issued to the project, consistent with existing practice by the Department of Finance and Revenue.

3903.5 A rental housing accommodation certified eligible for tax abatement under this chapter shall be considered available for rental as of the date on which a valid Certificate of Occupancy for housing use has been issued by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs covering all of the rental units in the project.

3903.6 In order for a project certified eligible for tax abatement to receive the first year of property tax abatement, the following shall be delivered to and stamped “received” by, the D.C. Department of Finance and Revenue not later than the close of business on the last business day prior to the start of a new tax year on July 1st:

(a) An executed Certificate of Occupancy for all units in the project; and

(b) All additional documentation as specified by DHCD in accordance with this chapter.

3903.7 For purposes of §§3903.5 and 3903.6, if a project which has been certified eligible for tax abatement is located on more than one tax assessment lot, the abatement may be granted separately for each assessment lot when all of the units on an assessment lot have received a valid Certificate of Occupancy.

3903.8 If the Certificate of Occupancy or other required documents are received after the time specified in §3903.6, the project shall not receive property tax abatement until the tax year which begins on July 1st of the following calendar year.

3903.9 The percentage of tax abatement specified in §§3903.1 and 3903.2 shall be applied to the most current full tax assessment for certified eligible properties in each of the five (5) tax years the abatement is in effect.

3903.10 The percentage of tax abatement specified in §3903.3 for a vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated shall be applied, in the second, third, fourth and fifth tax years, only to the same proportion of the current full tax assessment as the proportion of the tax increase due to rehabilitation was for the first year of tax abatement, as determined under §§3903.3 and 3903.4. For example, if the amount by which District property tax was increased due to rehabilitation was forty percent (40%) of the total tax assessment on the property during the first tax abatement year, then the percentages of tax abatement for the next four (4) years of its eligibility shall be applied to only forty percent (40%) of its total tax liability in each of those years.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 985 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3904** CERTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR DEFERRAL AND FORGIVENESS OF INDEBTEDNESS OWED TO THE DISTRICT {#sec-10-b3904 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3904}

3904.1 A vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated may be eligible for consideration of deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness owed to the District including, but not limited to, any outstanding tax liens, real property taxes, and unpaid water and sewer fees.

3904.2 The granting of deferral or forgiveness shall be based on a determination by DHCD that such action is in the best interest of the District, and consistent with District's rental housing needs in terms of its location, type and variety of sizes of rental units, as specified in this section.

3904.3 The DHCD shall review each application for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness for financial feasibility, based on commonly accepted underwriting criteria established by the Department and disclosed to applicants as part of the application package for the program. The DHCD review shall establish the amounts of deferral or forgiveness which create the minimum financial loss to the District and also make the project financially feasible.

3904.4 In determining specific amounts of deferral or forgiveness, DHCD shall use the following order of priorities:

(a) Deferral of some or all real estate taxes only;

(b) Some deferral and some forgiveness of real estate taxes only;

(d) Forgiveness of all real estate taxes and deferral of some or all water and sewer fees;

(e) Forgiveness of all real estate taxes plus some deferral and some forgiveness of water and sewer fees; and

(f) Forgiveness of all real estate taxes and all water and sewer fees.

3904.5 Applicants for projects financed under a multi-family housing program of the D.C. Housing Finance Agency may be certified by DHCD for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness; Provided, that the following has occurred:

(a) The project has a firm written commitment of financing from the D.C. Housing Finance Agency;

(c) The Director of DHCD has not received any information pursuant to the provisions of §§3901.5 and 3901.6 which would cause him or her to determine that the granting of deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness would not be in the best interest of the District.

3904.6 All other applicants may be certified by DHCD for deferral and/or forgiveness of indebtedness; Provided, that the following requirements are met:

(a) At least fifteen percent (15%) of the units in the project shall be made available at rents affordable by lower and moderate income households, as defined in §3902.3 of this chapter (in determining the number of units for compliance with the fifteen percent (15%) requirement, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded down to the next lowest whole number);

(b) The project meets the requirements of §§ 3902.6 through 3902.9 of this chapter, except that the waiver allowed in § 3902.10 may be allowed;

(c) The applicant shall make a binding written commitment to make an equity investment in the project of not less than ten percent (10%) of the projected overall costs of developing the project;

(d) The DHCD determines that the applicant is able to make the required equity investment;

(e) The DHCD has made a determination that the project is infeasible without the deferral or forgiveness, based on the feasibility analysis under § 3904.3; and

(f) The Director of DHCD has not received any information pursuant to the provisions of §§ 3901.5 and 3901.6 of this chapter which would cause him or her to determine that the granting of deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness would not be in the best interest of the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 987 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3905** ANNUAL FORGIVENESS AND DEFERRAL CEILINGS {#sec-10-b3905 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3905}

3905.1 Each fiscal year, the following persons shall make recommendations to the Mayor:

(a) The Director of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs shall recommend amounts of revenue to be forgiven and deferred related to special assessments under D.C. Code §5-513 (1981);

(b) The Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue shall recommend amounts of revenue to be forgiven and deferred related to real property taxes;

(c) The Director of the Department of Public Works shall recommend amounts of revenue to be forgiven and deferred related to water and sewer fees; and

(d) The Director of the Department of Housing and Community Development shall recommend overall amounts of revenue to be forgiven and deferred related to meeting the purposes and objectives of this program.

3905.2 After reviewing the recommendations, the Mayor shall make a determination of the amounts of revenue to be forgiven and deferred, and shall include such amounts in the appropriate sections of the District's annual budget.

3905.3 The amounts determined each fiscal year through the budget process shall be the maximum amounts of indebtedness to be forgiven or deferred during any given fiscal year for projects certified by DHCD as eligible for forgiveness or deferral. The amounts determined shall be known as the "annual debt deferral ceiling" and the "annual debt forgiveness ceiling."

3905.4 Projects meeting the criteria for forgiveness or deferral in §3904 of this chapter shall be certified by DHCD as eligible for forgiveness or deferral, up to the annual debt forgiveness ceiling or the annual debt deferral ceiling.

3905.5 Eligible projects which would bring the total debt forgiven or deferred for that fiscal year above the annual debt forgiveness ceiling or the annual debt deferral ceiling, shall be issued a preliminary certificate of forgiveness or deferral by DHCD.

3905.6 All applicants of projects with preliminary certificates of forgiveness or deferral which are submitted with a new request for forgiveness or deferral within the first thirty (30) calendar days of the next fiscal year following issuance shall receive priority consideration. If DHCD review indicates these projects are still eligible, they shall receive the first allocations of forgiveness and deferral of indebtedness available in the new fiscal year, with priority given in chronological order, based on the date of issuance of their preliminary certificate of forgiveness or deferral.

3905.7 Projects with preliminary certificates submitted after the first thirty (30) calendar days of a new fiscal year shall be treated on the same basis as other projects submitted that fiscal year.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 989 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3906** SCHEDULE, TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF DEFERRAL AND FORGIVENESS {#sec-10-b3906 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3906}

3906.1 The schedule for deferral and repayment of any indebtedness to the District shall be determined by the DHCD, based on the financial feasibility review and analysis required in §3904 of this chapter. In determining the schedule, DHCD shall use the following criteria:

(a) The period of initial deferral, during which no payment of the amount deferred is due, shall not exceed a maximum of five (5) tax years following the first tax year when the project is certified for the program under §3908.6 of this chapter; and

(b) The total period of deferral, including the period for repayment of deferred indebtedness, shall not exceed ten (10) full tax years from the first tax year when the project is certified for the program under §3908.6 of this chapter.

3906.2 When a project has been certified eligible for deferral of indebtedness under the rules of this chapter, and a Conditional Agreement for Deferral has been executed by the DHCD and the housing provider under §3908.6, no further interest or penalties shall accrue on that portion of the unpaid indebtedness which has been deferred beyond that which had accrued through the end of the last tax year prior to the tax year in which the Conditional Agreement for Deferral for the project was executed.

3906.3 Penalties and interest on any indebtedness which have not been deferred shall continue to accrue and be charged as provided elsewhere in D.C. Law.

3906.4 If the housing provider, or his or her successor, fails to meet the schedule for payment of deferred indebtedness established under §3906.1, any indebtedness due under the schedule shall remain and be considered as taxes due, water or sewer fees due, or other indebtedness, if any, due to the District as of the date established in such schedule, and the District shall collect such indebtedness using all legally available means, including but not limited to, the imposition of tax liens on the property, and the sale of the property at the next scheduled tax sale.

3906.5 All deferral of indebtedness owed to the District under this program shall be considered conditional during the entire period of the rent regulatory agreement provided for in §3907 of this chapter. This provision shall be enforced as follows:

(a) Each housing provider granted a deferral of indebtedness under this program shall execute and deliver to the District at the time the deferral takes effect, a Deed of Trust Note ("Note") for the entire amount of deferred indebtedness; and

(b) The terms of the Note shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(1) The entire amount of indebtedness shall become due and payable immediately upon a finding by DHCD that the housing provider has violated any provision of the rent regulatory agreement executed with and attached to the Note;

(2) The amount of indebtedness shall be considered paid in full and canceled upon the payment in full of the deferred indebtedness according to the established scheduled, and upon the completion of the term of the rent regulatory agreement without violation of the provisions of the agreement;

(3) The amount of indebtedness shall be secured by a Deed of Trust given by the owner of the property to the District, in form and content acceptable to the District; and

(4) The District may, at the request of the housing provider, allow for the subordination of the Deed of Trust securing the note to such other liens, securing private financing for the rehabilitation of the subject property as the District may, in its discretion, accept as necessary for the rehabilitation of the property; the District shall not unreasonably withhold agreement to subordinate the subject Deed of Trust to such private financing.

3906.6 All forgiveness of indebtedness owed to the District under this program shall be considered conditional during the entire period of the rent regulatory agreement provided for in §3907 of this chapter. This provision shall be enforced by means of a Deed of Trust Note, executed by each housing provider granted a forgiveness of indebtedness under this program, similar in form and content to the Deed of Trust Note established in §3906.5 but substituting provisions appropriate to the forgiveness of indebtedness in place of deferral of indebtedness.

3906.7 All taxes, water and sewer fees and other indebtedness owed to the District which is not explicitly deferred or forgiven under this program shall be paid when due, whether or not a project has received a deferral or forgiveness of any past indebtedness to the District under this program.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 990 (February 6, 1987); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2404 (April 10, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3907** RENT REGULATORY AGREEMENTS {#sec-10-b3907 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3907}

3907.1 The owner of each project determined to be eligible for tax abatement, under §3902 of this chapter, or for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness to the District under §3904 of this chapter shall be required to enter into a rent regulatory agreement with the DHCD prior to the issuance by the DHCD of any certification of eligibility for abatement, deferral or forgiveness.

3907.2 Each rent regulatory agreement (“agreement”) shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:

(a) Provide that the project shall be completed in conformity with the plans and specifications submitted for the project with the application;

(b) Establish the basis for the approval or disapproval of rent increases in the reserved units during the term of the agreement;

(c) Provide for marketing and tenant selection policies to be followed by the housing provider consistent with the requirements of §§3902.3, 3902.4, 3902.6 and 3904.6 and other related provisions of this chapter;

(e) Provide that the housing provider shall rent vacant non-reserved units in the project to persons specified in paragraph (d) of this subsection at all times on an equal basis with any other applicant;

(f) Provide that all indebtedness of the property which has been deferred or forgiven under this chapter, shall become immediately due and payable upon the sale or transfer of the property, or the majority of any ownership interest in the property, from the party with whom the rent regulatory agreement has been executed to any other party; Provided, that this requirement may be waived by the DHCD if the party to whom the property is transferred shall agree in writing to all the terms and conditions of the rent regulatory agreement and there are at least two (2) years remaining in the term of the agreement; Provided, further, that the enforcement of the provisions of this subsection shall be by means of the note(s) and deed(s) of trust provided for in §3906.4, §3906.5 and §3906.6; and

(g) Provide that the DHCD may establish such other means of enforcement of the provisions of the rent regulatory agreement as it determines to be necessary consistent with this chapter and other provisions of D.C. law.

3907.3 The term of each rent regulatory agreement for a project determined to be eligible for tax abatement only shall be five (5) years. The term of each rent regulatory agreement for a project determined to be eligible for tax abatement and deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness shall be ten (10) years.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 991 (February 6, 1987), as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2404 (April 10, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3908** PROCEDURES FOR CERTIFICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-b3908 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3908}

3908.1 When the DHCD has determined that a project is eligible for tax abatement, deferral of indebtedness or forgiveness of indebtedness to the District under this chapter, the implementation procedures of this section shall be followed.

3908.2 If the DHCD determines that a project is eligible for tax abatement under this chapter, the DHCD shall issue a Certificate of Eligibility for Tax Abatement to the owner of the project. This certificate shall be conditioned upon the continuing compliance by the project with the rent regulatory agreement for the project during the entire term of the tax abatement.

3908.3 The Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue shall, upon delivery of a Certificate of Eligibility for Tax Abatement and a valid Certificate of Occupancy for housing use, cause the amount of real estate taxes owed by the project to be abated, consistent with the provisions of §3903 and all other provisions of this chapter.

3908.4 If the DHCD determines that a project is eligible for deferral or forgiveness of indebtedness to the District under this chapter, the DHCD shall consult with the Departments of Finance and Revenue, Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, and Public Works, as appropriate, to determine the current status of debt collection efforts regarding the project.

3908.5 Based on such consultation, the DHCD shall include appropriate provisions regarding the terms and conditions of the deferral or forgiveness in any agreement or certificate provided to the project by the DHCD. The terms and conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) A deadline(s) for the completion of some or all of the rehabilitation work planned at the project; and

(b) The execution by the applicant of a consent judgment or agreement before a court of competent jurisdiction specifying the applicant's acceptance and agreement to the indebtedness proposed to be deferred or forgiven.

3908.6 If the DHCD determines, under this chapter, that a project is eligible for deferral of indebtedness to the District and has certified that the project is within the annual debt deferral ceiling as required by §3905.4, the DHCD shall execute a Conditional Agreement for Deferral with the housing provider for the subject project (the "deferral agreement"), which shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:

(a) The amount and type of indebtedness to be deferred, the period for which the payment of the amount is to be deferred, and the schedule for the subsequent repayment of the indebtedness;

(b) Any other provision as may be required by the DHCD under § 3908.5;

(d) Provisions for the enforcement of the agreement consistent with §§ 3906.4 and 3906.5 of this chapter.

3908.7 Upon delivery of a properly executed deferral agreement, the Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue or the Department of Public Works shall cause the payment of any indebtedness specified to be deferred, consistent with the terms of the deferral agreement.

3908.8 If the DHCD makes a determination, under this chapter, that an applicant is eligible for forgiveness of any indebtedness owed to the District, and has certified that the project is within the annual debt forgiveness ceiling as required by §3905.4 of this chapter, the DHCD shall issue the applicant a Conditional Certificate of Forgiveness which shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions:

(a) The amount and type of indebtedness to be forgiven;

(b) Any other provision as may be required by the DHCD under §3908.5;

(d) Provisions for the enforcement of the agreement consistent with §3906.6 of this chapter.

3908.9 Upon delivery of a properly executed Conditional Certificate of Forgiveness, the Director of the Department of Finance and Revenue or the Department of Public Works shall cause any indebtedness specified to be forgiven, and shall cause any liens securing the indebtedness to be released, consistent with the terms of the certificate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 992 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3909** WAIVER {#sec-10-b3909 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3909}

3909.1 The Director of the DHCD for good cause shown in writing, may waive any provision of this chapter, consistent with applicable law, except for the provisions of §3905 of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 994 (February 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 3999** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b3999 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B3999}

3999.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Rental Housing Act of 1985 (D.C. Law 6-10), D.C. Code §45-2501 et seq. (1981).

Administrator - the Administrator of the Neighborhood Improvement Administration (NIA).

DHCD - the D.C. Department, of Housing Community Development.

Director - the Director of the D.C. Department of Housing Community Development.

District - the District of Columbia Government.

Equity - an amount of investment which includes the following:

(a) Cash invested by an applicant in a project under the program, after submission of an application under the program which is not derived from any loan, whose repayment is not required, and whose repayment is not secured in any way by any lien or encumbrance on the property under this program or on any other property owned by the applicant or any of the applicant entity's principal owners, or in any other way;

(b) The cash value of materials or services contributed by an applicant to a project under the program, after the submission of an application under the program, based on the DHCD's estimation of the item's comparable market value; and

(c) Fifty percent (50%) of the out-of-pocket expenses paid by an applicant to maintain, heat, repair or provide other essential services to a property which is the subject of an application under the program, during the three (3) years immediately prior to the date of submission of the application based on documentation acceptable to DHCD.

Forgiveness of indebtedness - the canceling or forgiving of the required payment of any indebtedness owed to the District pursuant to the Act and this chapter. Forgiveness of indebtedness applies only to indebtedness which is past due at the time forgiveness is sought under the program.

Housing provider - a landlord, an owner, lessor, sublessor, assignee, or their agent, or any other person receiving or entitled to receive rents or benefits for the use or occupancy of any rental unit within a rental housing accommodation.

Indebtedness - the outstanding amount(s) owed to the District related to any real property in the District of Columbia as specified in § 3904.1 of this chapter, and any penalties and interest on this indebtedness.

Lower and moderate income households - a family whose annual income is within the loser income limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1437(f).

Newly constructed rental housing accommodation - a newly constructed rental housing accommodation for which the building permit was issued after December 31, 1975, or any newly created rental unit, added to an existing building or housing accommodation and covered by a Certificate of Occupancy for housing use issued after April 30, 1985, but excluding any rental housing accommodation the construction of which required the demolition of a housing accommodation subject to the Act, unless the number of newly constructed rental units exceeds the number of demolished units.

NIA - the Neighborhood Improvement Administration of the DHCD.

Program - the Tax Abatement and Incentives Program for New and Rehabilitated Rental Housing, established by Title VIII of the Act.

Project - the entire rental housing accommodation owned by the same legal entity or related legal entities which is the subject of an application for assistance under this program, is covered by a Certificate of Occupancy for housing use issued after April 30, 1985, and is located on one (1) or more contiguous lots and squares as specified in the tax assessment records of the District, including any part of such rental housing accommodation which is listed and assess separately for taxation purposes in the land records of the District.

Rehabilitation - the completion of an improvement to or renovation of a vacant rental housing accommodation for which the following applies:

(a) A building permit was applied for and granted after December 31, 1975;

(b) The total expenditure for the improvement or renovation equals or exceeds twenty-five percent (25%) of the assessed value of the rental housing accommodation prior to rehabilitation; and

(c) The rehabilitation brings the subject rental housing accommodation into full compliance with the housing code and the building code of the District and has resulted in the issuance of a new Certificate of Occupancy for housing use after April 30, 1985.

Rental Housing Accommodation - a building(s) in the District of Columbia containing one (1) or more rental units and the land appurtenant thereto. The term "Rental Housing Accommodation" does not include any hotel or inn or any building, including any room in the structure, used primarily for transient occupancy.

Reserved units - those rental units within an eligible project whose rents do not exceed the rents affordable by lower and moderate income household, and which are reserved for rental to households whose incomes do not exceed the lower- or moderate-income levels established in this chapter.

Tax abatement - the reduction of future property tax liability of the owner of real property in the District of Columbia.

Vacant rental housing accommodation which has been rehabilitated - a rental housing accommodation which has been continuously vacant and not subject to a rental agreement since January 1, 1985, has been rehabilitated according to the terms of the program, and is covered by a Certificate of Occupancy for housing use issued after April 30, 1985.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 980, 995 (February 6, 1987).*

### **10-B40** NEHEMIAH HOUSING PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 4000** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b4000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4000}

4000.1 This chapter shall set forth rules governing the operation of the Nehemiah Community Housing Opportunity Program (Nehemiah Program), administered by the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

4000.2 The purpose of the Nehemiah Program is to provide assistance to non-profit organizations for the production of new or rehabilitated housing for sale at prices affordable to District residents, and also to assist low and moderate income persons to purchase these homes.

4000.3 The Nehemiah Program is established under the authority of the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202 (D.C. Code § 45-3101 et seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.)).

4000.4 The Director, for good cause shown in writing, may waive any provision of this chapter, except the provisions of §§4003.3, 4003.5, 4003.6, 4003.12, 4006.2, 4006.4, 4006.9, 4007.2, 4007.8(b) and 4008.1, consistent with applicable law. All waivers shall be justified by a determination that undue hardship will result from applying the requirement and where application of the requirement would adversely affect the purpose and objectives of the Nehemiah Program.

4000.5 Non-profit applicants for federal funds under the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grant Program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be governed by rules published at 24 CFR Part 280 (Federal Register, Vol. 54, 97, page 22248, dated May 22, 1989). Non-profit organizations receiving funding under the federal program shall be eligible for assistance under this chapter. Federal rules shall have precedence over this chapter to the extent not inconsistent with the Act.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202, D.C. Code §45-3101 et seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4001** DESCRIPTION OF NEHEMIAH PROGRAM ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b4001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4001}

4001.1 DHCD may provide loans or grants, and make available land in public ownership, to assist eligible non-profit organizations in the construction or rehabilitation of homes under the Nehemiah Program.

4001.2 DHCD shall provide loans to eligible non-profit applicants in an amount up to one million dollars ($1,000,000) at below market interest rates to assist in their development of housing under the Nehemiah Program, consistent with the provisions of §4008.1.

4000.3 DHCD shall provide qualified purchasers of Nehemiah Program homes with loans or grants under the Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP) of up to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000), consistent with the provisions of §4007.7.

4001.4 DHCD shall make available uncommitted land owned by the D.C. Redevelopment Land Agency or other District agencies requested by qualified non-profit applicants consistent with the provisions of § 4008.

4001.5 Financial assistance provided under the Nehemiah Program shall not exceed the amount, nor shall assistance be provided on terms more favorable than, necessary to accomplish the public objectives of the project.

4001.6 Priority for financial assistance shall be provided to non-profit applicants providing the most affordable housing for low and moderate income home purchasers.

4001.7 Any failure of the non-profit applicant or Nehemiah Program home purchaser to comply with any terms or conditions of the Nehemiah Program shall constitute a default which may be actionable as determined in the sole discretion of DHCD.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8616 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4002** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b4002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4002}

4002.1 DHCD shall have the authority to establish, and shall announce from time to time, its requirements for receipt of applications for assistance from non-profit organizations under the Nehemiah Program. All applications shall be in a form prescribed by DHCD.

4002.2 DHCD's announcement soliciting applications under the Nehemiah Program shall be published in the following:

(a) At least one (1) newspaper of general circulation in the District of Columbia;

(b) In one (1) or more newspaper(s) serving minority communities in the District of Columbia; and

4002.3 With the application, DHCD shall provide general information, in a form prescribed by DHCD, which may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The deadline date(s) or other alternative timing requirements for submission of applications;

(b) The amount of funding available for the applicable period of the announcement described in §4002.1;

(d) The general application approval process to be used by DHCD, such as competitive selection or other alternative means of approval;

(e) The eligibility, feasibility, evaluation, ranking and selection criteria, if any, of projects to be funded;

(f) A listing of all documentation which is to accompany all Nehemiah Program applications; and

(g) A detailed description of the features of the Nehemiah Program and the financial assistance available to applicants.

4002.4 In the application, the applicant shall provide information specific to the Nehemiah project, in a form prescribed by DHCD, which may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) A Nehemiah Housing Development Plan, as required by §4003.6;

(b) A description of the property, and a map indicating the location of the property and the neighborhood served by the applicant;

(c) Certified true copies of the non-profit organization's charter, including District certification, Articles of Incorporation and bylaws or other instruments for governance, and a copy of a currently effective ruling from the Internal Revenue Services (IRS) evidencing the organization's tax-exempt status under § 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (or copy of application to IRS for tax exempt status);

(d) Names and positions of all governing officers or board members of the organization;

(e) A current financial statement for the organization, including balance sheet, statement of income and expenses, and audit or other certification of financial information including information on the availability of funds consistent with §4003.7;

(f) A description of the applicant's past experience or capacity to undertake the project, and current resumes or qualification statements of all proposed development team members and consultant(s);

(g) Evidence that the organization is neighborhood-based as defined in this chapter, and that the organization has the support of residents within the neighborhood for the project;

(h) Sketch plans for site development, typical unit plans and typical floor plans; and

(i) Copies of all private lender or investor financial commitments made for the project.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8616 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4003** APPLICATION ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION {#sec-10-b4003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4003}

4003.1 DHCD shall perform an initial review upon receipt of each application to determine its completeness in accordance with §4002, and its compliance with program eligibility requirements as specified in §§4003.3 through 4003.12.

4003.2 DHCD may reject applications which are initially determined incomplete or ineligible and may, in its sole discretion, grant additional time as it deems appropriate to enable applicants to correct deficiencies identified during the initial evaluation of the application.

4003.3 To be eligible to apply for assistance, the applicant shall be a corporation or other form of organization which is neighborhood-based and is organized as a non-profit as defined by this chapter.

4003.4 The specific terms of any legal agreements between a neighborhood-based non-profit applicant and any other party (excepting service or construction contracts) shall be subject to the review and approval of DHCD.

4003.5 Non-profit applicants shall be required to have a Nehemiah Housing Development Plan which provides for the following:

(a) A systematic effort of door-to-door canvassing in the neighborhood where the non-profit organization is located to offer residents the opportunity to purchase Nehemiah homes;

(b) The involvement of local neighborhood residents in the planning and design of Nehemiah Program homes, and opportunities for resident employment in the construction of homes;

(c) The construction or substantial rehabilitation of not less than fifty (50) single family homes within the neighborhood of the non-profit organization;

(d) The use of construction methods or other cost-saving techniques which will reduce the cost per square foot below the average per square foot construction cost in the Washington area as determined by DHCD;

(e) The accumulation of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) in non-District funds consistent with the requirements of §4003.6;

(f) A marketing plan for the sale of Nehemiah homes which assures a range of prices for homes determined by DHCD to be affordable, and provides for the sale of at least twenty percent (20%) of all homes to low income purchasers;

(g) A market analysis which supports the feasibility of the proposed development in terms of market demand, and takes into account the potential purchase of homes by neighborhood residents;

(h) The assembly of sufficient land or buildings, consistent with the requirements of §4003.7, to implement the proposed Nehemiah housing development;

(i) A qualified development team which may include an attorney, architect, construction contractor, and sales agent;

(j) A financing plan for the construction and sale of Nehemiah homes, consistent with the requirements of §4003.8; and

(k) A Nehemiah Homebuyer Training Program, which shall provide technical assistance to Nehemiah home purchasers in the areas of financial management, legal rights attendant to homeownership, and other aspects of homeownership.

4003.6 As part of the total financing required for Nehemiah Program financing, each non-profit applicant shall be required to accumulate three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) through membership fees, donations or gifts as follows:

(a) None of the three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) shall derive directly or indirectly from the District government;

(b) At least one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) of the total required shall be available at the time of application to DHCD for selection under the Nehemiah Program; Provided, that credit shall be made in accordance with paragraph (d);

(c) Any amount short of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) at the time of application shall be covered by a detailed plan to raise the required funding by a time no later than the date of final approval for the project as described in §4006.11; and

(d) Expenditures by non-profit applicants for predevelopment costs associated with the project shall be credited by DHCD toward the three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) required. Costs recognized shall include the cost of site acquisition (or cost of obtaining site control), reasonable professional fees for architects, engineers, development consultants, attorneys or other professional services directly related to development of the specific project site proposed in the application, and which are properly documented to the satisfaction of DHCD.

4003.7 Each applicant shall have and demonstrate evidence satisfactory to DHCD of site control of the property to be developed or rehabilitated. Evidence of site control may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Title by deed or similar instrument evidencing ownership;

(b) Fully executed purchase contract, installment contract, option agreement or similar contractual instrument that DHCD in its sole discretion finds acceptable;

(c) Other documents including purchase or sale agreements, options or leases that DHCD in its sole discretion finds acceptable; or

(d) Request for an exclusive right agreement to develop land which is owned by the District government or agencies of the District government, consistent with §4008.12.

4003.8 Each applicant shall have a financing plan which includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Proposed private and public sources for construction financing for the entire construction period (including any staging of construction);

(b) Detailed justification for the need for any proposed public financing of construction activities;

(d) The financing plan shall meet any underwriting standards established and previously disclosed by DHCD; and

(e) Proposed private sources for permanent financing for sale of Nehemiah homes.

4003.9 Each applicant proposing new construction shall submit a statement of how the proposal conforms with current zoning or a plan for obtaining a change in zoning or any needed zoning variances within a period generally not to exceed six (6) months.

4003.10 Property proposed for Nehemiah Program development or rehabilitation shall generally not contain any residential occupants, nor shall the proposed activity require the permanent displacement of families or individuals.

4003.11 Units in each Nehemiah project shall be developed to be accessible for physically handicapped individuals or adaptable for occupancy by persons with or without physical handicaps consistent with the requirements of the District of Columbia Building Code.

4003.12 Only properties located within the District of Columbia shall be eligible for Nehemiah Program assistance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8618 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4004** REVIEW AND RANKING OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b4004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4004}

4004.1 All applications which are determined complete and eligible for assistance in accordance with §4003.1 shall be reviewed and ranked in accordance with requirements of this section.

4004.2 DHCD shall give priority to proposals with higher ratios of private to public financing. It shall be DHCD's general policy for all applicants to use private financing to the maximum extent possible consistent with project feasibility. DHCD's underwriting of proposals shall be based on this policy.

4004.3 DHCD shall review and rank complete and eligible applications in accordance with the ranking and selection criteria, if any, established and disclosed, which may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

(a) The applicant's development capability as evidenced by its development record, financial status and equity or financial contribution to the project. An applicant who provides evidence, satisfactory to DHCD, that the applicant has successfully undertaken and completed a similar development on one or more previous occasions shall be deemed capable. Other demonstrations of capability include, but are not limited to, related training or experience by the applicant or members of the applicant's development team;

(b) The applicant's ability to secure the services of development team professionals (e.g., project architect, engineers, attorney, financial consultant or general contractors) which have a requisite amount of experience in the type of development proposed;

(c) The economic and market feasibility of the proposed development given its location, proposed costs, proposed sales levels and other related information;

(d) The amount of public financing required, and the amount of private financing leveraged by public financing;

(e) The extent to which the percentage of homes affordable to low or moderate income purchasers exceeds the minimum requirements of §4003.5(f), and the cost savings realized in providing a range of affordable home prices; and

(f) The location of the project in relation to District priorities for housing and community development activities.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8621 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4005** CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b4005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4005}

4005.1 DHCD shall approve applications based on the review and ranking requirements of §4004, and consistent with Nehemiah Program funding availability.

4005.2 DHCD shall notify all applicants, in writing, of its final decision regarding application approval or disapproval.

4005.3 DHCD's initial approval of applications shall be in the form of a written conditional approval letter to the applicant which shall establish conditions precedent to DHCD's further assistance in provision of funding or disposition of land.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8621 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4006** CONDITIONS FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-b4006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4006}

4006.1 Prior to final DHCD approval of the project and the provision of financial assistance or disposition of land, the applicant shall meet all conditions of the DHCD conditional approval and other requirements of this chapter to the satisfaction of DHCD.

4006.2 Each applicant shall agree in writing to permit all inspections of the property and project records as DHCD and other District agencies deem necessary to ensure the quality of the rehabilitation or construction work and compliance with District of Columbia laws and regulations during the construction period and home sales period.

4006.3 Each applicant shall agree to execute any standard DHCD financial assistance agreements, land disposition agreements and any other pertinent documents as determined by DHCD.

4006.4 Each applicant shall demonstrate that the property meets the requirements of the zoning regulations of the District of Columbia for the use, location and occupancy level intended.

4006.5 Each applicant shall provide evidence that it has accumulated at least three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) consistent with the requirements of §4003.6.

4006.6 Each applicant shall submit written commitments from recognized lender(s) providing sufficient funds, as determined by DHCD, to complete development of the project, including both interim and permanent loans or financing. The applicant shall also submit written consent by the lender(s) to the terms and conditions of DHCD's Nehemiah Program assistance.

4006.7 Final acceptance of each proposal may be subject to the applicant's ability to obtain a general contractor acceptable to DHCD.

4006.8 Each applicant may be required to submit final construction or rehabilitation cost estimates acceptable to DHCD.

4006.9 Each applicant shall meet all applicable District of Columbia minority contracting and equal opportunity hiring requirements.

4006.10 Each applicant shall be required to submit a final Nehemiah Marketing and Home Purchase Assistance Plan, as required by §4007.8, which is satisfactory to DHCD.

4006.11 Prior to closing on any financial assistance or disposition of land, DHCD shall issue a final letter of approval or rejection of the project to the applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8623 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4007** NEHEMIAH HOME PURCHASE ASSISTANCE AND SALE OF HOMES {#sec-10-b4007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4007}

4007.1 This section shall govern conditions relating to the sale of individual Nehemiah homes and the provision of grants or loans to purchasers of Nehemiah homes.

4007.2 Each Nehemiah Program home shall be sold to a person(s) who meets the following criteria:

(a) Is a first time homebuyer as defined in this chapter;

(b) Agrees to occupy the home as his or her principal place of residence for at least five (5) years;

(c) Agrees not to sell, convey, lease or otherwise alienate the home for a five (5) year period commencing on the date of property settlement without written approval of the Director;

(d) Agrees not to place liens or encumbrances on the home for a five (5) year period commencing on the date of property settlement without written approval of the Director; and

(e) Agrees to the alienation fees required in §4007.3.

4007.3 Protection against the alienation of a Nehemiah home as described in paragraph (c) of § 4007.2 shall be accomplished by execution of an agreement between the purchaser and the District at the time of property settlement, which agreement shall be recorded as a lien against the property.

4007.4 Alienation of a purchaser's interest in a Nehemiah home may be approved at the discretion of the Director during the first five (5) years of ownership; Provided, that the following percentages of the tax assessment value (determined at the time of conveyance of title to the purchaser) shall be paid as an alienation fee to the District:

(a) Eighty percent (80%) of the tax assessment value, if the alienation occurs within fifteen (15) months of the date of conveyance;

(b) Sixty percent (60%) of the tax assessment value, if the alienation occurs within sixteen to thirty (16 to 30) months from the date of conveyance;

(c) Forty percent (40%) of the tax assessment value, if the alienation occurs within thirty-one to forty-five (31 to 45) months from the date of conveyance; or

(d) Twenty percent (20%) of the tax assessment value, if the alienation occurs within forty-six to sixty (46 to 60) months from the date of conveyance.

4007.5 The alienation fees specified in §4007.4 shall take priority over mortgage liens placed on the property in connection with the initial purchase of the Nehemiah home.

4007.6 The Director may grant exemption, at his or her sole discretion, from the alienation fees of §4007.4 under the following circumstances:

(a) If the Nehemiah home purchaser dies or becomes totally disabled and if, in the option of the Director, the exemption would relieve the purchaser's heirs, devisees and immediate family of an unreasonable burden arising from the requirements of the abatement agreement;

(b) The purchaser is involuntarily transferred to a location outside the Washington Metropolitan Area by an existing employer; or

4007.7 DHCD shall provide loans or grants up to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) to purchasers of Nehemiah homes through the District's Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP) for those purchasers that meet all the requirements of the HPAP program. The level of HPAP assistance that shall be made available shall be consistent with the Very Low Income, Lower Income and Moderate Income components of the HPAP program (14 DCMR 25).

4007.8 DHCD shall provide the applicant a coordinated process for processing of HPAP applications for Nehemiah home purchasers who also qualify for assistance under HPAP, and for assuring that sufficient HPAP funds are available to qualified buyers.

4007.9 Non-profit applicants shall submit a Nehemiah Marketing and Hone Purchase Assistance Plan for the sale of Nehemiah homes for the review and approval of DHCD, consistent with the requirements of §4003.6, which shall provide for the following:

(a) Compliance with the requirements of paragraph (f) of §4003.6 and of this section;

(b) Agreement that a meaningful priority to purchase shall be given to District residents, as defined in this chapter, which shall include a plan acceptable to DHCD which provides an exclusive priority time period for purchase by District residents;

(c) Specify any other proposed priorities for the marketing or sale of Nehemiah homes, which may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

(1) That purchasers who are residents of the neighborhood which the non-profit applicant serves shall have priority to purchase; and

(2) That employees of the District of Columbia government, or persons who have accepted an offer of District employment, shall have priority to purchase homes; and

(d) Propose a means for assuring that homes priced in a range determined by DHCD to be affordable are made available on a priority basis to persons who require Nehemiah (or related HPAP) assistance in order to afford the purchase of a home, with priority for low and moderate income home purchasers.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8624 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4008** DIRECT LOAN ASSISTANCE AND AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC PROPERTY {#sec-10-b4008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4008}

4008.1 Pursuant to §4001.2, DHCD shall provide loans to eligible non-profit applicants in amounts up to one million dollars ($1,000,000) at below market rates to assist in development of housing under the Nehemiah Program. Loans provided by DHCD shall be subject to the requirements of §§4008.2 through 4008.9.

4008.2 Loan requests from applicants shall be made in amounts and on terms consistent with the policies expressed in §§4001.5, 4003.8 and 4004.2. Consistent with those policies, DHCD shall only consider loan requests which are supplemental to private market loan assistance or are accompanied by adequate documentation, to the satisfaction of DHCD, that sufficient private financing is not available to allow the project to proceed, or that the terms of private financing would jeopardize the feasibility of the project in achieving an affordable range of home prices.

4008.3 Loon requests from the applicant may be for the following (subject any specific activities to other eligibility requirements which may apply depending on DHCD's source of funds for the loan):

(a) The cost of property acquisition, including settlement and recordation fees and other related expenses;

(b) The cost of rehabilitation of buildings and grounds to correct existing and incipient code violations or to render a property appropriate for its proposed use;

(d) The cost of new construction;

(e) Construction of a model home;

(f) Payment of interest, in past or in whole, on private market loans for construction or acquisition of property;

(g) Creation of a loan guarantee fund or other form of credit enhancement as required to obtain private market loans for construction or acquisition of property; and

(h) Other uses as may be determined appropriate and eligible, in the sole determination of DHCD.

4008.4 Predevelopment costs for consultant or development team expenses shall not be eligible for loans from DHCD. However, credit for such expenses shall be allowed consistent with §4003.6.

4008.5 Loans made under this section shall be for a short term period generally not to exceed eighteen (18) months, or the time required to accomplish construction, sale and permanent financing take-out of the short term loan.

4008.6 Specific loan terms and conditions shall be established by DHCD in coordination with the underwriting standards of DHCD and of any private market financing involved in the project, and may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

(a) The principal amount of a loan may bear interest at a rate ranging from one percent (1%) annually up to one percent (1%) below the prevailing private or market annual interest rate for equivalent loans;

(b) Repayment of principal may be deferred for the term of the loan or until permanent financing is obtained;

(d) Construction staging and related pre-sale requirements may be conditions of the loan; and

(e) DHCD shall have discretion to establish timing requirements for release of loan funds which relate to the use of other project development funds obtained from the resources of the applicant and the private sector.

4008.7 Favorable consideration for loan amounts and terms shall be given to applicants proposing high percentages of home affordable to low and moderate income persons.

4008.8 DHCD loans to applicants, when added to any loan secured by the property which is senior or recorded prior to that of DHCD, shall not exceed ninety-five percent (95%) of the post development value of the property as determined by an independent fee appraisal satisfactory to DHCD, or by a DHCD staff appraisal where DHCD, in its sole discretion, elects this option.

4008.9 Each loan shall be secured by a deed of trust on the property, and may be subordinated consistent with this chapter to other existing or new debt also secured by the property.

4008.10 Property of the D.C. Redevelopment Land Agency or other agencies of the District which is uncommitted for other purposes shall be evaluated by DHCD to determine its potential for use under the Nehemiah Program.

4008.11 DHCD shall seek the approval and transfer of property appropriate for the Nehemiah Program from other agencies of the District for disposition by DHCD to non-profit applicants under the Nehemiah Program.

4008.12 When DHCD announces an application period for Nehemiah program assistance, the announcement shall include notice of the availability of property owned by the District and in the jurisdiction of DHCD for Nehemiah use. In these instances, it shall be DHCD's policy to enter into an Exclusive Right Agreement (ERA) to develop the publicly owned property with applicants receiving preliminary approval for Nehemiah program distance pursuant to §4005.

4008.13 The ERA shall provide for a specific schedule of actions required of the applicant leading up to actual disposition of the property, and DHCD may revoke the ERA if the terms or schedules contained in the agreement are not met.

4008.14 The transfer and disposition of any publicly owned land to a non-profit applicant may be at any value determined by DHCD as appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the approved Nehemiah project, including but not limited to consideration of the following:

(a) The value shall be set at a level, not to exceed fair market value for the use intended, which is consistent with the price of homes required by the approved Nehemiah project and related income requirements for Nehemiah home purchasers; and

(b) Any reimbursement to the District which is required by force of law by the District agency from which the land was obtained.

4008.15 The value of public land (for sale or lease) may be reduced to as low as zero for non-profit applicants demonstrating, to the satisfaction of DHCD, that their pricing of Nehemiah homes to ensure affordability by low and moderate income households is dependent on a reduction of land value.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8626 (December 29, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4099** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b4099 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4099}

4099.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202 (D.C. §45-3101 et seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.)).

Alienation - the act of transferring property to another, including the sale or transfer of title or the leasing of use of property.

Applicant - a non-profit organization which submits an application for assistance under the Nehemiah Program, or the entity receiving Nehemiah Program assistance and selling Nehemiah homes.

DHCD - the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development.

Director - the Director of the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development.

District - the government of the District of Columbia.

District resident - a resident of the District of Columbia at the time of execution of a contract to purchase a Nehemiah home, including persons who work in, or who have been notified of and have accepted a full time job in, the District of Columbia.

First time homebuyer - a purchaser who has had no ownership interest in their principal residence at any time during the three (3) year period ending on the date of their execution of a contract to purchase a Nehemiah home, but including a purchaser who has divorced or separated during the three (3) year period where a formal settlement has been made under which the applicant does not receive an ownership interest in a primary residence which had been jointly owned.

HPAP - the Home Purchase Assistance Program, as described at 14 DCMR 25.

Low income - a household or family whose annual income is less than fifty percent (50%) of the median family income for the Washington Metropolitan Area, adjusted for family size, as determined by DHCD periodically based on available data.

Moderate income - a household or family whose annual income is at least fifty percent (50%) and no more than eighty percent (80%) of the median family income for the Washington Metropolitan Area, adjusted for family size, as determined by DHCD periodically based on available data.

Nehemiah Program - the Nehemiah Community Housing Opportunity Program authorized by §4(b) of the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. law 7-202 (D.C. Code §45-3101 et seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.)).

Neighborhood-based - as used in the context of neighborhood-based non-profit organizations, refers to an area served by the organization that has a population of at least two thousand five hundred (2,500) persons and is distinguishable from other areas based on natural or man-made boundaries, a locally recognized name or other distinctive characteristics.

Non-profit organization - a private non-profit corporation or other legal entity which qualified as a tax exempt organization under §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved October 22, 1986 (68A Stat. 3; 26 U.S.C. §501(c)(3)).

Single family home - a single dwelling unit which has an identifiable, self-contained property interest (which may be sold by one person to another) located in a structure; may include dwelling units in a condominium or cooperative project.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 8615, 8629 (December 29, 1989).*

### **10-B41** HOUSING PRODUCTION TRUST FUND PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 4100** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b4100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4100}

4100.1 This chapter shall set forth rules governing the operation of the Housing Production Trust Fund (the Fund), and administered by the D.C. Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

4100.2 The purpose of the Fund shall be to provide financial assistance to non-profit and for-profit developers for the planning and production of low, very low and extremely low income housing and related facilities.

4100.3 The Fund is established under the authority of the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202 (the Act), D.C. Code §45-3101 et seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.).

4100.4 The Director, for good cause shown in writing, may waive any provision of this chapter, except the provisions of §§4101.3, 4105.2, 4106.1, 4106.4, 4107.11, and 4110.3 consistent with applicable law. All waivers shall be justified by a determination that undue hardship will result from applying the requirement and where application of the requirement would adversely affect the purpose and objectives of the Fund.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202, D.C. Code §45-3101 at seq. (1990 Repl. Vol.).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631 (December 29, 1989); as amended by final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582 (November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605 (February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4101** ORGANIZATION OF THE DHCD HOUSING PRODUCTION TRUST FUND {#sec-10-b4101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4101}

4101.1 DHCD shall organize and administer the Fund to facilitate creation of affordable housing and related activities for the citizens of the District of Columbia through the provision of financial assistance to eligible non-profit and for-profit developers.

4101.2 The Fund shall be a permanent proprietary revolving fund of identified, renewable, and segregated capital.

4101.3 DHCD may, subject to the provisions of the District of Columbia Depository Act, designate financial institutions described in §4105.2(a) and located in the District of Columbia as depositories for the Fund and deposit all or a portion of the monies held by the Fund in the designated depositories.

4101.4 When selecting the financial institutions to serve as depositories for the Fund, DHCD shall give priority to financial institutions described in §4105.2(a) with the following characteristics:

(a) Demonstrated commitment to and expertise in community development lending;

(b) Ability and written commitment to provide investments of equity capital to Fund-assisted projects either directly or through a Bank Community Development Corporation (Bank CDC), or similar subsidiary entity;

(c) Demonstrated commitment to organize and capitalize a Bank CDC or increase the capitalization of an existing Bank CDC in amounts related to Fund deposits; and

(d) The ability and commitment to satisfy other criteria which DHCD may reasonably establish and make known to potential depositories.

4101.5 There shall be deposited in the Fund the following:

(a) Fee option contributions made by commercial developers pursuant to any commercial linked development program established by the Council and codified by D.C. Statute;

(b) Community Development Program contributions made pursuant to the District of Columbia Regional Interstate Banking Act of 1985 Amendment Act of 1985, effective April 1986, D.C. Law 6-107; D.C. Code §§26-801 et seq.), as determined by the Superintendent of Banking and Financial Institutions in consultation with DHCD;

(c1) Amounts to be deposited in the Fund pursuant to Section 501(b)(3) of the Housing Act of 2002 (D.C. Law 14-114), as amended by Section 1302 of the Fiscal Year 2003 Budget Support Act of 2002.

(d) Grants, fees, donations, gifts, investments or other deposits from public and private sources;

(e) Repayments of principal and interest on loans provided from the Fund, including repayments of principal and interest on loans authorized by the Homestead Housing Preservation Act of 1986, effective August 9, 1986 (D.C. Law 6-135; D.C. Official Code § 42-2101 et seq.);

(f) Proceeds realized from the liquidation of security interests held by the District under the terms of assistance provided from the Fund, including liquidation of security interests held by the District under the terms of assistance provide from the Fund through the Homestead Housing Preservation Program Act of 1986, effective August 9, 1986 (D.C. Law 6-135; D.C. Official Code § 42-2101 et seq.);

(g) Interest earned from the deposit or investment of monies from the Fund;

(h) All revenues, receipts, and fees of whatever source derived from the operation of the Fund;

(i) Lease payments received under the Land Acquisition for Housing Development Opportunities Program;

(j) Any fee or portion of an application fee that the Zoning Commission, by rule, may require an applicant for a Planned Unit Development to pay when the applicant proposes a housing production option or fee option in connection with a Planned Unit Development application, to the extent that the Zoning Commission designates that the fee or portion of that fee shall be allocable to the Fund;

(k) Available Community Development Block Grants; and

(l) Any other funds as may be designated for this purpose by Council action.

4101.6 The Fund shall be organized into a Housing Production Component and a Special Financial Products Component.

4101.7 The Housing Production Component shall provide loans and grants for the production of housing for target populations on a continuing basis as authorized by D.C. Law 7-202, as amended, and detailed in this chapter; including loans and grants for acquisition, construction, rehabilitation and preservation of housing affordable by low, very low and extremely low income households. The duration of the period of affordability for which the housing shall be affordable on a continuing basis is detailed in §4107.2(c).

4101.8 The Special Financial Products Component shall provide a variety of specialized forms of financial assistance authorized by D.C. Law 7-202 and specified in this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED]; as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 293 (January 13, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4102** RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OF DHCD {#sec-10-b4102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4102}

4102.1 DHCD shall have responsibility and authority for administration of the Fund. DHCD is authorized to pay all reasonable costs of fund administration from the Fund not to exceed in a fiscal year 5 percent of the funds deposited into the Fund during the year.

4102.2 The Director shall allocate monies deposited in the Fund between the Housing Production Component and the Special Financial Products Component. Funds shall be allocated so that, in a given year, no more than 25 percent of the Fund may be allocated to the Special Financial Products Component.

4102.3 DHCD may establish specific underwriting criteria, evaluation procedures, priorities, and other criteria and procedures consistent with the Act and this chapter as may be necessary for the effective day-to-day operation of the Fund. These guidelines and procedures may be revised from by DHCD.

4102.4 The guidelines and procedures shall be specified in writing and made available to any financial institution seeking to be designated as a depository for the Fund pursuant to §4101.3, or as a Participating Lender as described in §4105.1 or to any applicant for assistance under the Fund.

4102.5 DHCD shall establish a One Stop Center to provide information to potential developers considering the development of affordable housing, particularly minority and non-profit developers.

4102.6 The One Stop Center shall provide potential housing developers with direct access to information and assistance on housing production programs including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) Available public and private sources of debt and equity capital;

(b) Housing programs of DHCD, the D.C. Housing Finance Agency, other District and federal agencies; and

4102.7 DHCD shall develop an annual community outreach plan, which shall promote maximum visibility of the Fund and its operations and full participation by developers, lenders, and District residents who request assistance through the Fund.

4102.8 DHCD shall periodically review Fund revenue sources to determine what additional revenue sources may be required to assure the continuation of the Fund and its programs and, if necessary, shall request Council action to access revenue sources otherwise unavailable to DHCD.

4102.9 DHCD shall also be responsible for the following:

(a) Filing with the Chairperson of the Council Committee on Housing and Economic Development quarterly and annual reports on activities and expenditures of the Fund;

(b) Conducting public hearings, and making annual assessments of the continued housing needs of low, very low and extremely low income households;

(c) Monitoring for compliance written agreements entered into by DHCD and commercial developers any Borrower or Grantee receiving Fund assistance pursuant to the Act and the rules; and

(d) Commissioning an annual audit report of the Fund by a Certified Public

Accountant or firm of public accountants independent of DHCD in accordance with generally acceptable government auditing standards covering financial and compliance audits which sets forth the amount of deposits in the Fund, the aggregate amount of all loans or grants issued by the Fund, and the number and amount of Fund loans in default.

4102.10 The audit may be conducted and included among any other similar audit of DHCD or its programs.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8633 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED]; as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 293 (January 13, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4103** THE HOUSING PRODUCTION TRUST FUND BOARD {#sec-10-b4103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4103}

4103.1 The Mayor shall establish an advisory Housing introduction Trust Fund Board (Board) to advise DHCD on the development, financing and operation of the Fund and other matters related to the planning and production of housing for low and moderate income households.

4103.2 The Board shall offer advice with respect to the following functions of the DHCD Director:

(a) Identifying and developing sources of private and public capital for the Fund and its projects, to ensure the growth and continuation of the Fund and the achievement of its mission;

(b) Advocating participation in the Fund and its activities by private for-profit and non-profit entities to increase the production of affordable housing and related facilities for low, very low and extremely low income households;

(c) Developing strategies to leverage capital for profit and non-profit community development corporations, public development corporations and similar entities and to identify other resources available for the production of affordable housing for low, very low and extremely low income households;

(d) Monitoring, reviewing, and analyzing Fund programs and operations, providing guidance on the most effective private and public market practices for management of the Fund;

(d1) Monitoring, reviewing and analyzing the actions required to ensure that funds are allocated and used as required by Title V of the Housing Act of 2002 (D.C. Law 14-114);

(e) Encouraging and assisting housing developers, particularly non-profit housing developers, to effectively and efficiently access the Fund, DHCD, and private sector real estate finance opportunities to secure debt and equity capital required to provide affordable housing opportunities and on-site child development facilities for low, very low and extremely low income households; and

(f) Allocating funds between the Housing Production Component and the Special Financial Products Component.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8635 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003) [EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4104** THE HOUSING PRODUCTION COMPONENT {#sec-10-b4104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4104}

4104.1 Funds allocated to the Housing Production Component may be used to provide Housing Production loans, grants and equity capital investments by DHCD to Eligible Entities described in § 4106.1.

4104.2 DHCD may establish guidelines and procedures consistent with the Act and this chapter as may be necessary to review and authorize equity investments by the Fund. These criteria and procedures may be revised by DHCD.

4104.3 Housing Production funds may be used for the following activities:

(a) Acquisition of real property for housing uses, including housing for the elderly, disabled or handicapped;

(b) Construction of residential structures or substantial rehabilitation of housing and related facilities, including the provision of loans to develop housing and provide services for the elderly, elderly special needs, disabled or handicapped, or other special needs individuals and families;

(c) Improvements to preserve housing including repairs needed to correct or remove actual or incipient D.C. Code violations which, if not repaired, would reasonably be expected to result in District of Columbia Housing Code deficiencies within five (5) years; and

(d) Operating Capital for housing development, including funds to retain Professional Services, or to establish a Contingency Reserve Fund of up to ten percent (10%) of the Housing Production assistance, as follows:

(1) Professional services costs for reasonable and customary costs of architectural, engineering and related professional services required in the preparation of rehabilitation plans, drawings, write-ups, or specifications of work, including grants for architectural designs for adaptive re-use of previously on-residential structures, provided that the applicant is able to demonstrate in writing to DHCD or its designee that the property for which the architectural design for adaptive re-use has been submitted has been reviewed by a licensed architect and has been found to be economically feasible for conversion to housing;

(2) Financing costs, including processing and loan settlement. Examples of financing costs include the following:

(A) The cost of building permits and related fees;

(B) Loan origination fees;

(D) Fees for title work and other legal fees related to obtaining art acceptable title report.

(E) Fees for recording and filing legal documents related to the loan;

(F) Appraisal fees; and

(G) Fees for an independent rehabilitation cost estimate; and

(3) A Contingency Reserve Fund to be used for unanticipated construction interest or construction costs and unanticipated increases in other eligible costs; and.

(e) Predevelopment expenses for projects sponsored by non-profit housing developers;

(f) Loans for first-effort model projects;

(g) Financing for construction loan guarantees or collateral;

(h) Other loans and grants for housing production determined by DHCD to be consistent with this Chapter and the Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988 as amended.

4104.4 All Housing Production Loans and Grants shall conform to the following underwriting standards and criteria:

(a) The Housing Production Loan or Grant shall constitute no more than forty-nine percent (49%) of the Total Development Costs;

(b) The Housing Production Loan shall be secured by a lien on the property, which may be subordinate to other lien(s) encumbering the property;

(c) The term of the Housing Production Loan shall be up to forty (40) years, or the term of the superior mortgage, if any, whichever is longer;

(d) Any mortgage that is superior to a Fund loan may be refinanced subject only to the express prior written approval of DHCD or its designee; and

(e) DHCD reserves the right to review the terms and conditions of the new superior mortgage(s) and to require amendment of any conditions of the Housing Production Loan before granting approval of any proposed refinancing of a superior mortgage.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8636 (December 29, 1989); as amended as Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4105** PARTICIPATING LENDERS FOR HOUSING PRODUCTION TRUST FUND ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b4105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4105}

4105.1 DHCD may designate certain Financial Institutions to be Participating Lenders authorized to originate loans from the Fund pursuant to the Act and this chapter.

4105.2 The following types of financial institutions shall be eligible to apply to be designated Participating Lenders and to originate loans from the Fund:

(a) Financial institutions which have accounts insured by any agency of the United States or subsidiary entities of such institutions;

(b) Financial institutions who are approved mortgagees of the Federal Housing Administration, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development;

(c) Any financial institution including one designated by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac as a seller/servicer, that presents evidence of responsibility, permanency, financial adequacy, and requisite administrative capabilities determined acceptable by DHCD;

(d) Any mortgage banking or mortgage brokerage firm licensed and regulated by the D.C. Office of Banking and Financial Institutions; and

(e) National nonprofit intermediaries such as the Local Initiatives Support Corporation and the Enterprise Foundation, and local nonprofit lenders that present evidence of responsibility, permanency, financial adequacy, and requisite administrative capabilities determined acceptable by DHCD.

4105.3 When evaluating Financial Institutions described in §4105.2 to select Participating Lenders to originate loans from the Fund, DHCD may give priority to Financial Institutions which demonstrate the following:

(a) Ability and commitment to provide investments of equity capital to Fund-assisted projects either directly or through one or more subsidiary entities;

(b) Commitment to expand their housing production lending in the District which is not related to Fund assistance; or

(c) Demonstrated commitment to and expertise in housing production lending for low, very low and extremely low income households.

4105.4 Each Participating Lender approved to originate loans from the Fund shall be required to execute a contract with DHCD, which shall set forth the rights and responsibilities of both the Participating Lender and DHCD. The contract terms shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) All Fund loans originated by the Participating Lender shall conform to written underwriting criteria, evaluation procedures, priorities, written provisions to prevent conflict of interest and identify any real or potential conflict of interest situations between the Participating Lender and the project sponsor, and other criteria and procedures established by DHCD consistent with the Act and this chapter;

(b) All Fund loans originated by the Participating Lender shall be subject to review and audit by DHCD; and

(c) The Participating Lender shall be obligated to purchase at its own expense the full amount of any Fund loan which the Participating Lender has originated and DHCD has determined, in its sole discretion, not to be in compliance with the Act, this chapter, or DHCD's written criteria, procedures and priorities.

4105.5 DHCD shall establish and publish the procedures consistent with the Act and this chapter by which DHCD will allocate reservations of Fund monies to Participating Lenders.

4105.6 DHCD may authorize Participating Lenders to assess Eligible Borrowers fees, not to exceed an amount determined by DHCD to be reasonable, to accept and process applications submitted by Eligible Borrowers for Fund loans. The fees may include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:

(a) Origination fees;

(b) Loan discounts;

(d) Lender inspection fees; and

(e) Fees for preparation or review of closing documents.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8637 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4106** APPLICATIONS FOR HOUSING PRODUCTION TRUST FUND ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b4106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4106}

4106.1 An entity may be eligible to make application for financial assistance from the Fund if the entity:

(a) Is a person, partnership, joint venture, non-profit or for-profit organization, corporation or other entity legally capable of entering into contractual obligations;

(b) Can establish to the satisfaction of DHCD or its designee reasonable capacity to provide the financial requirements of the project;

(c) Supplies information satisfactory to DHCD or its designee of its management capabilities with respect to development, ownership or operation of the project; and

(d) Certifies its compliance and warrants continued compliance with all applicable non-discrimination, equal opportunity, affirmative action, and minority business enterprise requirements of the federal and District governments.

4106.2 All applicants shall demonstrate evidence satisfactory to DHCD or its designee of site control of the specified property to be developed. Evidence of site control may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Title by deed or similar instrument evidencing ownership; or

(b) Fully executed purchase contract, installment contract, option agreement or similar contractual instrument.

4106.3 DHCD reserves the right to develop specific procedures consistent with the Act and this chapter. The Department shall afford priority consideration to Non-profit Housing Developers and developers that are Local Small Disadvantaged Business Enterprises. The Department also may afford priority consideration project sponsors that are more than 50 percent owned by Non-profit Housing Developers or tenant associations.

4106.4 The following individuals or entities shall be ineligible to make applications for financial assistance from the Fund and to receive such assistance:

(a) Any person(s) including employees, agents, consultants, officers, elected officials or appointed officials of the District of Columbia government or DHCD determined to have a conflict of interest because of their responsibilities to the Fund, consistent with the provisions of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (18 U.S.C. 207 (Supp. IV 1980)) and D.C. Code §1-1461 (1987 Repl. Vol.);

(b) Individuals, corporations, partnerships, or joint ventures officially excluded from participation in District of Columbia or federal contracting activities; and

4106.5 DHCD shall in each fiscal year, announce the availability of Fund assistance and a summary of the requirements for receipt of applications for such assistance.

4106.6 In the announcement of availability of Fund assistance, DHCD shall provide general information, in a form prescribed by DHCD, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) The deadline date(s) or other alternative timing requirements for submission of applications;

(b) The names and addresses of the Participating Lenders, if any, from whom application material and instructions may be obtained and to whom completed applications may be returned;

(d) A detailed description of the types of assistance available through the Fund and the types of activities eligible for assistance from the Fund; and

(e) Criteria that will be used to evaluate applications and make awards.

4106.7 DHCD's announcement of availability of Fund assistance and summary of application requirements shall be published in the following:

(a) At least two (2) newspapers of general circulation in the District of Columbia; and

(b) In a newspaper(s) serving minority communities in the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8639 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4107** ELIGIBILITYAND PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR HOUSING PRODUCTION COMPONENT ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b4107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4107}

4107.1 Properties for which an Eligible Borrower may receive Housing Production Component assistance shall provide a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the total housing units in the development or project as Reserved Units on a continuing basis as further defined in § 4107.2(c).

4107.1a In each fiscal year, funds shall be awarded from the Housing Production Component and the Special Financial Products component so that, in aggregate:

(a) At least forty percent (40%) of the funds awarded in the fiscal year shall benefit extremely low-income households;

(b) At least forty percent (40%) of the funds awarded in the fiscal year shall benefit very low income households; and

(c) At least fifty percent (50%) of the funds awarded in the fiscal year shall be for the development or rehabilitation of rental housing.

4107.1b In evaluating and scoring project proposals in response to an announcement of availability of Fund assistance, DHCD shall grant additional weight to project proposals that would achieve the objectives set forth in 4107.1a.

4107.2 Fund assistance shall be limited as follows:

(a) The percentage of all units which are Reserved Units in properties assisted with Housing Production Component funds shall not be less than the percentage of the project's total development costs which are financed by the Fund, as determined by DHCD;

(b) The type and size of the Reserved Units shall be representative of the other housing units in the project for which assistance is not provided through the Fund;

(c) Reserved units shall be continuously affordable to low, very low and extremely low- income households as required by the Act and further specified in § 4112.5, subject to the following requirements:

(1) Reserved Units shall be continuously affordable for a period of at least 15 years from the date of loan settlement for for-sale units;

(2) Reserved Units shall be continuously affordable for a period of at least 40 years from the date of the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for rental units; and

(3) No period of affordability will be attached to units where assistance is provided for the rehabilitation of owner-occupied single-family homes or where assistance is provided under the Homestead Housing Preservation Act of 1986, effective August 9, 1986 (D.C. Law 6-135; D.C. Official Code § 42-2107) or another statutory program; and

(d) The property shall be located in the District of Columbia.

4107.3 For compliance with the requirements regarding Reserved Units, the following shall apply:

(a) In determining the number of Reserved Units for compliance with any requirement of this section, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded up to the next highest whole number;

(b) The maximum allowable monthly rents for Reserved Units, including utilities, determined periodically by DHCD shall be based on thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the annual top income limit for low, very low and extremely low income households, as published periodically by DHCD, and as those terms are defined in § 4199. The formula shall be applied as follows:

Type of Unit

Applicable Low Income Limit

Efficiency(or bed in Congregate facility)

One person limit

1 Bedroom

Two person limit

2 Bedroom

Three person limit

3 Bedroom

Five person limit

4 Bedroom

Seven person limit

5 Bedroom

Eight person limit

(c) Where the provision of essential utilities is not included as part of the rent, a reasonable allowance for utilities as determined by DHCD shall be subtracted from the maximum allowable rent in determining compliance with affordable rent requirements.

4107.4 The applicant shall certify to DHCD that the applicant shall rent all Reserved Units in the project exclusively to low, very low and extremely low income households, consistent with the requirements of §4112.5, and shall certify annually that such units have been rented exclusively to eligible households

4107.5 Properties which are occupied at the time of submission of an application for assistance under the Fund, or which shall be occupied during rehabilitation or other improvement activity, shall be eligible for participation in the Fund's programs provided that the relocation requirements of §4107.6 are met.

4107.6 Occupants of property that will be improved with Fund monies shall be eligible for relocation assistance in accord with District of Columbia law. Persons considered permanently displaced by activity assisted by the Fund shall include those whose displacement result from demolition activity.

4107.7 Property for which an eligible entity may receive a Fund assistance shall not include hotels, motels, dormitories, fraternity and sorority houses, hospitals, nursing homes, sanitariums, rest homes, trailer parks and other similar facilities used for residential purposes.

4107.8 The following types of housing developments shall receive priority consideration for Housing Production Loans, provided they also meet other eligibility requirements:

(a) Developments in which at least fifteen (15%) of the total units contain three (3) or more bedrooms and will be available for rental or sale to low, very low and extremely low income households consisting of four (4) or more persons; and

(b) [DELETED]

(d) Housing developments that include child development facilities.

4107.9 Projects assisted with Housing Production Component monies shall be determined by DHCD or its designee to be economically feasible according to standard underwriting criteria, consistent with private market requirements, which shall be updated periodically by DHCD, and furnished to applicants.

4107.10 Underwriting criteria may include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) Loan-to-value ratio;

(b) Debt coverage ratio;

(d) Replacement and operating cost reserves;

(e) Criteria for operating cost allowances;

(f) Appraisal and market analysis requirements; and

(g) Borrower capability and credit requirements.

4107.11 Fund assistance for housing shall be limited to amounts needed to support the availability of Reserved Units which are affordable for occupancy by low, very low and extremely low income households as defined in §4199.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8641 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED];as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 293(January 13, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4108** APPROVAL AND FUNDING OF APPLICATIONS AND CONTINUING RESPONSIBILITIES OF DEVELOPERS {#sec-10-b4108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4108}

4108.1 Upon receipt of any application for a financial assistance from the Fund, DHCD or its designee shall perform an initial review to determine the completeness and its compliance with Property and other eligibility requirements as specified in §§4106 and 4107.

4108.2 DHCD or its designee shall reject applications which are initially determined to be incomplete or ineligible and may, in its sole discretion, grant additional time as it deems appropriate to enable applicants to correct deficiencies identified during the initial evaluation of the application.

4108.3 Applications determined to be complete and meeting intake requirements shall be reviewed by DHCD, or its designee, in accordance with the criteria established pursuant to this chapter.

4109.4 The DHCD or its designee shall approve or reject applications based on written underwriting criteria, evaluation procedures, priorities, and other criteria and procedures, consistent with the Act, this chapter and funding availability.

4108.5 All applications rejected by Participating Lenders shall be referred to DHCD for review and further consideration. DHCD reserves the right to evaluate, approve and fund directly the applications independent of the Participating Lender.

4108.6 At the sole discretion of DHCD, highly ranked applications for which there is no current funding availability may be held by DHCD for subsequent late approval if additional funds become available or earlier approved projects are not proceeding on a timely basis.

4108.7 DHCD or its designee shall notify all applicants, in writing, of its final decision regarding application approval or disapproval.

4108.8 The initial approval of applications by DHCD or its designee shall be in the form of a written conditional commitment letter to the applicant which shall establish conditions precedent to receipt of financial assistance through the Fund.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8644 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4109** THE SPECIAL FINANCIAL PRODUCTS COMPONENT {#sec-10-b4109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4109}

4109.1 Funds allocated to the Special Financial Products Component may be used to provide Special Financial Products to Eligible Borrowers, described in §4106.1 who may be eligible to make an application for a Housing Production Loan.

4109.2 Special Financial Products may be used to provide the following types of assistance:

(a) [DELETED];

(b) Bridge loans and gap financing to reduce up-front costs and costs of residential development and to continue the construction or rehabilitation of a property, should circumstances change adversely during development;

(d) [DELETED];

(e) Loans or grants to provide on-site child development facilities for housing or commercial developments financed, assisted or constructed as a result of a linked development program approved by the D.C. Zoning Commission;

(f) [DELETED];

(g1) Loans authorized under the Homestead Housing Preservation Act of 1986, effective August 9, 1986 (D.C. Law 6-135; D.C. Official Code § 42-2101 et seq.);

(g2) Payments for services authorized under section 6a of the Homestead Housing Preservation Program Act of 1986, effective August 9, 1986 (D.C. Law 6-135; D.C. Official Code § 42-2101 et seq.);

(g3) Loans and grants for the rehabilitation of single-family homes made under the Department of Housing and Community Development Single-Family Residential Rehabilitation Program or any successor program; and

(h) Other loans for housing production determined by DHCD to be consistent with these Rules and the purposes of the Act.

##### **10-B DCMR § 4110** APPLICATIONS: SPECIAL FINANCIAL PRODUCTS {#sec-10-b4110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4110}

4110.1 Special Financial Products may be originated as follows:

(a) Directly by DHCD; or

(b) By non-profit organizations pursuant to a written agreement with DHCD specifying the terms and conditions, consistent with the Act and this chapter.

4110.2 All Special Financial Products, whether originated by DHCD or a non-profit organization shall comply with the application procedures for Housing Production Component assistance as set forth in §§4106.5, 4106.6, 4106.7, and 4108.

4110.3 All prospective Borrowers or Grantees for financial assistance through the Special Financial Products Component shall be subject to the Borrower eligibility criteria and priorities as set forth in §§4106.1 through 4106.4.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8645 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4111** ELIGIBILITY AND PRIORITY CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL FINANCIAL PRODUCTS {#sec-10-b4111 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4111}

4111.1 Eligible Borrowers or Grantees may make application through the Special Financial Products Component for a variety of specialized forms of financial assistance authorized in D.C. Law 7-202 and specified in §4109.2.

4111.2 Except for properties for which loans or grants are requested to provide on-site child development facilities described in §4109.2(e) and which shall be subject to the additional eligibility criteria of §4111.6, properties for which an Eligible Borrower or Grantee may receive assistance through the Special Financial Products Component shall be subject to the Property Eligibility Criteria and Priorities for Housing Production Loans as set forth in §4107.

4111.3 All other provisions of this chapter notwithstanding, applications and awards for the following Special Financial Products shall be subject to § 4107.1a and the additional eligibility criteria described in §§4111.4 through 4111.6:

(a) [DELETED]

(b) Bridge Loans and Gap Financing to reduce up-front costs of residential development and to continue the construction or rehabilitation of a property should circumstances change adversely during development, as described in §4109.2(b); and

(c) Loans or grants to finance on-site child development facilities for proposed housing or commercial development projects, as described in §4109.2(e).

4111.4 [DELETED]

4111.5 Bridge loans and gap financing to reduce up-front costs and costs of residential development to keep a housing project in operation, should circumstances change adversely during development as described in §4109.2(b) shall only be available to Eligible Borrowers which are able to demonstrate the following to the satisfaction of DHCD or its designee:

(a) Construction of the project for which special financial product assistance is requested has commenced;

(b) Completion of the project for which special financial product assistance is requested would be severely jeopardized without additional funds;

(d) Borrower agrees in writing to accept to abide by any DHCD mandated changes to or substitution of the membership or composition of the Development Team of the Project.

4111.6 Loans or grants to finance on-site child development facilities for proposed housing or commercial development projects described in §4109.2(e) shall only be available to eligible borrowers which are able to demonstrate the following to DHCD or its designee:

(a) The amount of special financial product assistance for the child development facility does not exceed the minimum cost of constructing the facility to meet the minimum requirements of the D.C. Building Code;

(b) The percentage of spaces reserved for children of low- and moderate-income families in the child development facility shall be no less than the percentage of the facility's total development costs which are assisted by the Fund, as determined by DHCD;

(c) Any fees assessed to the low, very low and extremely low income families described in this section for child care services shall be affordable to such low, very low and extremely low income families as determined by DHCD or its designee;

(d) When accepting children for the reserved spaces, the following children shall be accepted in descending order of priority:

(1) Dependent children of low, very low and extremely low income residents of the residential building containing an assisted child development facility; or

(2) Dependent children of low, very low and extremely low income employees of businesses located in the commercial building containing the assisted child development facility;

(e) Other children of low, very low and extremely low income households whose residences or places of employment provide reasonable access to the assisted child development facility; and

(f) Children of other low, very low and extremely low income District of Columbia residents.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8646 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED].*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4112** CONDITIONS FOR PROJECT CLOSINGS {#sec-10-b4112 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4112}

4112.1 Prior to closing on any financial assistance under the Fund, the applicant shall meet all conditions of the conditional commitment of DHCD or its designee and other requirements of this chapter to the satisfaction of DHCD or its designee.

4112.2 Each applicant shall agree in writing to permit all inspections of the property and property records as DHCD, its designee, and other District agencies deem necessary to ensure the quality of rehabilitation or development work and compliance with District of Columbia laws and regulations during the construction period and after occupancy.

4112.3 Each applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of DHCD or its designee that the property meets the requirements of the zoning regulations of the District of Columbia for the use, location, and occupancy level intended.

4112.4 With respect to rental or cooperative properties, each applicant shall agree in writing to submit to DHCD or its designee annual audited property or project income and expense statements, as well as annual corporate or business financial statements.

4112.5 Each applicant shall execute and agree to be bound by a Rent Regulatory Agreement or a Price and Carrying Charge Regulatory Agreement, as appropriate, which shall set forth the terms and conditions covering all Reserved Units, and may be recorded as a lien or covenant on the property.

4112.6 The Agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the requirements set forth in §§4112.7 through 4112.13.

4112.7 Each applicant shall warrant that the tenant income and eligibility requirements or the initial purchase prices of the reserved units are consistent with the provisions of §4107.

4112.8 With respect to rental properties each applicant shall do the following:

(a) Establish the basis for the approval or disapproval of rent increases in the Reserved Units to ensure continual affordability to low, very low and extremely low income households for the periods specified in § 4107.2(c);

(b) Warrant that the rents of Reserved Units shall be affordable to low, very low and extremely low-income households on a continuing basis for the periods specified in § 4107.2(c).

4112.9 With respect to Reserved Units, if any, which may be sold to low, very low and extremely low-income households for homeownership, including condominium and cooperative ownership, each applicant shall provide a written strategy subject to the express, prior written approval of DHCD, to ensure that the initial sale prices and all subsequent resale prices shall be continually affordable to low, very low and extremely low- income households for the periods specified in § 4107.2(c).

4112.10 Each applicant shall warrant that priority in renting or selling the Reserved Units shall be provided to low, very low and extremely low income families and individuals referred by the District of Columbia Housing Authority from the date of initial occupancy.

4112.11 Each applicant shall provide that DHCD may establish any means of enforcement of the provisions of this section as it determines to be necessary and consistent with this chapter and other provisions of District of Columbia law.

4112.12 Each applicant shall provide that DHCD shall notify the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs and other appropriate District and federal authorities, upon the expiration, termination or material breach by Borrower of the Rent Regulatory Agreement.

4112.13 An applicant may petition DHCD to terminate the Rent Regulatory Agreement prior to its expiration. The Director may approve the petition following an appropriate review assessment and analysis of the housing requirements of the tenants of the property, the demand for affordable housing of the District, the impact of termination of the Agreement upon neighborhood stabilization activities, and other factors and consideration which the Director may deem to be necessary and appropriate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8648 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582(November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605(February 14, 2003)[EXPIRED]; as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 293 (January 13, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4199** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b4199 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4199}

4199.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Applicant - a corporation, partnership, joint venture, individual or other eligible entity which submits an application for assistance from the Housing Production Trust Fund.

Area Median Income (AMI) - the area median income for a household in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, adjusted for family size without regard to any adjustments made by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the purposes of the programs it administers.

Child development facility - facility where a child development program is provided for infants and children, away from home, for less than twenty-four (24) hours a day for each infant or child, and which is to be located on a proposed housing or commercial project under a linked development agreement. The term child development facility shall include a child development center, child development home, or infant care center, but does not include a public or private elementary school engaged in legally required education and related functions.

Code violations - violations of any applicable District of Columbia Municipal Regulation governing the condition or serviceability of a dwelling or its component systems, or its appropriateness for the use or occupancy intended, or its conformance with existing zoning.

Construction - the erection or substantial rehabilitation of structures for housing and related facilities.

Continuing Basis - Without interruption for the periods of time defined in § 4107.2(c)

Council - Council of the District of Columbia.

DHCD - the Department of Housing and Community Development.

Designee - a Participating Lender or other third-party selected by DHCD to review any portion of an application for assistance, provide financing from the Fund, or provide other services as needed to ensure the efficient operation of the Fund on behalf of DHCD.

Dwelling unit - any part of a multi-family, single room occupancy or congregate housing facility which is rented for residential occupancy and includes any apartment, efficiency apartment, single room, suite of rooms, or duplex. In a congregate housing facility, a bed in a shared sleeping room may be considered as a dwelling unit. If the dwelling unit is a congregate housing or single room occupancy facility, it may or may not contain a kitchen or bath.

Elderly special housing needs individuals and families - an individual or family whose head of household, or spouse of the head of household, is at least sixty (60) years of age and households who belongs to at least one of the following categories:

(a) Disabled - an individual meeting the definition of disability in §223 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423) or §102 of the Developmental Disabilities Services and Facilities Construction Amendments of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 2691 (1));

(b) Handicapped:

(1) An individual who has a medically determinable physical impairment, including blindness, which prohibits and incapacitates seventy-five percent (75%) of that person's ability to move about, to assist himself or herself, or to engage in an occupation;

(2) An individual who has a physical or mental impairment which is expected to be of long continued and indefinite duration, substantially impedes his or her ability to live independently, and is of a nature that the ability could be improved by more suitable housing conditions; or

(3) An individual who has developmental disability which is a severe, chronic disability of a person which is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments; is manifested before the person attains age twenty-two (22); is likely to continue indefinitely; results in substantial functional limitations in three (3) or more of the following areas of major life activity of self-care, receptive and expressive language, learning, mobility, self-directions, capacity for independence living and economic sufficiency; and reflects the person's need for a combination and sequence of special care, treatment or other services which are of a lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated;

(d) An individual who is medically determined chronically mentally ill or retarded.

Eligible entity - a borrower or grantee who may be eligible in accordance with § 4106 to make application for financial assistance from the Housing Production Trust Fund.

Equity investment or Equity capital investment - funds provided by DHCD from the Housing Production Trust Fund to an Eligible Entity in exchange for which the Department holds an ownership interest in the real property assisted with Housing Production Trust Fund monies.

Extremely low income - a household or family whose annual income is greater than zero but less than thirty percent (30%) of the area median income, as adjusted for family size.

Fund - the Housing Production Trust Fund established pursuant to Housing Production Trust Fund Act of 1988, D.C. Law 7-202.

Grantee - an "Eligible Borrower" which receives a Grant through the Special Financial Products Components of the Housing Production Trust Fund.

Housing production - the construction, rehabilitation, or preservation of decent, safe, and affordable housing.

Low income - a household or family whose annual income is greater than fifty percent (50%) but less than eighty percent (80%) of the area median income, as adjusted for family size.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

Minority housing developer - a housing developer controlled by minority persons who possess at least fifty-one (51%) of the ownership and controls its daily management and operations.

Non-profit housing developer - a housing developer who qualifies as an non-profit organization under §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved October 22, 1986 (68 Stat. 3; 26 U.S.C. §501(c)(3).

Predevelopment expenses - expenses associated with the project which accrue prior to the selection or approval of an applicant. These costs may include, but are not limited to, reasonable professional fees for architects, engineers, development consultants and attorneys.

Property - the land and improvements receiving fund assistance.

Reserved units - dwelling units whose rents or sales prices are affordable to low, very low and extremely low-income households on a continuing basis.

Total development cost - the cost of preservation, construction, or substantial rehabilitation of Housing and Related Facilities, and of the land on which they are located, including necessary site improvements and other expenses attributable to the capital cost of the preservation, construction, or substantial rehabilitation or development of the Housing and Related Facilities.

Very low income - a household or family whose annual income is greater than thirty percent (30%) but less than fifty percent (50%) of the area median income, as adjusted for family size.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8631, 8649 (December 29, 1989); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 10582 (November 22, 2002); as amended by Emergency Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 1605 (February 14, 2003) [EXPIRED].*

### **10-B43** HOUSING FINANCE FOR ELDERLY, DEPENDENT AND DISABLED

##### **10-B DCMR § 4300** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b4300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4300}

4300.1 This chapter sets forth rules governing the operation of the District of Columbia Housing Finance for Elderly, Dependent, and Disabled (HoFEDD) Program, administered by the District of Columbia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

4300.2 The purpose of the HoFEDD Program shall be to provide financing (loans) to private for-profit and not-for-profit applicants to facilitate the development of housing, including community based residential facilities, for special needs individuals and families, as defined in §4399 including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) Elderly households;

(b) Handicapped or disabled households (including physical, mental and emotional disabilities);

(d) Foster care clients;

(e) Mentally retarded children and adults;

(f) Adjudicated and pre-adjudicated youth;

(g) Adult ex-offenders living under court-ordered supervision; and

(f) Individuals undergoing treatment for substance abuse.

4300.3 HoFEDD financing may not be used by an applicant for any facility having a medical component, providing full time professional nursing care or requiring a certificate of need from the State Health Planning and Development Agency of the D.C. Department of Human Services, excepting facilities housing eight (8) or fewer persons which provide intermediate care for the mentally retarded.

4300.4 The HoFEDD Program is established under the authority of the District of Columbia Community Development Act of 1975, D.C. Law 1-39 (D.C. Code 5-901 et seq. (1981)).

4300.5 The Director, for good cause shown in writing, may waive any provision of this chapter, consistent with applicable law.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §5(d) of the District of Columbia Community Development Act of 1975, D.C. Law 1-39, D.C. Code 5-904(d) (1981), Mayor’s Order 76-111, 22 DCR 6367 (May 14, 1976).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4301** PUBLIC NOTICE AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION PROCESS {#sec-10-b4301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4301}

4301.1 The DHCD shall publish Notices of Funds Availability (NOFA's) soliciting Proposals to develop properties under the HoFEDD Program in the following publications:

(a) At least two (2) newspapers of general circulation in the District of Columbia; and

(b) In newspaper(s) serving minority communities in the District of Columbia.

4301.2 The DHCD may establish time periods for receipt of proposals or may establish a process for the submission of unsolicited proposals for loans under the HoFEDD Program.

4301.3 The NOFA shall provide information necessary for applicants to obtain sufficient instruction to prepare and submit a proposal. That information may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The amount of lending authority available under the HoFEDD Program;

(b) The authorization to solicit proposals;

(d) The earliest date a RFP or application materials may be obtained and the closing date, if applicable, for obtaining the RFP or materials;

(e) The name, address, and phone number of the DHCD official to be contacted for additional information;

(f) The deadline date for submission of proposals; and

(g) Any evaluation or ranking criteria proposed for review of proposals.

4301.4 All applicants shall submit proposals to DHCD in a form prescribed by DHCD. The RFP or application form or other instructions for submission of proposals shall include, but not be limited to, the following information:

(a) The types of projects that shall be eligible to be funded;

(b) The types of DHCD loans that shall be available;

(d) The maximum loan principal available to each applicant; and

(e) The type of proposal form or format to be used, the location for proposal submission, and the number of copies of the proposal to be submitted.

4301.5 Proposals which do not contain all of the information and materials required by the application form or RFP, whichever is applicable, shall not be considered by DHCD.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3536 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4302** ELIGIBILITY {#sec-10-b4302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4302}

4302.1 The following applicants shall be eligible to participate in the HoFEDD Program:

(a) For-profit corporations;

(b) Not-for-profit corporations; and

4302.2 Housing types eligible for assistance, including community based residential facilities, include the following:

(a) Single family properties to be developed as congregate housing facilities. Single family properties shall consist of one (1) dwelling unit, and may, by structure, be an apartment unit or a detached, semi-detached, or attached house. Congregate housing facilities shall include the existence of common kitchen and dining facilities for all residents and may include shared bath facilities;

(b) Multi-family properties to be developed as congregate housing or independent living facilities. Multi-family properties shall consist of two (2) or more dwelling units, and may be either apartment buildings or subdivided single-family properties; and

(c) Single room occupancy properties which may include the existence of common kitchen and dining facilities and may also include shared bath facilities.

4302.3 Only housing located in the District of Columbia shall be eligible for HoFEDD assistance.

4302.4 Each applicant shall demonstrate the capacity to repay the loan to DHCD, and shall meet reasonable credit standards as determined by DHCD.

4302.5 Each applicant shall demonstrate the capacity to develop the property for which it is seeking assistance. The demonstration of capacity may include evidence, satisfactory to DHCD, that the applicant has successfully undertaken and completed a similar development on one or more previous occasions.

4302.6 Where sufficient experience is not demonstrated by the applicant alone, demonstration of capacity may be considered in the form of allied organizations or individual professionals with requisite experience being included on an applicant's development team.

4302.7 Each applicant shall have or be able to obtain and demonstrate evidence satisfactory to DHCD of site control of the specified property to be developed. Evidence of site control shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Title, deed, or similar instrument of ownership;

(b) Fully executed purchase contract, installment contract, option agreement or similar contractual instrument;

(d) Other title documents, purchase or sales contracts, options, or leases that DHCD in its sole discretion finds acceptable.

4302.8 To be eligible for assistance with HoFEDD funds, a project shall provide for occupancy which meets both the following requirements:

(a) Adequate provisions for occupancy by lower and moderate income households consistent with §§4302.9 through 4302.14; and

(b) Adequate provisions for occupancy by special needs individuals and families consistent with §§4302.16 through 4302.18.

4302.9 The requirement of §4302.8(a) shall be met by providing dwelling units which are reserved for (referred to as reserved units) and made available at rents which are affordable by lower and moderate income households for the term of the loan, or for ten (10) years, whichever is greater.

4302.10 Projects which provide more than fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units in a property as reserved units for lower and moderate income households shall be eligible for HoFEDD funds up to one hundred percent (100%) of total development costs.

4302.11 Projects which provide fifty percent (50%) or less of the dwelling units in a property as reserved units for lower and moderate income households shall be eligible for HoFEDD funds up to the portion of total development costs which does not exceed the percentage of reserved units in the project; Provided, that the percentage of reserved units for any project assisted shall be at least twenty percent (20%).

4302.12 In determining compliance with the requirements in this section for reserved units, the following requirements shall apply:

(b) In determining the number of units for compliance with one of the percentage requirements of this section, any fraction of a whole number shall be rounded up to the next highest whole number; and

(c) Where the provision of essential utilities is not included as part of the tent, a reasonable allowance for utilities as determined by DHCD shall be subtracted from the maximum allowable rent. in determining compliance with affordable rent requirements.

4302.13 The maximum allowable monthly rents for reserved units, including utilities, determined periodically by DHCD shall be based on thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of annual income limits for very low income households under the Federal Section 8 Program, applied as follows:

Type of Unit

Applicable Section 8

Very Low Income Limit

Efficiency ( or bed in congregate facility)

1 Bedroom

2 Bedroom

3 Bedroom

4 Bedroom

5 Bedroom

One person limit

Two person limit

Three person limit

Five person limit

Seven person limit

Eight person limit

4302.14 The applicant shall certify to DHCD that the applicant shall rent all reserved units in the project only to lower and moderate income households.

4302.15 At least fifteen percent (15%) of the dwelling units for each property shall be developed to the accessible for physically handicapped individuals or adaptable for occupancy by persons with or without physical handicaps. At least one-third of these units, or at least five percent (5%) of the total units, must be accessible for physically handicapped individuals.

4302.16 Applicants may request a waiver of the requirements of §4302.15 for existing buildings based on a clear and convincing showing that meeting the requirements would present substantial practical difficulty or undue economic hardship of a substantial nature.

4302.17 The requirement of §4302.8(b) shall be met by providing dwelling units which are made available for occupancy to special needs individuals and families as listed in §4302.2 for the term of the loan, or for ten (10) years, whichever is greater, consistent with §4302.18 or §4302.19.

4302.18 Projects which provide more than fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units in a property for special needs individuals or families shall be eligible for HoFEDD funds up to one hundred percent (100%) of total development costs.

4302.19 Projects which provide fifty percent (50%) or less of the dwelling units in a property for special needs individuals or families shall be eligible for HoFEDD funds up to the portion of total development costs which does not exceed the percentage of special needs units in the project; Provided, that the percentage of special needs units for any project assisted shall be at least twenty percent (20%).

4302.20 If the percentage of special needs units in a project is different from the percentage of reserved units for lower and moderate income households in the project, or is applied to different units within the project, HoFEDD financing shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of §§4302.10 and 4302.11.

4302.21 If the project is occupied at the time of proposal submission, the requirements of §4306 shall apply.

4302.22 Rental assistance payments from the District's Tenant Assistance Program or the Federal Section 8 or Housing Voucher Program, if they be available, are eligible for use in projects developed with HoFEDD funds. However, rental assistance payments shall not be used for financing or construction of a HoFEDD project.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3537 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4303** REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PROPOSALS {#sec-10-b4303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4303}

4303.1 The DHCD's Neighborhood Improvement Administration (NIA) shall initially review each proposal for completeness and compliance with eligibility standards.

4303.2 The DHCD may reject proposals which are initially determined incomplete or ineligible, and may, in its sole discretion, grant additional time as it deems appropriate to enable applicants to correct deficiencies identified during the initial evaluation of the proposals.

4303.3 The DHCD shall review and approval proposals in accordance with the eligibility and other criteria in this chapter, including any selective evaluation criteria established by DHCD consistent with §4301.

4303.4 All determinations of loan eligibility and approval shall be in the sole discretion of DHCD.

4303.5 The approval or disapproval of proposals shall be the decision of the Director. DHCD shall notify all applicants in writing of its final decision regarding proposal approval or disapproval.

4303.6 The DHCD's initial approval of proposals shall be in the form of a written conditional commitment letter to the applicant which shall establish conditions precedent to loan closing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3542 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4304** CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO FINAL APPROVAL AND PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-b4304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4304}

4304.1 Prior to final approval of loan closing on projects which have received conditional commitments, all conditions of the DHCD conditional commitment letter shall be met to the satisfaction of DHCD.

4304.2 Final approval of loan closings shall also be subject to the applicant's meeting other requirements of the program to the satisfaction of DHCD, including but not limited to, the requirements set forth in §§4304.3 through 4304.11.

4304.3 Each applicant shall agree to permit all inspections of the property and property records as DHCD and other District agencies deem necessary to ensure the quality of rehabilitation work and compliance with District laws and regulations during the construction period, including the verification of contractor payment requests, and to ensure continuing compliance with District laws and regulations during the term of the loan.

4304.4 Each applicant shall agree to execute DHCD's standard HoFEDD contract documents, promissory note, deed of trust for the benefit of DHCD, and any other pertinent documents as determined by DHCD.

4304.5 If the applicant is the lessee and not the owner of the property to be assisted with HoFEDD funds, the applicant, shall cause the property owner to execute a Deed of Trust for the benefit of DHCD at loan closing.

4304.6 The applicant shall agree that the applicant or other members of the applicant's immediate family, shall not occupy the property assisted with HoFEDD funds.

4304.7 The applicant shall demonstrate that the property meets the requirements of the zoning code of the District of Columbia for the use, location and occupancy level intended.

4304.8 Each applicant shall have applied for a certificate of occupancy (C of O) for the property for which funding is sought prior to submission of any proposal. The C of O shall be appropriate to the use and occupancy level intended in. the proposal.

4304.9 Each applicant shall agree to obtain a C of O at the completion of HoFEDD funded development and prior to occupancy.

4304.10 Each applicant shall have executed a rent regulatory agreement consistent with §§4304.13 and 4304.14.

4304.11 Each applicant shall agree to submit to DHCD annual audited property or project income and expense statements as well as annual corporate or partnership financial statements.

4304.12 A resident manager may occupy a property assisted with HoFEDD funds.

4304.13 Each applicant shall be required to enter into a rent regulatory agreement with DHCD consistent with the requirements of §4304.14 prior to the final approval of loan closing.

4304.14 Each rent regulatory agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:

(a) Provide that the income, rent and other eligibility requirements of §4302 shall be followed by the applicants;

(b) Establish the basis for the approval or disapproval of rent increases in the reserved units during the term of the agreement;

(c) Provide that the applicant shall give priority in renting vacant reserved units in the project to special needs individuals and families on the public housing waiting list of the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), or on the DHCD waiting list for Section 8 or Housing Vouchers, Tenant Assistance Program (TAP) Certificates, or other similar forms of rental assistance as may be available;

(d) Provide that the applicant shall rent vacant non-reserved units in the project to persons specified in paragraph (c) of this subsection at all times on an equal basis with any other applicant; and

(e) Provide that DHCD may establish any means of enforcement of the provisions of the rent regulatory agreement as it determines to be necessary and consistent with this chapter and other provisions of D.C. law.

4304.15 Each applicant shall be required to submit a tenant selection plan satisfactory to DHCD for the property assisted with HoFEDD funds. The Tenant Selection Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Agreement by the applicant to the priority occupancy requirements of §4304.14(c);

(b) A plan for open and affirmative marketing on an equal opportunity basis to obtain applications for vacancies in the initial occupancy of the housing, which shall include public notice of the availability of units at least ninety (90) days prior to the expected date of initial occupancy; and

(c) Agreement by the applicant that housing vacancy applications shall be considered based on the date and time of application receipt, and that if more applications are received than available units, a waiting list shall be maintained, based on date and time of application for consideration when subsequent vacancies occur.

4304.16 Where a HoFEDD assisted facility also has a multi-year commitment for rental assistance payments to lower and moderate income households under the Section 8 or Tenant Assistance Programs, DHCD may accept variations from the Tenant Selection Plan requirements of §4304.15 which are necessary to meet the requirements of the rental assistance programs.

4304.17 If an applicant proposes that some or all of the dwelling units in a property be occupied by specific referral of special needs individuals or families from the D.C. Department of Human Services or other District agencies, the applicant shall submit to DHCD an executed agreement between the applicant and the District agency providing for the referral of appropriate clients to the applicant's HoFEDD assisted facility prior to DHCD final approval of loan closing. This agreement may be substituted for the tenant selection plan requirements of §4304.15 for the units covered by the agreement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3542 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4305** ALLOWABLE PROJECT COSTS {#sec-10-b4305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4305}

4305.1 The following project costs shall be eligible for loan assistance from the HoFEDD program:

(a) Predevelopment costs associated with the project which accrue subsequent to the selection or approval of an applicant. These costs may include the reasonable professional fees for architects, engineers, development consultants and attorneys. These costs shall be properly documented and shall not be allowable in excess of ten percent (10%) of total project cost;

(b) The cost of constructing a new property; Provided, that if CDBG funds are requested or used, it should be understood that new construction of buildings are normally ineligible under HUD regulations;

(d) The cost of property acquisition, including settlement and recordation fees and other related expenses;

(e) Repairs and rehabilitation of buildings and grounds to correct existing or incipient code violations or render a property appropriate for its proposed use and occupancy;

(f) Costs to provide for accessibility and adaptability in new construction or improvement of existing buildings and grounds;

(g) Refinancing pre-existing mortgages secured by the property, at the discretion of DHCD; Provided, that refinancing shall ordinarily not be approved in excess of fifteen percent (15%) of total project cost; and

(h) Relocation assistance as provided in §4306.

4305.2 The following costs shall be ineligible to be financed with HoFEDD loans:

(a) Predevelopment costs associated with the project which accrue prior to DHCD's initial approval of a conditional commitment to an applicant;

(b) Costs for any type or quality of materials or elements of construction and rehabilitation scope that exceed, as determined by DHCD, a level necessary to make improvements which have a sufficient useful life to render the HoFEDD loan a sound investment, correct existing or incipient code violations, render a property appropriate for its proposed use and occupancy or provide for accessibility and adaptability;

(d) The purchase of equipment for construction or other equipment not fixed to the property (with the exception of essential housing related items such as stoves or refrigerators);

(e) That portion of development costs excluded as a result of failure to benefit special needs individuals or families, or lower or moderate income households, as provided in §§4302.11, 4302.19, and 4302.20;

(f) Any cost unrelated to the pre-development or actual development of eligible properties; and

(g) Any cost prohibited by Federal or local law and regulations.

4305.3 The development of properties shall comply with all applicable Federal and District of Columbia laws, codes and other regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3545 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4306** RELOCATION AND OTHER PROVISIONS FOR EXISTING TENANTS {#sec-10-b4306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4306}

4306.1 A tenant who is required to move, as determined by DHCD at the time an applicant receives final approval under §4304, because of housing overcrowding or change of use resulting from the project, and who cannot be accommodated by a move within the property or by proposed improvements to the building, shall be entitled to receive assistance as set forth in §§4306.2 and 4306.3.

4306.2 A tenant described in §4306.1 shall receive payment for relocation moving expenses at least equivalent to the assistance payable for displaced tenants under Title VII of the Rental Housing Act of 1985 (D.C. Law 6-10) as set forth in D.C. Code §45-2573 (1981).

4306.3 For lower and moderate income tenants as described in §4306.1 living in the property at the time an applicant receives final approval, the applicant shall provide either a TAP or Section 8 Existing Housing Certificate or a housing assistance payment equal to forty-eight (48) times the amount obtained by subtracting the existing rent level of the tenant, or thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income if that is higher, from the lesser of the following:

(a) The monthly rent of a comparable replacement dwelling, not to exceed the fair market rent level established by the federal government for the Section 8 existing housing program; or

(b) The monthly rent of the unit the tenant actually moves to; Provided, that the unit is in substantial compliance with the D.C. Housing Code.

4306.4 An applicant may make the housing assistance payment on a lump sum basis or, with the tenant's consent, on a monthly basis.

4306.5 If a lower and moderate income tenant required to move as described in §4306.1 has a residing family member who is handicapped, DHCD shall allow reasonable costs necessary to provide a barrier free environment in replacement housing through the HoFEDD or Home Improvements for the Handicapped Programs.

4306.6 Lower and moderate income tenants who are not required to move as a result of HoFEDD assistance to the property, but who freely elect to move from the property after approval of a loan, shall not be eligible for the relocation or other assistance as provided in this section.

4306.7 A tenant who is required to move on a temporary basis to allow for rehabilitation work on the property shall be provided adequate interim housing accommodations at affordable rents consistent with this section.

4306.8 A lower and moderate income tenant living in the HoFEDD assisted property at the time an applicant receives final approval and who remains in the property shall be entitled to affordable rents by one (1) or more of the following methods:

(a) Approval and acceptable of subsidies to the tenant(s) under the District's Tenant Assistance Program or the Federal Section 8 Program;

(b) Placement of the tenant(s) in a reserved unit, as defined in §4302.8; Provided, that the rent level of the reserved unit does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income;

(c) Assurance that the existing rent level of the tenant shall be maintained for a period of four (4) years; Provided, that the following adjustments to the existing rent level shall be allowed:

(1) If thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income is higher than the existing rent level, that amount may be charged during the four (4) year period, with allowance for the applicant making an annual redetermination of income of the tenant during the four (4) year period; and

(d) Creation of an adequate special fund for the property which provides a subsidy between the rent level required under paragraph (c) of this subsection and any other rent level sought or proposed by the applicant during the four (4) year period.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3547 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4307** TYPES OF ASSISTANCE TO BE PROVIDED {#sec-10-b4307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4307}

4307.1 The DHCD shall provide interim and permanent loans in accordance with §§4308 and 4309 to the extent required to make feasible the development of community based residential facilities and other housing eligible for HoFEDD assistance, for which all or any portion of the allowable project costs listed in §4305 would be either unavailable from other sources or would be available only at terms which would render the project economically infeasible.

4307.2 The DHCD encourages that both interim and permanent loans be leveraged by private or other public agency financing.

4307.3 The DHCD may give priority to proposals with higher ratios of private to public funding, and it shall be DHCD's general policy for all applicants, that other public or private financing shall be used to the maximum extent possible consistent with project feasibility. DHCD's underwriting of proposals shall be based on this policy.

4307.4 Any failure of the applicant to comply with any interim or permanent loan terms or contractual documents required by DHCD may constitute a default as determined in the sole discretion of DHCD.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3549 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4308** INTERIM LOANS {#sec-10-b4308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4308}

4308.1 The DHCD may originate interim loans to finance all or a portion of the allowable project costs to develop eligible properties, consistent with this section and §§4305 and 4307.

4308.2 The Department shall provide a leveraged loan for that portion of the project not financed by the private or other public lender, consistent with the policy set forth in §4307.

4308.3 Where, to the satisfaction of DHCD, no portion of the development cost may be obtained from an institution or lender other than DHCD, DHCD may provide a loan for the full amount of the project's financing, to the extent allowed in §§4308.4 and 4308.5.

4308.4 Interim loans to not-for-profit applicants, when added to any loan secured by the property which is senior or recorded prior to that of DHCD, shall not exceed one hundred percent (100%) of the post development value of the property as determined by an independent fee appraisal satisfactory to DHCD or by a DHCD staff appraisal where DHCD, in its sole discretion, elects this option.

4308.5 Interim loans to for-profit applicants, when added to any loan secured by the property which is senior or recorded prior to that of DHCD, shall not exceed ninety percent (90%) of the post development value of the property as determined by an independent fee appraisal satisfactory to DHCD or by a DHCD staff appraisal where DHCD, in its sole discretion, elects this option.

4308.6 The DHCD may, from time to time, establish maximum loan levels calculated on the basis of cost per dwelling unit or calculated in another manner as determined by DHCD, based on cost data available for the Washington, D.C. area.

4308.7 The principal amount of an interim loan shall bear interest at an annual rate ranging from zero percent (0%) to five percent (5%), except that for a for-profit applicant the Director may establish an annual rate higher than five percent (5%), so long as such rate is at least one percent (1%) lower than the prevailing private or market interest rate for equivalent loans.

4308.8 The maximum loan term of the interim loan shall be one (1) year, or until the development has been completed to the satisfaction of DHCD, or until permanent public or private financing can be obtained; Provided, that in no case shall the interim loan have a term in excess of five (5) years.

4308.9 The interim loan shall be repaid in the following manner:

(a) No loan principal shall be amortized during the term of the loan, however, the total amount of the principal of the interim loan shall become due and payable at maturity as determined in accordance with §4308.6; and

(b) The interest on the interim loan shall either be paid in installments during the period of development or shall accrue and become due in full at maturity in accordance with §4308.8, as specified by DHCD in its sole discretion.

4308.10 Interim loans may be subordinated to other existing or new debt secured by the property.

4308.11 Each interim loan shall be secured by a deed of trust on the property, except that, in the sole discretion of DHCD, a portion of the interim loan funds advanced for pre-development costs in accordance with §4305.1(a), may be determined to be a grant to the applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3549 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4309** PERMANENT LOANS {#sec-10-b4309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4309}

4309.1 The DHCD may provide permanent mortgage loans to eligible housing types for which all or any portion of the allowable project costs would be either unavailable from other sources or would be available only at terms which would render the project economically infeasible.

4309.2 The Department shall provide a leveraged permanent loan for that portion of the project not financed by the private or other public lender, consistent with the policy set forth in §§4305 and 4307.

4309.3 If to the satisfaction of DHCD no portion of the development cost may be obtained from an institution or lender other than DHCD, DHCD may provide a direct loan for the full amount of project's financing, to the extent allowed in §§4309.5 and 4309.6.

4309.4 A permanent loan may be used to refinance any or all of an interim loan provided under the HoFEDD Program.

4309.5 Permanent loans to not-for-profit applicants, when added to any indebtedness secured by the property which is senior or recorded prior to the DHCD loan, shall not exceed one hundred percent (100%) of the post development value of the property as determined by an independent fee appraisal satisfactory to DHCD (or by a DHCD staff appraisal where DHCD, in its sole discretion, elects this option).

4309.6 Permanent loans to for-profit applicants, when added to any indebtedness secured by the property which is senior or recorded prior to the DHCD loan, shall not exceed ninety percent (90%) of the post development value of the property as determined by an independent fee appraisal satisfactory to DHCD (or by a DHCD staff appraisal where DHCD, in its sole discretion, elects this option).

4309.7 The DHCD may, from time to time, establish maximum loan levels calculated on the basis of cost per dwelling unit or calculated in another manner as determined by DHCD, based on cost. data available for the Washington, D.C. area.

4309.8 The principal amount of a permanent loan shall be repaid with interest with an annual rate ranging from zero percent (0%) to five percent (5%), except that for a for-profit sponsor, DHCD may establish an annual rate higher than five percent (5%), so long as the rate is at least one percent (1%) lower than the prevailing market interest rate for equivalent loans.

4309.9 The maximum loan term of the permanent loan (including acquisition cost) shall be determined by DHCD, but shall not exceed the following:

(a) The term of any private first trust loan:

(b) Forty (40) years for substantial rehabilitation or new construction projects;

(d) Twenty (20) years for minor rehabilitation or repair projects.

4309.10 Unless otherwise determined by DHCD, the permanent loan shall be repaid in full in the following manner:

(a) On a periodic or installment basis as established by DHCD; or

(b) At the time of the sale, transfer or other conveyance of title to the property to a third party purchaser or transferee.

4309.11 The repayment of the permanent loan shall commence on the first day of the first month following the date of settlement or at such other time as may be determined by DHCD, which may also decide, on a case-by-case basis, to permit deferral of payments of principal and/or interest until sale or transfer of the property securing the loan or until the end of a specific designated period after which DHCD may provide for forgiveness of principal and/or accrued interest.

4309.12 Permanent loans may be subordinated to other existing or new debt secured by the property.

4309.13 Each permanent loan shall be secured by a recorded deed of trust on the property, except that, in the sole discretion of DHCD, a portion of the permanent loan funds advanced for pre-development costs in accordance with §4305.1(a), may be determined to be a grant to the applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3551 (May 13, 1988).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4399** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b4399 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4399}

4399.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Accessible Dwelling Unit - a dwelling unit that handicapped and disabled individuals and families are capable of approaching, entering, and using and has been rendered barrier free to such individuals through preparation, retrofit, rehabilitation or construction in accordance with District law and regulation, and A117.1 - 1980 National Standards Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities accessible to and Usable by Physically Handicapped People approved March 3, 1980 by the American National Standards Institute, Inc.

Adaptable Dwelling Unit - a dwelling unit wherein certain of its building elements have been or may be altered so as to render the unit potentially accessible to physically handicapped or disabled individuals, as well as usable by and accommodating the needs of non-disabled individuals in accordance with District law and regulation.

Applicant - a corporation, partnership, joint venture or other eligible entity which submits a proposal for assistance under the HoFEDD Program. The term applicant is also applicable to the entity receiving HoFEDD assistance and the housing provider which currently owns and/or manages, or will own or manage, the housing accommodation receiving HoFEDD assistance.

Code Violations - violations of any applicable District of Columbia Municipal Regulation governing the condition or serviceability of a dwelling or its component systems, or its appropriateness for the use or occupancy intended, or its conformance with existing zoning.

Congregate Housing Facility - a multi-family or single family residential property that contains a central dining facility where meals may be served to the occupants and have the following characteristics:

(a) A congregate housing facility in a multi-family property consists of two (2) or more dwelling units, a central kitchen and dining facility and at least one bathroom per dwelling unit; or

(b) A congregate housing facility in a single family property consists of a single family house or single apartment unit with a central kitchen and dining facility and may have shared bath facilities.

DHCD - the Department of Housing and Community Development.

Dwelling Unit - any part of a multi-family, single room occupancy or congregate housing facility which is rented for residential occupancy and includes any apartment, efficiency apartment, single room, suite of rooms, or duplex. In a congregate housing facility, a bed in a shared sleeping room may be considered as a dwelling unit. If the dwelling unit is a congregate housing or single room occupancy facility, it may or may not contain a kitchen or bath.

Eligible Occupants - special needs individuals and families as defined in this section.

Entity - a corporation, partnership or joint-venture.

Equity - an amount of investment which includes the following:

(a) Cash invested by an applicant in a project under the program, after submission of an application under the program, which is not derived from any loan, whose repayment is not required, and whose repayment is not secured in any way by an lien or encumbrance on the property under this program or on any other property owned by the applicant or any of the applicant entity's principal owners, or in any other way; and

HoFEDD - the District's Housing Finance for Elderly, Dependent and Disabled Program.

Individual - an adult or minor residing and domiciled in the District of Columbia who belongs to one or more of the categories delineated in the "Special Needs Individuals and Families" definition.

Lower and Moderate Income Household - a family whose annual income is within the Section 8 lower income limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1437f.

Multi-family Property - residential property containing two (2) or more dwelling units.

NIA - DHCD's Neighborhood Improvement Administration.

NOFA - a Notice of Funds Availability issued pursuant to the HoFEDD Program.

Not-for-profit Applicant - any private nonprofit entity that is designated as exempt from the payment of federal taxes pursuant to §501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of the United States.

Owner - a fee simple owner, owner of record, leaseholder, general or special warranty deed holder.

Pre-existing Mortgages - financial obligations that are secured by the affected property at the time the applicant applies for loans under the HoFEDD Program.

Property - the land and improvements receiving HoFEDD assistance.

Reserved Units - dwelling units made available at affordable rents to lower and moderate income households.

RFP - a request for proposals issued pursuant to the HoFEDD Program.

Single Room Occupancy - a housing accommodation (including rooming units as defined in the D.C. Zoning Regulations at 11 DCMR 199) with shared bath facilities and which may or may not have kitchen or dining facilities available, consistent with District regulation.

Special Needs Individuals and Families - individuals or family households which belong to at least one of the following categories:

(a) Elderly - an individual who is at least sixty (60) years of age or a family whose head-of-household or spouse is at least sixty (60) years of age;

(b) Disabled - an individual or family head-of-household or spouse meeting the definition of disability in §223 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423) or §102 of the Developmental Disabilities Services and Facilities Construction Amendments of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 2691(1));

(1) An individual or a family with a head-of-household or spouse who has a medically determinable physical impairment, including blindness, which prohibits and incapacitates seventy-five percent (75%) of that person's ability to move about, to assist himself or herself, or to engage in an occupation;

(2) An individual or a family with a head-of-household or spouse who has a physical or mental impairment which is expected to be of long continued and indefinite duration, substantially impedes his or her ability to live independently, and is of a nature that such ability could be improved by more suitable housing conditions; or

(3) A person who has developmental disability which is a severe, chronic disability of a person which is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments; is manifested before the person attains age twenty-two (22); is likely to continue indefinitely; results in substantial functional limitations in three (3) or more of the following areas of major life activity of self-care, receptive and expressive language, learning, mobility, self-direction, capacity for independent living and -economic sufficiency; and reflects the person's need for a combination and sequence of special care, treatment or other services which are of a lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated;

(d) Foster children and adolescents;

(e) Individuals assigned to congregate or other community based housing arrangements as a result of actual or pending court adjudication;

(f) Individual ex-offenders living under court ordered supervision;

(g) Individuals undergoing treatment for substance abuse;

(h) An individual or family with a head-of-household or spouse who is homeless; or

(i) An individual who is medically determined chronically mentally ill or retarded.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 35 DCR 3535, 3553 (May 13, 1988).*

### **10-B45** LAND ACQUISITION FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 4500** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b4500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4500}

4500.1 This chapter shall set forth rules governing the operation of the Land Acquisition for Housing Development Opportunities (LAHDO) program, administered by the District of Columbia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).

4500.2 The purpose of the LAHDO program shall be to provide financial assistance to developers to acquire vacant land or land improved with buildings resulting in the rehabilitation of existing residential structures, conversion of existing structures to residential use, or construction of new residential or mixed use structures on vacant land. The LAHDO program is designed to increase the stock of safe, sanitary and affordable housing in the District of Columbia.

4500.3 The LAHDO program may also provide funds for the design and installation or renovation of site improvements as defined in §4501.2 to be located on the property to be developed or rehabilitated as housing.

4500.4 The LAHDO program may also assist developers of housing in negotiating a framework for additional financial assistance available from the District of Columbia under other programs designed to promote the development or rehabilitation of economically feasible housing.

4500.5 LAHDO program funds shall be available to private for-profit and not-for-profit developers to facilitate the development of the type of housing as defined in §4503.5, including the following:

(a) Rental housing;

(b) Cooperative housing;

(c) Mixed-use residential housing in which not less than fifty-one percent (51%) of the net usable floor space is devoted to residential use and occupancy and not more than forty-nine percent (49%) is devoted to commercial or retail use; and

(d) Other types of eligible housing described in §4503.5.

4500.6 The LAHDO Program funds shall not be used by a developer for any facility expressly deemed ineligible for the LAHDO Program, as defined in §4503.6.

4500.7 The LAHDO Program is established under the authority of the District of Columbia Community Development Act of 1975, D.C. Law 1-39 (D.C. Code 5-901 et seq. (1988 Repl. Vol.)).

4500.8 The Director may, for good cause shown in writing, waive any provision of this chapter, except the provisions of §§ 4501.5, 4503.4, 4503.7, 4503.9, 4503.10, 4503.11, 4503.12, 4503.13, 4506.2, 4506.4, 4506.6, 4506.11, 4506.14, 4507.4 and 4508.12, consistent with applicable law. All waivers shall be justified by a determination that undue hardship will result from applying the requirement and where application of the requirement would adversely affect the purpose and objectives of the LAHDO Program.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is the District of Columbia Community Development Act of 1975, D.C. Law 1-39, D.C. Code §5-901 et seq. (1988 Repl. Vol.).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4501** DESCRIPTION OF LAHDO ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b4501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4501}

4501.1 DHCD shall provide funds for the District's acquisition of land, whether vacant land or land underlying existing buildings, and lease the acquired land to the LAHDO Program applicant consistent with the requirements of §4508.

4501.2 DHCD may acquire from the applicant, some or all of the site improvements made by the applicant to the District acquired or immediately adjoining public land, including but not limited to, the following:

(a) The installation of new or repair of existing water and sewer laterals, connections, fittings, conduits and meters;

(b) The installation of all electrical or natural gas service lines, connections, fittings, conduits and meters exterior to the building;

(d) The installation or repair of retaining walls or barriers and the resurfacing of existing parking lots; and

(e) The installation of property landscaping.

4501.3 DHCD may, in its discretion, acquire building(s) on the land which it acquires through the LAHDO Program, and sell the buildings to the applicant.

4501.4 DHCD may, in connection with the sale of the building(s), provide financing to the applicant for acquisition of the building(s) by accepting a note for a term determined by DHCD, but not to exceed two (2) years or the completion of rehabilitation, whichever is longer, which note shall be secured by a lien on the building(s) sold.

4501.5 DHCD may provide technical assistance to the extent necessary to assist an applicant in obtaining financial assistance under other District programs necessary to complete an economically feasible project.

4501.6 Financial assistance provided under LAHDO shall not exceed the amount, nor shall assistance be provided on terms more favorable than, necessary to accomplish the public objectives of the project, including the objective that at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the dwelling units be affordable by lower-income households consistent with §4503.9.

4501.7 If financial assistance from programs other than LAHDO is necessary, the total financial assistance provided to the applicant from all public programs, including LAHDO assistance, shall not exceed an amount determined to be necessary to achieve project objectives and the financial feasibility of the project.

4501.8 Any failure of the applicant to comply with any terms or conditions of the LAHDO Program, including provisions of the Lease Agreement, or any terms and conditions of interim or rehabilitation loans or any other public financial or technical assistance program, shall constitute a default which may be actionable as determined in the sole discretion of DHCD.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8508 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4502** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b4502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4502}

4502.1 DHCD shall have the authority to establish, and shall announce from time to time, the time period requirements for receipt of applications for assistance under the LAHDO Program. All applications shall be in a form as prescribed by DHCD.

4502.2 DHCD's announcement soliciting applications to develop housing under the LAHDO Program shall be published in the following:

(a) At least two (2) newspapers of general circulation in the District of Columbia; and

(b) In a newspaper(s) serving minority communities in the District of Columbia.

4502.3 In the application or application announcement, DHCD shall provide general information, in a form prescribed by DHCD, which may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The deadline dates(s) or other alternative timing requirements for submission of applications;

(b) The amount of funding available for the applicable period of the announcement described in §4502,1;

(d) Application fees, if any, required of applicants;

(e) The general application approval process to be used by DHCD, such as competitive selection or other alternative means of approval;

(f) The eligibility, feasibility, evaluation, ranking and selection criteria, if any, of projects to be funded;

(g) The minimum percentage of dwelling units in each selected project which must be reserved at rental levels or sales prices which are affordable to lower-income individuals or families;

(h) A listing of all documentation which is to accompany all LAHDO Program applications; and

(i) A detailed description of the features of the LAHDO Program, the sale/leaseback transaction, land purchase option available to project developers and other District of Columbia financial assistance available to applicants.

4502.4 In the application, the applicant shall provide information specific to the LAHDO project, in a form prescribed by DHCD, which may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The applicant's cover letter, specifying that the applicant is prepared to negotiate with DHCD to facilitate acquisition of the subject property, comply with all DHCD and District requirements to complete the proposed project and seek all necessary project financing. The cover letter shall also specify the planned source of financing;

(b) Copies of all private lender(s) and investor(s) financial commitments made for the proposed project;

(c) Evidence that all real estate taxes or other governmental charges for the property are current, or applicant's commitment to bring them current not later than the time of closing described in §4506;

(d) Current resumes or qualifications statements of all proposed development team members;

(e) Copies of all existing mortgage instruments, liens or other indebtedness encumbering the property;

(f) A map indicating the location of the property;

(g) An appraisal which shall meet the requirements specified in §4502.5;

(h) A current, certified true copy of the applicant's Articles of Incorporation, By-Laws, Partnership Agreement, Joint Venture Agreement and other legal documents establishing and governing the applicant; and

(i) A current copy of the "Personal Financial Statement," for the applicant and any principals of the development entity or any member of the proposed development team who will have a financial interest in the planned project.

4502.5 Each applicant shall submit, as an attachment to its application, a detailed Real Estate Appraisal Report, completed by a qualified real estate appraiser. The appraisal shall be reviewed by DHCD and shall contain the following:

(a) A statement of the purpose of the appraisal report;

(b) A statement of the appraiser's qualifications and previous appraisal reports completed by the appraiser, including the type(s) of properties appraised, dates of all previous reports and clients names and addresses;

(c) The estimated current and after-rehabilitation or after development value of the land under lying a property proposed for acquisition under the LAHDO Program;

(d) The estimated current and after-rehabilitation or development value of the improvement (i.e., building(s) to be rehabilitated or developed by the applicant);

(e) The estimated current and after-rehabilitation or development value of the combined land and proposed improvements for the project proposed by the applicant;

(f) A legal description, zoning characteristics, topographic description and photographs of the land and improvements which is the subject of the appraisal report;

(g) A complete narrative description of the approach or methodology used to support the estimated values, including statistical analyses, comparable property analyses and other data required to adequately support the appraiser's estimates of values;

(h) A certification by the appraiser and the applicant that affirms that both parties have read, understood and complied with the DHCD "Appraisal Instructions," which shall be an integral part of the LAHDO application submission; and

(i) A certification by the appraiser that he or she shall be available, after submission of the Appraisal Report to DHCD, to promptly respond to any reasonable requests by DHCD for clarification of any part(s) of the Appraisal Report, or to provide any additional data needed by DHCD to complete its review of the Appraisal Report or any later submitted data.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8509 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4503** APPLICATION ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION {#sec-10-b4503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4503}

4503.1 DHCD shall perform an initial review upon receipt of each application to determine its completeness in accordance with §4502, and its compliance with program eligibility requirements as specified in §§4503.3 through 4503.15.

4503.2 DHCD may reject applications which are initially determined incomplete or ineligible and may, in its sole discretion, grant additional time as it deems appropriate to enable applicants to correct deficiencies identified during the initial evaluation of the application.

4503.3 The following types of applicants shall be eligible to participate in the LAHDO Program:

(a) Individuals;

(b) For-profit corporations;

(d) Partnerships, limited partnerships and joint ventures engaged in for-profit or not-for-profit activities.

4503.4 The following applicants shall be ineligible to participate in the LAHDO Program:

(a) Any person(s) (including employees, agents, consultants, officers, elected officials or appointed officials of the District of Columbia government or DHCD) determined to have a conflict of interest because of their responsibilities in the LAHDO Program, consistent with the provisions of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (18 U.S.C. 207 (Supp. IV 1980)) and D.C. Code §1-1461 (1987 Repl. Vol.).

(b) Individuals, corporations, partnerships or joint ventures officially excluded from participation in District of Columbia or federal contracting activities; and

4503.5 Properties eligible for assistance shall contain not less than twenty (20) dwelling units after construction or rehabilitation and shall be located on a contiguous site(s). Housing types eligible for assistance shall include the following:

(a) Rental housing with multiple dwelling units which are available for lease to the general public, including high-rise, elevator or walk-up building(s), or attached, semi-detached or detached single family buildings (if they singly or collectively contain or will contain twenty (20) dwelling units);

(b) Cooperative housing, where a cooperative corporation shall own the property and issue proprietary leases to its stockholders, enabling each stockholder to occupy specific dwelling units within the property;

(c) Mixed-use housing, where the building(s) consists of commercial or retail space and housing accommodations; Provided, that not less than fifty-one percent (51%) of all net usable floor space in the building(s) is devoted to housing;

(d) Other types of owner-occupied housing which meet the requirements of applicable District laws and regulations and are determined by DHCD to be economically and legally feasible under this chapter;

(e) Single room or congregate occupancy properties, which may include the existence of common kitchens, dining rooms and shared bathing facilities; Provided, that the accommodations include not less than twenty (20) individual or shared sleeping rooms, after construction or rehabilitation, located on contiguous sites; and

(f) Properties converted from institutional, commercial, industrial or retail use, to a housing use as specified in this subsection; Provided, that the proposed reuse is consistent with applicable zoning, planning and building code requirements of the District of Columbia.

4503.6 Properties ineligible for assistance shall include the following:

(a) Properties which shall have retail or commercial uses which compose more than forty-nine percent (49%) of all net usable floor space;

(b) Properties which shall have less than twenty (20) dwelling units after construction or rehabilitation;

(d) Hotels, boarding houses, youth hotels, motels or inns, unless planned for conversion to an eligible property consistent with §4503.5(f);

(e) Penal institutions and correctional facilities; and

(f) Dwelling accommodations in trailer parks.

4503.7 Only properties located within the District of Columbia shall be eligible for LAHDO Program assistance.

4503.8 Each applicant shall have and demonstrate evidence satisfactory to DHCD of site control of the specified property to be developed. Evidence of site control may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Title by deed or similar instrument evidencing ownership;

(b) Fully executed purchase contract, installment contract, option agreement or similar contractual instrument; or

4503.9 To be eligible for assistance with LAHDO Program funds, selected projects shall reserve not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of all dwelling units (or rooms, for single room occupancy properties) for occupancy by and to be affordable to lower-income individuals or families (referred to as "reserved units").

4503.10 Reserved units shall be made available to lower-income individuals or families for the term of the LAHDO land lease at rents or cooperative carrying costs as follows:

(a) The maximum allowable rents or cooperative carrying costs for reserved units, including utilities, shall not exceed an amount to be determined periodically by DHCD equal to thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the annual income limits for very low income households, established under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 Housing program, applied as follows:

Type of Unit

Applicable Section 8 Very Low Income Limit

Single Room and Efficiency

One person limit

1 Bedroom

Two person limit

2 Bedroom

Four person limit

3 Bedroom

Five person limit

4 Bedroom

Seven person limit

5 Bedroom

Eight person limit

(b) Whenever the provision of essential utilities is not included as part of the rent or cooperative carrying cost, a reasonable allowance for utilities, as determined by DHCD, shall be subtracted from the maximum allowable rents or cooperative carrying costs.

4503.11 The applicant shall certify to DHCD that the applicant shall either rent or sell all reserved units in the project only to lower-income households for the term of the land lease.

4503.12 Units in each project shall be developed to be accessible for physically handicapped individuals or adaptable for occupancy by persons with or without physical handicaps consistent with the requirements of the District of Columbia Building Code.

4503.13 If vacant, units required by §4503.12 shall be made available on a priority basis for occupancy by physically handicapped persons during the term of the LAHDO Program lease.

4503.14 Properties which are occupied at the time of submission of the Program application, or which shall be occupied during rehabilitation or conversion, shall be eligible for participation in the LAHDO Program; Provided, that the relocation requirements of §4507 are met. Priority consideration shall be given as specified under §4504.2.

4503.15 The proposed financial elements of the application shall meet any underwriting standards established and previously disclosed by DHCD.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8512 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4504** REVIEW AND RANKING OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b4504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4504}

4504.1 All applications which are determined complete and eligible for assistance in accordance with §4503.1 shall be reviewed and ranked in accordance with the requirements of this section.

4504.2 Priority consideration shall be given to funding of properties which are vacant (either vacant buildings or vacant land) at the time of application for assistance to DHCD.

4504.3 DHCD shall give priority to proposals with higher ratios of private to public financing. It shall be DHCD's general policy for all applicants to use private financing to the maximum extent possible consistent with project feasibility. DHCD's underwriting of proposals shall be based on this policy.

4504.4 DHCD shall review and rank complete and eligible applications in accordance with the ranking and selection criteria, if any, established and disclosed, which may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

(a) Project economic and market feasibility given its location, proposed costs, proposed rents and income and other related information;

(b) The applicant's development capability in relation to its development record, financial status and equity contribution to the project. An applicant who provides evidence, satisfactory to DHCD, that the applicant has successfully undertaken and completed a similar development on one or more previous occasions shall be deemed capable. Other demonstrations of capability include, but are not limited to, related training or experience by the applicant or members of the applicant's development team;

(c) The applicant's ability to secure the services of development team professionals (e.g., project architect(s), engineers, attorneys, financial consultants, general contractors, etc.) which have a requisite amount of experience in the type of development proposed by the applicant;

(d) The extent to which the project is designed to meet the District's housing needs, such as the need for higher percentages of two (2) or three (3) bedroom units;

(e) The quality of the project's site and architectural design, including consideration of energy efficiency;

(f) The amount of public financing required, and the amount of private financing leveraged by public financing;

(g) The location of the project in relation to District priorities for housing and community development activity; and

(h) The degree to which the project meets other District or DHCD objectives, such as the prevention of displacement and the elimination of slum or blighted conditions.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8516 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4505** CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b4505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4505}

4505.1 DHCD shall approve applications based on the review and ranking requirements of §4504, and consistent with LAHDO Program funding availability.

4505.2 At the sole discretion of DHCD, highly ranked applications for which there is no current funding availability may be held by DHCD for later approval if additional funds become available or earlier approved projects are not proceeding on a timely basis.

4505.3 DHCD shall notify all applicants, in writing, of its final decision regarding application approval or disapproval.

4505.4 DHCD's initial approval of applications shall be in the form of a written conditional commitment letter to the applicant which shall establish conditions precedent to DHCD's acquisition of property and execution of a LAHDO Program Lease Agreement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8517 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4506** CONDITIONS FOR PROJECT CLOSING AND IMPLEMENTATION {#sec-10-b4506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4506}

4506.1 Prior to final approval of the acquisition of property and actual closing on the property which has received a conditional commitment, the applicant shall meet all conditions of the DHCD conditional commitment and other requirements of this chapter to the satisfaction of DHCD.

4506.2 Each applicant shall agree, in writing, to permit all inspections of the property and property records as DHCD and other District agencies deem necessary to ensure the quality of rehabilitation or development work and compliance with District of Columbia laws and regulations during the construction period, the term of the lease, and after occupancy.

4506.3 Each applicant shall agree to execute DHCD's standard LAHDO Assignment Agreement or Land Purchase Leaseback Agreement, Lease Agreement, and any other pertinent documents as determined by DHCD.

4506.4 Each applicant shall demonstrate that the property meets the requirements of the zoning regulations of the District of Columbia for the use, location and occupancy level intended.

4506.5 Each applicant shall agree to submit to DHCD annual audited property or project income and expense statements as well as annual corporate or business financial statements.

4506.6 Each applicant shall agree to be bound by rent regulatory terms and conditions covering all reserved units, which shall include, but not be limited to, the following requirements:

(a) Provide that the tenant income and eligibility requirements, the rent or cooperative carrying costs and other requirements of §4503 shall be followed by the applicant;

(b) Establish the basis for the approval or disapproval of rent increases in the reserved units during the term of the LAHDO Lease Agreement:

(c) Provide that the applicant shall give priority in renting or selling units in the project to lower-income individuals or families on the waiting list(s) of the D.C. Department of Public and Assisted Housing (DPAH); and

(d) Provide that DHCD may establish any means of enforcement of the provisions of this section as it determines to be necessary and consistent with this chapter and other provisions of District of Columbia law.

4506.7 Each applicant shall be required to submit a tenant selection plan satisfactory to DHCD. The tenant selection plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) The applicant's method for complying with the priority occupancy requirements of §4506.6;

(b) A plan for affirmative marketing on a equal opportunity basis to obtain applications for vacancies in the initial occupancy of the housing which shall include notice to DHCD and the public of the availability of units at least ninety (90) days prior to the expected date of initial occupancy; and

(c) Procedures which ensure that when vacancies exceed the priority applications received pursuant to §4506.6(c), applications for reserved units shall be considered based on the date and time of application receipt, and that if more applications are received than available units, a waiting list shall be maintained, based on date and time of application for consideration when subsequent vacancies occur.

4506.8 DHCD may accept variations in the tenant selection plan requirements if necessary to meet the requirements of other public programs which govern the project.

4506.9 Final acceptance of each proposal may be subject to the applicant's ability to obtain a general contractor acceptable to DHCD.

4506.10 Each applicant may be required to submit final construction or rehabilitation cost estimates acceptable to DHCD.

4506.11 Each applicant shall meet all applicable District of Columbia minority contracting and equal opportunity hiring requirements.

4506.12 Each applicant shall submit written commitments from recognized lender(s) providing sufficient funds, as determined by DHCD, to complete the development of the project, including both interim and permanent loans, prior to DHCD's closing on the acquisition of the property. The lender(s) shall also agree in writing that the assistance terms and lease terms are acceptable to the lender.

4506.13 Prior to the acquisition and lease of the property, DHCD shall issue a final letter of approval or rejection of the project to the applicant.

4506.14 If DHCD approves the project, DHCD shall conduct a public hearing, pursuant to D.C. Code §5-905 (1988 Repl. Vol.), to advise the public of the proposed terms and conditions under which DHCD shall acquire and dispose of the property including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) The purchase/leaseback transaction;

(b) The acquisition of site improvements;

(c) An interim loan to the applicant for the applicant's acquisition of any building(s) on the property, if applicable; and

(d) Any other public financing required to be committed for the project to ensure economic feasibility.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8518 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4507** RELOCATION AND OTHER PROVISIONS FOR EXISTING TENANTS {#sec-10-b4507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4507}

4507.1 DHCD shall give priority consideration to selection of properties which are vacant at the time of application submission, rather than occupied properties, consistent with §4504.2.

4507.2 DHCD may approve and select occupied properties, subject to the requirements of this section.

4507.3 Applications for LAHDO assistance for occupied properties shall include information on current occupants including tenant income, family and unit size, current rent and utility costs and detailed plans for the provision of adequate and affordable housing following rehabilitation of the property in relation to rent levels, unit size, temporary or permanent relocation.

4507.4 Persons permanently displaced under the LAHDO Program as set forth in §4507.5 shall be eligible to receive relocation benefits in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, P.L. 91-646, 84 Stat. 1894 (42 U.S.C. 4601) as amended (or Uniform Act). The benefits provided by the applicant shall be consistent with the regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development at 24 CFR Part 42, and shall include the following:

(a) Relocation assistance advisory services;

(b) Payments for moving and related expenses; and

4507.5 No persons shall be considered permanently displaced by reason of the District's acquisition alone. Rehabilitation is the only activity which shall be considered as having caused permanent displacement of persons hereunder, and only if the rehabilitation results in one of the following:

(a) A tenant/occupant's housing needs cannot be met through proposed improvements to the property or by a move within the property because the tenant will be living in over-crowded housing conditions; or

(b) There will be an insufficient number of units after rehabilitation to house existing tenants as a result of structural alteration of the property (e.g., reduction in number of total units).

4507.6 For purposes of this section, the term "initiation of negotiations" as used in the Uniform Act shall mean the date upon which the District provides notice to the tenant/occupant of the property that he or she will or will not be permanently displaced by the project. The date of initiation of negotiations shall not be later than the date of acquisition of the property by the District, and shall be provided at an earlier date when all of the following can be determined with reasonable certainty:

(a) That the proposed rehabilitation activity will result in the permanent displacement of persons consistent with §4507.5;

(b) That private or other financing necessary to the project (including financing of rehabilitation) will be available to the applicant; and

(c) That the District will be able to proceed with the acquisition based on the availability of funds, having completed the public hearing required by §4506.14, and DHCD's approval of the terms and conditions of the acquisition/leaseback.

4507.7 Eligibility for relocation assistance shall begin on the date of initiation of negotiations, as defined in §4507.6. DHCD and the applicant shall promptly provide a notice of the initiation of negotiations and relocation eligibility to all persons scheduled to be permanently displaced, as defined in §4507.5, which shall be no later than ten (10) working days following the date of initiation of negotiations. This notice shall be personally served or sent by certified or registered first-class mail, return receipt requested.

4507.8 DHCD and the applicant shall also provide notice to all other occupants of the property that they will not be permanently displaced by the project as a result of rehabilitation. This notice shall be provided at the same time and manner as the notice required in §4507.7.

4507.9 Tenant/occupants of the property who are required to move on a temporary basis to allow for rehabilitation work in the property shall be provided the following assistance by the applicant:

(a) Offered a reasonable opportunity to lease and occupy on a temporary basis a suitable decent, safe and sanitary dwelling unit in the same property (or in a nearby property);

(b) The terms and conditions of continued occupancy are reasonable and set forth in a lease which is offered to the tenant;

(c) Reimbursement of all actual out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with the temporary relocation, including moving costs and any increased rent or utility costs during the term of the temporary relocation; and

(d) Upon completion of rehabilitation, offered a lease for a suitable unit in the LAHDO property with reasonable terms and conditions of continued occupancy consistent with the requirements of §4507.12.

4507.10 If the applicant does not provide the assistance required in §4507.9 to tenant/occupants required to move on a temporary basis, the applicant shall be required to provide relocation benefits as provided in §4507.4.

4507.11 Persons who do not qualify as permanently displaced persons under the LAHDO Program shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) A person who moves before the initiation of negotiations, unless DHCD determines that the person was coerced or received any financial inducement to move by the applicant (or prior owner of the property);

(b) A person who initially enters into occupancy of the property after the date of its acquisition for the project;

(c) A tenant/occupant who has been notified on a timely basis that he or she will not be permanently displaced by project, but who freely elects to move from the property after the initiation of negotiations;

(d) A person who does not accept the temporary relocation assistance as required in §4507.9;

(e) A person who, after receiving a notice of relocation eligibility as described in §4507.7, receives a notice in writing that he or she is not to be displaced, provided that the person has not actually moved; or

(f) Other persons as specified in 24 CFR Part 42.

4507.12 Any lower-income tenant residing in the LAHDO assisted property at the time of acquisition and who remains in the property shall be assisted by one or more of the following methods:

(a) If available, approval of subsidy payments on behalf of the tenant(s) under a District or Federal rental assistance payment program;

(b) Placement of the tenant(s) in a reserved unit, as defined in §4503.10; Provided, that the rent level for the reserved unit does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income; or

(c) Assurance that the existing rent level of the tenant(s) in a reserved or other unit shall be maintained for a period of forty-two (42) months after acquisition; Provided, that the following adjustments to the existing rent level shall be allowed:

(1) If thirty percent (30%) of one-twelfth (1/12) of the tenant's annual income is higher than the existing rent level, the higher amount (not to exceed the after rehabilitation market rent of the unit) may be charged during the forty-two (42) month period, with allowance for the applicant making an annual redetermination of income of the tenant during the same period; and

(2) The existing rent level may be increased during the forty-two (42) month period by the amount of the adjustment of general applicability in the rent ceiling as determined annually pursuant to D.C, Code §45-2516 (1990 Repl. Vol.).

4507.13 All costs in meeting the relocation assistance and other requirements of this section shall be borne by the applicant. DHCD shall recognize these costs in their underwriting of the project for LAHDO or assistance under other programs.

4507.14 The applicant shall assume administrative responsibility for compliance with the requirements of this section by execution of a specific agreement with DHCD, which responsibilities shall include, but not be limited to, the following activities by the applicant:

(a) To provide information to and work cooperatively with DHCD in determining potential displacement, permanent or temporary, related to building improvements;

(b) To provide notice to tenants (jointly with DHCD) in accordance with §§4507.7 and 4507.8;

(d) To provide persons to be displaced with the advisory services and payments referenced in §4507.4 in a manner consistent with 24 CFR Part 42; Provided, that the applicant may request administrative guidance or instruction by DHCD in interpretation of regulations and calculation of payments;

(e) To inform tenant/occupants that if they disagree with the applicant's actions they may appeal to DHCD, and that the applicant shall be bound by DHCD's determination; and

(f) To reimburse the District or compensate tenant/occupants, as appropriate, for any supplemental financial assistance required if, upon post-audit or appeal, DHCD determines the applicant's initial assistance is less than the amount for which a tenant/occupant is eligible.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8520 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4508** LAND PURCHASE/LEASEBACK TRANSACTION {#sec-10-b4508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4508}

4508.1 DHCD may acquire property under the LAHDO Program through one of the following methods:

(a) Direct purchase of the land from an owner-applicant;

(b) Acceptance of assignment of an applicant's right to purchase the property from a third party; or

(c) Purchase of land or land and building(s) from an applicant immediately following the applicant's purchase of property from a third party.

4508.2 DHCD shall purchase the property for a price which is equal to the lesser of one of the following:

(a) The sale price specified in the applicant's sales contract or agreement or purchase option agreement; or

(b) The appraised value accepted by DHCD after its review of the appraisal submitted as part of the LAHDO Program application.

4508.3 The land shall be leased to the applicant under the specific terms and conditions of the LAHDO Program Lease Agreement, which shall include all applicable requirements of this chapter and any other necessary operating and enforcement provisions as determined by DHCD.

4508.4 DHCD shall set the annual land lease payment at a below market rate which shall be thirty-eight dollars and sixty-four cents ($38.64) per annum per one thousand dollars ($1,000) in land purchase price paid by DHCD under the LAHDO Program.

4508.5 DHCD may, in its sole discretion, establish a different lease rate than that provided in §4508.4 if it determines that a different rate is needed to ensure the economic feasibility of the project.

4508.6 In addition to the annual land lease payment provided for in §4508.4, if DHCD acquires site improvements from the applicant in accordance with §4501.2, the LAHDO Program Lease Agreement shall also provide that DHCD's increased costs related to its purchase of site improvements shall be paid in the form of additional rent over the term of the lease, on terms comparable to those established for the overall lease.

4508.7 The LAHDO Program Lease Agreement shall have a term of not less than fifty (50) years, but DHCD may approve a longer term if DHCD determines in its underwriting of the project, that the terms and conditions of Private financing, mortgage insurance or other costs shall make the project otherwise infeasible.

4508.8 DHCD may, at its sole discretion, allow the applicant to purchase the land leased under the LAHDO Program; Provided, that the applicant meets conditions for sales as established by DHCD which shall include, but not be limited to, the requirements of §§4508.9 through 4508.15.

4508.9 An option to purchase shall only be available to the applicant five (5) years after the date of completing the rehabilitation or construction required by DHCD under the LAHDO Program.

4508.10 Except as provided for in §4508.15, the price of the land shall be set at its fair market value at. the time of purchase from DHCD (as determined by a current appraisal acceptable to DHCD); Provided, that the price shall not be less than the price paid by DHCD at the time of acquisition under the Program.

4508.11 If DHCD acquired site improvements from the applicant as provided in §4501.2, the purchase price for the land shall also include the cost of those improvements, less any amounts already paid to DHCD as additional rent for the site improvements under the terms of the LAHDO Program Lease Agreement.

4508.12 The applicant shall submit, in a form prescribed by DHCD, an assessment of the impact of the sale on any tenants living in reserved units, and shall agree that as regards its exemption from the rent ceiling controls of the Rental Housing Act of 1985 pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2515(a) (1990 Repl. Vol.), the following shall apply:

(a) If exemption was obtained pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2515(a) (1) (1990 Repl. Vol.), that DHCD will advise the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs that the District subsidy for units in the property will terminate as of the date of acquisition of the land, and that the provisions of D.C. Code §45-2519 (1990 Repl. Vol.) concerning rent levels shall then be applicable;

(b) If exemption was obtained pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2515(a) (2) or (4) (1990 Repl Vol.), that the applicant shall agree that any lower income tenant occupying reserved units shall receive assistance for a period of forty-two (42) months following land acquisition in the same manner as required in §4507.12; or

(c) If exemption was obtained pursuant to D.C. Code §45-2515(a)(7) (1990 Repl. Vol.), the provisions of that section concerning rent levels shall be applicable.

4508.13 The applicant shall agree that as regards its exemption from real property taxes with respect to the land, that DHCD will advise the Department of Finance and Revenue that the basis for the exemption will terminate as of the date of acquisition of the land.

4508.14 The applicant shall agree to execute a covenant in the deed enforcing the conditions of DHCD's agreement to sell the land.

4508.15 DHCD may, in its sole discretion, negotiate a sale price and terms for the land, which price is less than the land's fair market value, if all of the following conditions obtain:

(a) The applicant agrees, upon terms and conditions which are legally binding and enforceable as determined by DHCD, to maintain the reserved units consistent with the requirements for reserved units in §4503 for an additional period of not less than ten (10) years from the date of the sale of the land;

(b) DHCD makes a written finding based on information provided by the applicant and upon DHCD's own research, that the difference between the price agreed upon by DHCD and the fair market value of the land does not exceed the amount required to maintain the reserved units for the additional ten (10) years while maintaining the economic viability of the development; the burden of proof shall be upon the applicant to justify such finding by DHCD; and

(c) In no event shall the price negotiated by DHCD be less than the price paid by DHCD at the time of acquisition under the LAHDO Program, including both the price of the land and any site improvements acquired by DHCD.

4508.16 The applicant shall agree that any site improvements which attach to the land acquired by DHCD shall be owned by the District, regardless of whether the District acquires the site improvements as provided in §4501.2. Buildings on the land shall not be considered a site improvement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8525 (December 22, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4599** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b4599 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4599}

4599.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Applicant - a corporation, partnership, joint venture, individual or other eligible entity which submits an application for assistance under the LAHDO Program. The term applicant is also applicable to the entity receiving LAHDO assistance and the housing provider which currently owns or manages, or will own or manage, the housing accommodation receiving LAHDO assistance.

DHCD - the Department of Housing and Community Development.

District - the government of the District of Columbia.

LAHDO - the District's Land Acquisition for Housing Development Opportunities Program.

Lower-Income household - a family whose annual income is within the Section 8 lower income limits established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1437(f).

Property - the land and improvements receiving LAHDO assistance.

Reserved units - dwelling units made available at affordable rents to lower income households.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 36 DCR 8507, 8528 (December 22, 1989).*

### **10-B46** ACQUISITION OF ABANDONED AND

##### **10-B DCMR § 4600** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b4600 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4600}

4600.1 The Purpose of this chapter is to provide criteria to be considered in identifying "deteriorated property" that constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare or that contributes to the blight or dilapidation of the area immediately surrounding the subject property pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 42-3171.01(2) (2006 Supp.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 55 DCR 6458 (June 13, 2008).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4601** REAL PROPERTY THAT CONSTITUTES A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE {#sec-10-b4601 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4601}

4601.1 In accordance with D.C. Official Code § 42-3171.01(2) (a), property constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare if conditions on the property meet at least two (2) of the following criteria:

(a) If the property contains a structure, the structure shows signs of disrepair that threaten surrounding properties, structures, systems, or persons, as evidenced by an absent, dilapidated, or partial roof, dilapidated or partial floors or exterior walls, visible structural defects, conditions that may expose the structure to the elements, or any other condition that evidences the structure is not maintained;

(b) If the property contains a structure, the structure fails to provide for necessary ventilation, light, sanitation, or drainage, as evidenced by inadequate or inoperable electrical wiring or plumbing, standing water, boarded or blocked doors or windows, or unconnected public utilities;

(d) Conditions on the property that present a threat of disease transmission or ill health, as evidenced by an environment conducive to the harborage of vermin or vectors, including the existence of abandoned cars, garbage, standing water, or excessive vegetation, or criminal acts on the property, as evidenced by drug usage or other illicit activities;

(e) Evidence of trash dumping, which includes the existence of abandoned automobiles, automobile parts, appliances, furniture, household items, clothing, household garbage, yard debris, or any other discarded items; or

(f) The property is located within a crime reduction target area; or

(g) The existence of any other condition that constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, as determined by the Director.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 55 DCR 6458 (June 13, 2008).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4602** REAL PROPERTY THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE BLIGHT OR DILAPIDATION OF THE AREA IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY {#sec-10-b4602 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4602}

4602.1 In accordance with D.C. Official Code § 42-3171.01(2)(b), property contributes to the blight or dilapidation of the area immediately surrounding the property if the conditions on the property meet at least two (2) of the following criteria:

(a) If the property contains a structure, the structure shows signs of disrepair, which may be evidenced by a neglected exterior including, but not limited to, chipping or flaking paint, rotting wood, crumbling brick or other stone, missing or broken doors or windows, graffiti, or unsecured entrances or openings;

(b) The property comprises an irregular sized or shaped lot, which renders the property unusable for its intended purpose;

(c) A vacant lot for which the perimeter is not secured by an upright fence or other barrier that limits access to the lot;

(d) The property exhibits a pattern of neglect, as evidenced by the following:

(1) More than two (2) recorded housing code violations within a two (2) year period, regardless of whether the violation was paid or abated;

(2) More than two (2) citations issued by the District of Columbia Department of Public Works within a two (2) year period, regardless of whether the citation was paid or abated;

(3) Delinquent real property taxes or other assessments that result in the property being eligible to be sold at the real estate tax sale two (2) or more times, regardless of whether redeemed or paid; or

(4) Combination of two or more recorded housing code violations, citations issued by the Department of Public Works, or delinquent real property taxes or other assessments that result in the property being eligible to be sold at the real estate tax sale, regardless of whether abated, redeemed, or paid;

(e) The property's title contains an irregular ownership history or encumbrance that renders the title unmarketable;

(f) The existence of any other condition that may contribute to the blight or dilapidation of the area immediately surrounding the property, as determined by the Director.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 55 DCR 6458 (June 13, 2008).*

### **10-B48** INVESTMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS: REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS

##### **10-B DCMR § 4800** PLACEMENT OF INVESTMENTS {#sec-10-b4800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4800}

4800.1 The Deputy Mayor for Financial Management shall invest all deposited public funds which are not required to be disbursed immediately.

4800.2 Public funds shall be invested in obligations of the United States government or its agencies directly or through repurchase agreements secured by such obligations.

4800.3 The investments shall have the longest maturities possible under the circumstances.

4800.4 The period for which an investment may be held shall not exceed ninety-one (91) days.

4800.5 Each investment shall be placed with the eligible financial institution which has made the highest interest rate yield bid in response to a solicitation by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §10(a)(1) of the District of Columbia Depository Act of 1977, D.C. Law 2-32 (D.C. Code §47-349(a)(1)), and Mayor's Order 85-87, 32 DCR 4252 (July 19, 1985).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098 (September 6, 1985).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4801** APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS {#sec-10-b4801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4801}

4801.1 Each financial institution desiring to be an eligible financial institution shall submit information, in the form provided by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management, which is appropriate for the evaluation of the condition of such financial institution.

4801.2 The factors to be considered by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management in approving a financial institution as an eligible financial institution shall include, but not be limited to the following:

(a) The financial history and condition of the financial institution and its affiliates;

(b) The submission of reports by the financial institution and its affiliates to the Federal Reserve System, Securities and Exchange Commission, and National Association of Securities Dealers;

(c) The prospects of the financial institution and its affiliates as shown by satisfactory business relations with other governments;

(d) The integrity of the management of the financial institution and its affiliates reflected in a history of dealing in government securities;

(e) The efficiency of the financial institution and its affiliates in making delivery of collateral and providing the requested transaction documentation; and

(f) The convictions, fines, reprimands, suspensions or other penalties imposed by any court of law or regulatory body on the financial institution or its affiliates.

4801.3 No financial institution desiring to be an eligible financial institution shall be required to submit information and reports not made public under federal regulations.

4801.4 Each eligible financial institution shall keep current any information required to be submitted pursuant to this subsection and shall immediately notify the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management of any change in its condition or in its total assets which causes investments to exceed the limitation of §4802.

4801.5 Each eligible financial institution and each of its affiliates shall submit its financial statements and audit report prepared by an independent certified public accountant to the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management not later than four (4) months after the end of each of its fiscal years.

4801.6 Any financial institution which misrepresents any material information required to be submitted pursuant to this section shall be terminated as an eligible financial institution by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management and shall be ineligible for placement of investments for public funds for a period of not less than two (2) years thereafter.

4801.7 The Deputy Mayor for Financial Management may, in his or her discretion, terminate an eligible financial institution for good cause. Good cause shall include the following:

(a) Bankruptcy;

(b) Default or insolvency;

(d) Failure to deliver collateral; or

(e) Slowness in repayment.

4801.8 The Deputy Mayor for Financial Management shall publish in the D.C. Register the name and address of each financial institution which has been approved by him or her as an eligible financial institution or has been terminated by him or her.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098 (September 6, 1985).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4802** LIMITATION ON AMOUNT {#sec-10-b4802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4802}

4802.1 No financial institution shall at any time have investments of public funds in an amount exceeding twenty-five percent (25%) of the total assets, exclusive of public funds, of that financial institution.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098, 5100 (September 6, 1985).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4803** REQUIRED COLLATERAL {#sec-10-b4803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4803}

4803.1 Both the principal and interest of any public funds invested in repurchase agreements shall be fully secured by obligations of the United States government or its agencies.

4803.2 The Deputy Mayor for Financial Management shall receive the required collateral at or before the close of the business day on which the investment is made.

4803.3 No collateral shall be returned to a financial institution except upon the repayment of the public funds invested with that financial institution.

4803.4 Any financial institution may, with the approval of the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management, substitute different and acceptable collateral of the type specified in §4803.1.

4803.5 Each financial institution shall give the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management a power of attorney authorizing him or her to transfer any collateral or any part of the collateral for the purpose of repaying any investment made under this chapter.

4803.6 Upon the default or insolvency of any financial institution, or if the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management believes that the liquidity or safety or any public funds invested with any financial institution will be jeopardized by delay, he or she shall immediately take all steps consistent with applicable law to sell as much collateral as may be necessary to recover all public funds, including interest accrued thereon, invested with that financial institution.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098, 5100 (September 6, 1985).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4804** DELEGATION OF DEPUTY {#sec-10-b4804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4804}

4804.1 Wherever this chapter prescribes the performance of a duty by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management, that duty shall be performed by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management or any person that the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management may delegate to perform the duty for him or her.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098, 5101 (September 6, 1985).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 4899** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b4899 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B4899}

4899.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Default or insolvency -

(a) The inability of failure of a financial institution to repay any public funds invested with such financial institution upon demand or at maturity;

(b) The acknowledgement by a financial institution of such inability or failure to repay; or

(c) The issuance of an order from the appropriate regulatory agency advising a stipulated regulatory agency to arrange for the supervision of the portfolio of a financial institution which falls under paragraph (a) or (b) of this subsection.

District - the District of Columbia government or any agency, board, commission, institution, committee, office, officer, or instrumentality thereof; or, if required by the context, the word "District" means the geographical area of the District of Columbia.

Eligible financial institution -

(a) Any bank which is insured by the federal government pursuant to chapter 16 of Title 12 of the Unites States Code (64 Stat. 873) and which has been approved by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management pursuant to §4801; and

(b) Any securities dealer which is insured by the Securities Investor Protection Corporation and which has been approved by the Deputy Mayor for Financial Management to §4801.

Obligations of agencies of the United States - instruments issued by agencies of the United States government, and not directly by the United States Treasury, which are guaranteed both as to principal and interest by the full faith and credit of the United States government.

Obligations of the United Stated government - an instrument of the United States public debt that is issued by the United States Treasury and is guaranteed both as to principal and interest by the full faith and credit of the United States government, including United States Treasury bills, United States Treasury notes, and United States Treasury bonds.

Public funds - all monies belonging to or under the control of the District except funds appropriated pursuant to the act of July 2, 1862, 7 U.S.C. 301-305, 307, 308, D.C. Code §31-1408 (1981), and the District of Columbia Retirement Reform Act, Public Law 96-122, March 17, 1979, 93 Stat. 866, D.C. Code §1-701 et seq. (1981).

Repurchase agreements - contracts for the sale or purchase of securities subject to the condition that, after a stated period of time, the original seller will buy back such securities at an agreed price plus interest at an agreed rate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 32 DCR 5098, 5101 (September 6, 1985).*

### **10-B50** REVENUE BONDS

##### **10-B DCMR § 5000** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b5000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5000}

5000.1 The provisions of §490(a)(1) of the D.C. Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act of 1973, (D.C. Code §47-334(a)(1)), (the "Act") provide that the Council may by act authorize the issuance of revenue bonds, notes, or other obligations (including refunding bonds, notes, or other obligations) to borrow money to finance, to refinance, or to assist in the financing or refinancing of, undertakings in the following areas:

(a) Housing;

(b) Health facilities;

(d) Recreational facilities;

(e) College and university facilities;

(f) College and university programs that provide loans for the payment of educational expenses for or on behalf of students;

(g) Pollution control facilities; and

(h) Industrial and commercial development.

5000.2 The Act also provides that a financing or refinancing may be effected by loans made directly or indirectly to any individual or legal entity, by the purchase of any mortgage, note, or other security or by the purchase, lease, or sale of any property.

5000.3 The provisions of §485 of the Act (D.C. Code, §47-332) provide that bonds and notes issued by the Council and the interest on those bonds and notes shall be exempt from all federal and District taxation, except estate, inheritance, and gift taxes.

5000.4 The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed to give full effect to the purposes and objectives set forth in this section.

5000.5 The procedures set forth in this chapter shall be followed by the Executive Branch of the District government with respect to the submission and evaluation of, and recommendations with respect to requests for the issuance by the Council of revenue bonds, notes, or other obligations, the proceeds from the sale of which will be used to finance undertakings, for both profit and non-profit applicants, in the areas specified in the Act.

5000.6 The Executive Branch shall consider applications with respect to facilities the acquisition of which accomplish one (1) or more of the following objectives:

(a) Relieve conditions of unemployment by maintaining or increasing employment of citizens and residents of the District;

(b) Encourage the increase of industry, trade, commerce, and a balanced economy in the District by assisting in the retention of existing industry, trade, or commerce or in the attraction of new industry, trade, or commerce to the District;

(d) Maintain or increase the tax base of the District;

(e) Promote and protect the health, happiness, safety, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the citizens and residents of the District; or

(f) Protect the resources of the District.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §422 of the Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act, as amended, P.L. 93-198, D.C. Code §1-422 (1981), and Mayor's Order 83-145, 30 DCR 3171 (June 24, 1983).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5001** ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b5001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5001}

5001.1 Applications of exempt persons and non-exempt persons shall establish that the applicant or the facility, as the case may be, complies with the minimum requirements set forth in this section.

5001.2 The acquisition of the facility shall achieve one (1) or more of the objectives set forth in §5000.6.

5001.3 The availability of bond financing shall constitute an inducement to the facility applicant to proceed with the acquisition of the facility; Provided, that this requirement shall not apply to any facility applicant who is an exempt person submitting an application requesting the issuance of an exempt purpose bond.

5001.4 Unless the bond act otherwise provides, compliance with the provisions of §§5001.5 and 5001.6 of this section may be assured through public benefit agreements between the District and the applicant, and where appropriate, the facility user(s).

5001.5 The facility applicant shall establish the following to the satisfaction of the Executive Branch:

(a) That the facility is economically and financially feasible and the facility applicant has the capacity to repay the indebtedness evidenced by the bonds; and

(b) That the applicant will take affirmative steps to open construction job opportunities to citizens and residents of the District and construction contracting opportunities to minority-owned District businesses.

5001.6 The facility applicant and the facility user(s) shall establish, to the satisfaction of the Executive Branch, that it or they shall take affirmative steps to do the following:

(a) To open permanent post-acquisition job opportunities to citizens and residents of the District; and

(b) To open post-acquisition business opportunities to minority-owned District businesses.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4911 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5002** ELIGIBLE FACILITIES {#sec-10-b5002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5002}

5002.1 Applications shall be considered by the Executive Branch only if they relate to issuances of bonds to finance the acquisition of facilities which constitute eligible facilities.

5002.2 Eligible facilities shall be deemed to be facilities which meet the following criteria:

(a) The facilities are located or will be located within, or have a substantial connection with, the District; and

(b) The facilities constitute undertakings in the areas of housing, health facilities, transit and utility facilities, recreational facilities, college and university facilities, college and university programs which provide loans for the payment of educational expenses for or on behalf of students, pollution control facilities, and industrial and commercial development.

5002.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of §5002.2, applications shall not be considered by the Executive Branch if they relate to the issuance of any bond where any portion of the proceeds of the bond is to be used to provide any sexually oriented business establishment (as defined in §199 of Title 11 DCMR (the Zoning Regulations).

5002.4 Notwithstanding the provisions of §5002.2, applications shall not be considered by the Executive Branch if they relate to the issuance of an industrial development bond described in §5006.9 if more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the proceeds of the issue will be used to provide a facility the primary purpose of which is one (1) of the following:

(a) Automobile sales or service;

(b) The provision of recreation or entertainment; or

(c) Retail food and beverage services, including eating and drinking places; Provided, that this paragraph shall not include or apply to grocery stores and supermarkets.

5002.5 Notwithstanding the provisions of §5002.2, applications shall not be considered by the Executive Branch if they relate to the issuance of an industrial development bond described in §5006.9 and if any portion of the proceeds of the issue is to be used to provide any of the following private or commercial facilities:

(a) Golf course or country club;

(b) Massage parlor;

(d) Skating facility (including roller skating, skateboard, and ice skating);

(e) Racquet sports facility (including any handball or racquetball court);

(f) Hot tub facility;

(g) Suntan facility; or

(h) Racetrack.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4912 and 4915 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5003** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b5003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5003}

##### **10-B DCMR § 5004** INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS: REFINANCING LIMITATIONS {#sec-10-b5004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5004}

5004.1 Notwithstanding the provisions of §5002, no portion of an otherwise eligible facility shall be considered eligible for financing through the issuance of an industrial development bond to the extent that the costs paid or incurred with respect to that facility (other than, as may be permitted by substantially all requirement, costs which do not exceed ten percent (10%) of the proceeds of an issue of bonds issued to provide the facility) are not costs paid or incurred with respect to the following:

(a) A facility described in §5004.2, and, if the original use of the facility commences prior to the date of an issue of bonds issued to provide the facility, it is described in §5004.4; or

(b) If the acquisition of the facility commences on or after September 23, 1983, the facility is described in §§5004.3 or 5004.4.

5004.2 If the acquisition of a facility commenced (or occurred) prior to September 23, 1983, the facility is described in this subsection if official action providing for an issuance of bonds to finance the facility is taken prior to the date the entire facility is first placed in service. The determination whether a stage or portion of a single facility, or an entire facility, is placed in service shall be made according to the facts and circumstances of each case. The date on which an entire facility is first placed in service shall not be earlier, however, than the date on which the following occur:

(a) The facility has reached a degree of completion which would permit operation at substantially the level for which it is designed; and

(b) The facility is, in fact, in operation at that level. For example, a newly constructed air pollution control facility for a manufacturing plant is not first placed in service within the meaning of this section merely as a result of its initial operation at an air pollution abatement level substantially below that contemplated for the completed facility.

5004.3 If the original use of a facility commences (or the acquisition of a facility occurs) on or after the date of issue of bonds issued to provide the facility, the facility is described in this subsection if official action providing for an issuance of bonds to finance the facility is taken prior to the commencement of the acquisition of the facility. Temporary construction or other financing of a facility prior to the issuance of bonds to provide the facility shall not cause the facility to be one which is not described in this subsection and, therefore, not eligible for consideration by the Executive Branch.

5004.4 If the original use of a facility commences prior to the date of issue of bonds issued to provide the facility, the facility is described in this subsection if no non-exempt person or a related person who was a substantial user of the facility at any time during the five (5) year period preceding the date of issue of the bonds and who receives, directly or indirectly, proceeds of the issue in question in an amount equal to five percent (5%) or more of the face amount of the issue (in payment for his or her interest in the facility) shall be a substantial user of the facility at any time during the five (5) year period following the date of issue of the bonds.

5004.5 A facility shall not be treated as one not described in §5004.4 by reason of the use of the facility by a substantial user prior to the date of issue of the bonds issued to provide the facility, if official action was taken by the District with respect to the bonds, as follows:

(a) Prior to the commencement of the acquisition of the facility and the bonds are issued within one (1) year after the entire facility was first placed in service or was acquired (whichever occurs later); or

(b) In the case of a facility described in §5004.2, prior to the date the entire facility is first placed in service.

5004.6 The provisions of §5004.5 shall not apply with respect to an acquisition if any substantial user or a related person after the date of the acquisition was a substantial user before the date on which official action was taken by the District.

5004.7 The provisions of §§5004.1 through 5004.6 shall not apply to the financing of extraordinary facilities.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4913 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5005** EXEMPT PURPOSE BONDS AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS {#sec-10-b5005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5005}

5005.1 In reviewing and evaluating applications, the Office of Business and Economic Development (OBED) shall determine whether a proposed bond would constitute an exempt purpose bond or a qualified industrial development bond and shall advise the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development of its determination.

5005.2 Exempt purpose bonds shall not be subject to any provisions of this chapter applicable to industrial development bonds, specifically including, but not limited to, the provisions of §§5002.5, 5004, 5006, 5007, and 5008.

5005.3 The provisions of §§5006 through 5008 shall apply solely to industrial development bonds.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4915 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5006** QUALIFIED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS {#sec-10-b5006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5006}

5006.1 An industrial development bond shall be deemed a qualified industrial development bond if the following requirements are met:

(a) The bond is issued to finance an exempt facility, an industrial park, an exempt small-issue facility, or an extraordinary facility; and

(b) As to any eligible facility other than an extraordinary facility, substantially all of the proceeds of the industrial development bond are, except as provided in §5004.2, to be used for the acquisition of the facility after the date of official action with respect to the facility.

5006.2 Notwithstanding the provisions of §5006.1, an industrial development bond shall not be deemed a qualified industrial development bond if the average maturity of the bonds which are part of an issue exceeds one hundred twenty percent (120%) of the average reasonably expected economic life of the facilities being financed with the proceeds of the issue.

5006.3 For purposes of §5006.2, the average maturity of any issue of bonds shall be determined by taking into account the respective issue prices of the bonds which are issued as part of the issue, and the average reasonably expected economic life of the facilities being financed with any issue of bonds shall be determined by taking into account the respective cost of the facilities.

5006.4 The reasonably expected economic life of any facility shall be determined as of the later of the date on which the bonds are issued or the date on which the facility is placed in service (or expected to be placed in service).

5006.5 Land shall not be taken into account in determining the average reasonably expected economic life of a facility unless twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the proceeds of any issue is used to finance the acquisition of land, in which case the land shall be taken into account in computing the average maturity of the bonds and shall be treated as having an economic life of fifty (50) years.

5006.6 Proceeds of an industrial development bond used with respect to the acquisition of an eligible facility shall be treated as paid or incurred after the date of official action notwithstanding the fact that a contract, purchase order, or other agreement or document for the acquisition of the facility is entered into prior to the date of official action; Provided, that the benefits and burdens of ownership (e.g., title, possession, and risk loss) shall not be transferred until after the date of official action.

5006.7 Proceeds of an industrial development bond used to reimburse reasonable deposits paid prior to the date of official action with respect to the acquisition of an eligible facility shall be treated as paid after the date of official action if the benefits and burdens of ownership of the eligible facility are transferred after the date of official action.

5006.8 In determining whether substantially all of the proceeds of an industrial development bond issued to finance the acquisition of an exempt small issue facility are used for the acquisition of the exempt small issue facility, proceeds used as working capital or to finance inventory shall be deemed not to have been used for the acquisition of the exempt small issue facility.

5006.9 An industrial development bond shall be deemed a qualified industrial development bond issued to finance an exempt facility if it is issued as part of an issue substantially all of the proceeds of which are to be used to provide any one (1) or more of the following:

(a) Projects for residential rental property;

(b) Sports facilities;

(d) Airports, docks, wharves, mass commuting facilities, parking facilities, or storage or training facilities directly related to any of the foregoing;

(e) Sewage or solid waste disposal facilities or facilities for the local furnishing of electric energy or gas;

(f) Air or water pollution control facilities;

(g) Facilities for the furnishing of water for any purpose if the following occurs:

(1) The water is or will be made available to members of the general public (including electric utility, industrial, agricultural, or commercial users); and

(2) Either the facilities are operated by a governmental unit or the rates for the furnishing or sale of the water have been established or approved by the District, by a state, by a political subdivision of a state, by an agency or instrumentality of the United States, by a public service or public utility commission, or other similar body;

(h) Qualified hydroelectric generating facilities;

(i) Qualified mass commuting vehicles; or

(j) Local district heating or cooling facilities.

5006.10 A facility described in §5006.9, other than a facility described in §5006.9(a), shall constitute an exempt facility if that facility satisfies the criteria contained in the Internal Revenue Code and in the Internal Revenue Regulations, as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings, applicable to that type of facility.

5006.11 An industrial development bond shall be deemed a qualified industrial development bond issued to finance an industrial park if it is issued as part of an issue substantially all of the proceeds of which are to be used for the acquisition or development of an industrial park.

5006.12 A facility shall constitute an industrial park if that facility satisfies the criteria contained in the Internal Revenue Code and in the Internal Revenue Regulations, as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings, applicable to industrial parks.

5006.13 An industrial development bond shall be deemed a qualified industrial development bond issued to finance an exempt small issue facility if it is issued as part of an issue the aggregate authorized face amount (determined in accordance with the provisions of §5007) of which is ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or less at the time of issuance, and substantially all of the proceeds of which are to be used for one (1) of the following:

(a) The acquisition of land or property of a character subject to the allowance for depreciation provided in the Internal Revenue Code; or

(b) To redeem part or all of a prior issue which was issued to finance an exempt small issue facility.

5006.14 An industrial development bond shall be deemed a qualified industrial development bond notwithstanding the fact that it is not issued to finance an exempt facility of an industrial park and is issued as part of an issue the aggregate authorized face amount (determined in accordance with the provisions of §5007) of which exceeds ten million dollars ($10,000,000) if substantially all of the proceeds of the bond are to be used to provide an extraordinary facility.

5006.15 For purposes of §5006.14, an extraordinary facility shall be defined as a facility designated by the Mayor as a facility the acquisition of which shall provide exceptional public benefits to the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4916 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5007** EXEMPT SMALL ISSUE FACILITIES {#sec-10-b5007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5007}

5007.1 For purposes of §5006.13, in determining the aggregate authorized face amount of any issue there shall be taken into account the face amount of bonds issued under all prior issues and which are outstanding at the time of the later issue (not including as outstanding any bond which is to be redeemed from the proceeds of the later issue), if all of the following apply:

(a) The proceeds of two (2) or more issues of bonds are to be used primarily with respect to facilities located at the same facility site;

(b) The principal user of those facilities is or will be the same person or two (2) or more related persons; and

5007.2 In determining the aggregate authorized face amount of an industrial development bond described in §5006.13, there shall be taken into account not only the amount described in §5007.1, but also the aggregate amount of capital expenditures paid or incurred with respect to facilities described in §5007.3 during the six (6) year period beginning three (3) years before the date of the issue and ending three (3) years after that date (and financed otherwise than out of the proceeds of prior outstanding issues to which §5006.13 applied), as if the aggregate amount of those capital expenditures constituted the face amount of a prior outstanding issue described in §5007.1.

5007.3 For purposes of §§5007.1 and 5007.2, the facilities to be taken into account shall be those facilities which are located at the same facility site and the principal user of which is or will be the same person or two (2) or more related persons.

5007.4 The determination whether facilities are located at the same facility site under §5007.3 shall be made as of the date of issue of the issue in question.

5007.5 In determining the aggregate authorized face amount of an industrial development bond described in §5006.13, the provisions of §5007.2 shall not apply to any industrial development bond issued as part of an issue the aggregate authorized face amount of which is one million dollars ($1,000,000) or less without regard to the provisions of §5007.2.

5007.6 For purposes of §5007.2, capital expenditures shall not include any capital expenditure which is an "excluded expenditure."

5007.7 A capital expenditure shall be an "excluded expenditure" under §5007.6 if it satisfies any of the following criteria:

(a) It is made by a public utility company which is not a principal user (or related person) of the facility financed by the proceeds of the issue in question with respect to property of that company, or it is made by a governmental unit with respect to property of that governmental unit; and if in either instance the property of the company or unit (as the case may be) will be:

(1) Used to provide gas, water, sewage disposal services, electric energy, or telephone service;

(2) Installed in, or connected to, the facility, but will not consist of property which is such an integral part of the facility that the cost of the property is ordinarily included as part of the acquisition cost of the facility; and

(3) Of a type normally paid for by the user (or related person) in the form of periodic fees based upon time or use.

(b) It is made by a person other than the user, a related person, or a governmental unit and if it is made with respect to tangible personal property or intangible personal property leased to the user (or a related person) of a facility. This paragraph shall apply, however, only if the personal property is leased by the manufacturer of the tangible or intangible personal property, or by a person in the trade or business of leasing property the same as, or similar to, the personal property, and only if, pursuant to general business practice, property of that type is ordinarily the subject of a lease;

(c) It is made to replace property damaged or destroyed by fire, storm, or other casualty, to the extent that these expenditures do not exceed in dollar amount the fair market value (determined immediately before the casualty) of the property replaced;

(d) It is required by a change made after the date of issue in a federal or District law of general application or rules and regulations of general application issued under a federal or District law;

(e) It is required by or arises out of circumstances which could not reasonably be foreseen on the date of issue or arises out of a mistake of law or fact. The aggregate dollar amount taken into account under this paragraph with respect to any issue may not, however, exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000);

(f) It is described in clause (i) or (ii) of §44F(b)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code for which a deduction was allowed under §174(a) of the Internal Revenue Code; or

(g) It is excluded under the provisions of §1.103-10(b)(2)(v) of the Internal Revenue Regulations.

5007.8 An industrial development bond issued as part of an issue the aggregate authorized face amount of which is ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or less (but more than one million dollars ($1,000,000)) and substantially all of the proceeds of which are to be used to redeem part or all of a prior issue shall not constitute a qualified industrial development bond unless all of the prior issues being redeemed are qualified industrial development bonds under §5007.2. In applying §5007.2 with respect to the refunding issue, capital expenditures shall be taken into account only for purposes of determining whether the prior industrial development bond(s) being redeemed qualified (and would have continued to qualify) under §5006.13 but for the redemption.

5007.9 Capital expenditures in an amount not to exceed ten million dollars ($10,000,000) shall not be taken into account for purposes of applying §5007.2 in the case of any industrial development bond substantially all of the proceeds of which are to be used to provide an exempt small issue facility, and either of the following:

(a) With respect to which an Urban Development Action Grant has been made under §119 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; or

(b) With respect to which a portion of the cost has been or will be provided by any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or the District.

5007.10 Separate qualified industrial development bonds which (but for this subsection) would be treated under the provisions of proposed Internal Revenue Regulation §1.103-7(b)(6) and proposed Internal Revenue Regulation §1.103-7(c). Examples (16), (17), and (18) as part of the same issue shall be treated as separate issues unless the proceeds of those bonds will be used with respect to two (2) or more facilities at least one (1) of which is an eligible facility described in §5002, and at least one (1) of which is located in a governmental unit other than the District or which have, or will have, as a principal user the same person or related persons.

5007.11 For purposes of §5007.10, a person (other than a governmental unit) shall be considered a principal user of a facility if that person (or a group of related persons which includes that person) does one (1) of the following:

(a) Guarantees, arranges, participates in, or assists with the issuance (or pays any portion of the cost of issuance) of any obligation the proceeds of which are to be used to finance or refinance the facility; and

(b) Provides any property or any franchise, trademark or trade name (within the meaning of §1253 of the Internal Revenue Code) which is to be used in connection with the facility.

5007.12 Each bond act proposed by the Executive Branch shall provide that in order for an industrial development bond to constitute a qualified industrial development bond, written statements signed by a responsible party of the facility applicant (e.g., the president or chief financial officer of a corporation or general partner of a partnership or limited partnership) shall be filed on the date of issuance of the bond with OBED and with the holder(s) of the bond(s) or, if applicable, the trustee for the holder(s) of the bond(s) (to be specified in the bond documents) setting forth the following information:

(a) The date and aggregate authorized face amount of the issue;

(b) The name and address of the facility applicant, the owner of the facility, and each principal user of the facility;

(d) The date and amount of any capital expenditures described in §5007.2 paid or incurred within the three-year period preceding the date of issue of the industrial development bond;

(e) To the extent known at the time that the statement is filed, a description of each leasehold interest in the facility for which there is a lease agreement, or a binding commitment to enter into a lease, which shall include the term of the lease, renewal options if any, rental, and the percentage of the fair rental value of the entire facility attributable to each lease or prospective lease; and

(f) To the extent known at the time the statement is filed, a description of any use of the facility made by other users.

5007.13 Each bond act proposed by the Executive Branch shall provide that each principal user of an exempt small issue facility shall, within ninety (90) days after the first, second, and third anniversaries of the date of issuance of the bond, file with OBED and with the holder(s) of the bond(s) or, if applicable, the trustee for the holder(s) of the bond(s) (to be specified in the bond documents) a written statement setting forth by date and amount any capital expenditures (as described in §5007.2) for the immediately preceding year.

5007.14 The Executive Branch may require independent verification of capital expenditures by a certified public accountant or other person acceptable to the Executive Branch.

5007.15 Certification required under §5015 shall also be submitted as to the principal users of the facility.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4919 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5008** REFUNDINGS {#sec-10-b5008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5008}

5008.1 In the case of an issue of bonds issued to re-fund one (1) or more outstanding issues of bonds, the proceeds of the refunding issue shall be considered to be used for the purpose(s) for which the proceeds of the issue(s) to be refunded were used. The provisions of this subsection shall apply regardless of the date of issuance of the issue(s) to be refunded and shall apply to refunding issues to be issued to refund prior refunding issues.

5008.2 An industrial development bond which is issued to refund a prior issue or issues of bonds issued to finance an exempt facility shall be considered a qualified industrial development bond if substantially all of the proceeds of the refunded issue were used to provide facilities generally available to the general public and described in §5006.9(c) or §5006.9(d).

5008.3 An industrial development bond with an aggregate authorized face amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) or less shall be considered a qualified industrial development bond if substantially all of the proceeds of that issue are to be used:

(a) To redeem part or all of a prior issue which was a qualified industrial development bond issued to finance one (1) or more exempt small issue facilities; or

(b) To refund part or all of a prior issue issued to refund an issue described in §5006.13.

5008.4 An industrial development bond with an aggregate authorized face amount of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or less, but more than one million dollars ($1,000,000), which is issued to re-fund a prior issue or issues of bonds issued to finance one (1) or more exempt small issue facilities shall be a qualified industrial development bond if the condition set forth in §5007.8 is met, and if substantially all of the proceeds are to be used as provided in §5008.3.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4924 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5009** [RESERVED] {#sec-10-b5009 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5009}

##### **10-B DCMR § 5010** ARBITRAGE {#sec-10-b5010 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5010}

5010.1 The determination whether a bond is an "arbitrage bond" shall be made in accordance with the provisions of § 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code and the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Regulations, as interpreted and applied by courts of law and in Internal Revenue Rulings.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4924 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5011** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b5011 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5011}

5011.1 A facility applicant shall complete and submit a formal application requesting an issue of bonds.

5011.2 The Executive Branch shall establish a schedule of fees, which may be changed from time to time to be paid upon the submission of an application.

5011.3 The application shall be in the form designated by OBED and shall be submitted to OBED in triplicate.

5011.4 The form and content of the application may be changed from time to time.

5011.5 The application shall include information required for evaluation of the proposed financing by the Mayor.

5011.6 There shall be included with the application a written description of the facility and information with respect to the facility of the type normally required by financial institutions in analyzing the credit worthiness of a facility. An application submitted prior to the availability of this information shall not be sufficient for evaluation.

5011.7 If at any point an applicant decides to withdraw an application from consideration, OBED shall have the right to require re-application if the applicant later wishes to reactivate consideration of the facility for bond financing.

5011.8 OBED shall have responsibility for the preliminary review of all applications.

5011.9 Facility applicants shall respond promptly to requests for clarification or additional information. Failure to respond satisfactorily may result in the immediate disapproval of an application.

5011.10 Upon receipt and review of an application, OBED shall submit a copy to the Corporation Counsel and to bond counsel. OBED shall promptly transmit copies of any amendments to the application and a copy of its recommendation to the Corporation Counsel and to bond counsel.

5011.11 Bond counsel shall review the application for legal sufficiency under the Act and this chapter. After review of the completed application, bond counsel shall submit its findings to OBED and to the Corporation Counsel.

5011.12 After review of the completed application, OBED shall submit the application, with its recommendation of approval or disapproval, to the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development. A copy of the OBED recommendation shall be submitted to the Corporation Counsel and to bond counsel.

5011.13 The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development shall furnish a copy of the application to the Deputy Mayor for Finance. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development and the Deputy Mayor for Finance shall, after reviewing the application, submit a joint recommendation or separate recommendations on the application to the Mayor.

5011.14 The Mayor shall review the application, comments, and recommendations, and may, in his or her discretion, approve the application. At the Mayor's discretion, bond counsel shall draft a proposed bond act and related documents for submission to the Council.

5011.15 After the proposed bond act and related documents are drafted, they shall be forwarded to the Mayor for submission to the Council.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4925 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5012** PROCESSING OF BOND APPLICATIONS PURSUANT TO DISTRICT'S VOLUME CAP {#sec-10-b5012 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5012}

5012.1 Applications for bond financing shall be submitted to the Office of Business and Economic Development (OBED) on or before May 1, 1986, in order to be eligible for priority status pursuant to §5013.2 for purposes of allocating the District's 1986 Volume Cap pursuant to H.R. 3838 or other new federal tax legislation.

5012.2 The OBED shall first process those applications which are received on or before the close of business on May 1, 1986, and which are complete. These applications shall hereinafter be referred to as "Allocation Applications."

5012.3 The OBED shall process all other applications pursuant to §§5012.9, 5012.10 and 5012.11.

5012.4 The OBED shall make a determination of the completeness of Allocation Applications received pursuant to §§5012.1 and 5012.2.

5012.5 An Allocation Application shall be determined to be complete if all material questions are answered completely and correctly and the facility applicant, as defined in §5099, has submitted fully executed copies of the following:

(a) First Source Employment Agreement between the facility applicant and the Department of Employment Services;

(b) Memorandum of Understanding regarding minority business opportunity between the facility applicant and the Minority Business Opportunity Commission; and

5012.6 The Corporation Counsel shall make a preliminary determination of the legal sufficiency of Allocation Applications received pursuant to §§5012.1 and 5012.2.

5012.7 An Allocation Application shall be determined to be legally sufficient if, based on the information received from the facility applicant and the legal sufficiency review of bond counsel pursuant to §5011.11, the Corporation Counsel determines that there are no legal impediments which prevent issuance of the bonds requested by the Allocation Applications.

5012.8 An Allocation Application determined by the OBED to be complete pursuant to §5012.4 and determined by the Corporation Counsel to be legally sufficient pursuant to §5012.6 shall be considered by the OBED for allocation under the District's 1986 Volume Cap.

5012.9 The OBED shall also review any Existing Bond Application submitted prior to April 2, 1986, for which bonds have not been issued and for which the facility applicant restates an intention to seek issuance of the bonds.

5012.10 The facility applicant's intention, with respect to its Existing Bond Application, shall be delivered in writing to the OBED by close of business on May 1, 1986, in order to be considered for purposes of priority allocation under the District's 1986 Volume Cap. The Existing Bond Application of a facility applicant shall also satisfy the requirements of §§5012.5, 5012.7 and 5012.8.

5012.11 The OBED shall also process the following:

(a) Applications received after May 1, 1986, which satisfy the requirements of §§5012.5, 5012.7 and 5012.8; and

(b) Applications received on or before May 1, 1986, which did not satisfy the completion requirements of §5012.5 on that date, but which subsequently satisfy those requirements and the requirements of §§5012.7 and 5012.8.

5012.12 Applications processed pursuant to §5012.11 shall not be considered for allocation under the District's 1986 Volume Cap unless and until the earlier of the following occurs:

(a) Federal tax legislation is modified to make the provisions of §§5012, 5013 and 5014 unnecessary;

(b) Allocation Applications that satisfy the requirements of §5012.8 and Existing Bond Applications that satisfy the requirements of §5012.10 do not consume the District's 1986 Volume Cap; or

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 4438 (July 25, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5013** PRIORITY ALLOCATION OF VOLUME CAP {#sec-10-b5013 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5013}

5013.1 The OBED shall give first priority for purposes of allocation under the District's 1986 Volume Cap to industrial development bond financings for which bond acts have been enacted by the Council and which were awaiting completion of the Congressional layover period required by §602 of the Act, D.C. Code § 1-233(c)(1) (1985 Supp.) on January 1, 1986.

5013.2 The OBED shall give second priority for purposes of allocation under the District's 1986 Volume Cap to Allocation Applications and Existing Bond Applications that meet the objectives and eligibility requirements of §5001 as well as the requirements of federal tax law and pending legislation and which propose the financing of facilities to be located in the following geographic areas:

(a) Wards 6, 7, and 8;

(b) Capital City Business and Industrial Park: For purposes of this section, the land within the following boundary descriptions shall be the Capital City Business and Industrial Park:

(1) Beginning at the intersection of New York Avenue, N.E., and 9th Street, N.E.; Northeast on New York Avenue, N.E., to Montana Avenue, N.E.;

(2) North on Montana Avenue, N.E., to W Street, N.E.;

(3) West on W Street, N.E., to 13th Street, N.E.;

(4) Northwest on 13th Street, N.E., to Brentwood Road; N.E.;

(5) Southwest on Brentwood Road, N.E., to 9th Street, N.E.; and

(6) South on 9th Street, N.E., to New York Avenue, N.E.;

(c) Capital City Market: For purposes of this section, the land within the following boundary descriptions shall be the Capital City Market:

(1) Beginning at the intersection of Florida Avenue, N.E., and 5th Street, N.E.; Southwest on Florida Avenue, N.E., to 6th Street, N.E.;

(2) Northwest on 6th Street, N.E., to Penn Street, N.E., including square 3594;

(3) Northwest on Penn Street, N.E., to New York Avenue, N.E.;

(4) Southwest on New York Avenue, N.E., to railroad tracks;

(5) Southwest on railroad tracks to Delaware Avenue, N.E.;

(6) South on Delaware Avenue, N.E., to M Street, N.E.;

(7) East on M Street, N.E., to 4th Street, N.E.; and

(8) North on 4th Street, N.E., to Florida Avenue, N.E.;

(d) Shaw Neighborhood: For purposes of this section, the land within the following boundary descriptions shall be the Shaw Neighborhood:

(1) Beginning at the intersection of 13th Street, N.W., and M Street, N.W.; East on M Street, N.W., to New York Avenue, N.W.;

(2) Northeast on New York Avenue, N.W., to North Capitol Street, N.W.;

(3) North on North Capitol Street, N.W., to Florida Avenue, N.W.;

(4) Northwest on Florida Avenue, N.W., to Bohrer Street, N.W.;

(5) Northeast on Bohrer Street, N.W., to 5th Street, N.W.;

(6) North on 5th Street, N.W., to W Street, N.W.;

(7) East on W Street, N.W., to 4th Street, N.W.;

(8) North on 4th Street, N.W., to Harvard Street, N.W.;

(9) West on Harvard Street, N.W., to 15th Street, N.W.;

(10) South on 15th Street, N.W., to N Street, N.W.;

(11) East on N Street, N.W., to 13th Street, N.W.; and

(12) South on 13th Street, N.W., to M Street, N.W,

(e) Upper Georgia Avenue Corridor: For purposes of this section, any square located on or abutting Georgia Avenue, N.W., beginning at the intersection of Spring Road, N.W. and North on Georgia Avenue, N.W., to Eastern. Avenue, N.W., shall be the Upper Georgia Avenue Corridor; and

(f) Adams Morgan Neighborhood: For purposes of this section, the land within the following boundary descriptions shall be the Adams Morgan Neighborhood:

(1) Beginning at the intersection of Florida Avenue, N.W., and 16th Street, N.W., North on 16th Street, N.W., to Argonne Place, N.W.;

(2) Southwest on Argonne Place, N.W., to Lanier Street, N.W.;

(3) Southwest on Lanier Street, N.W., to Calvert Street, N.W.;

(4) Southeast on Calvert Street, N.W., to Columbia Road, N.W.;

(5) Southwest on Columbia Road, N.W., to Connecticut Avenue, N.W.;

(6) South on Connecticut Avenue, N.W., to Florida Avenue, N.W.; and

(7) Northeast on Florida Avenue, N.W., to 16th Street, N.W.

5013.3 In the event that Allocation Applications and Existing Bond Applications, reviewed by OBED pursuant to §5013.2, request bond financing in an aggregate amount that exceeds the District's 1986 Volume Cap remaining after allocation of a portion of the District's 1986 Volume Cap to industrial development bonds pursuant to §5013.1, OBED shall do the following:

(a) Evaluate and rank the Allocation Applications and Existing Bond Applications to determine which best satisfy the objectives of the District's revenue bond program as set forth in §5000.6; and

(b) Make its findings for allocations under the District's 1986 Volume Cap based on the rankings.

5013.4 In the event that Allocation Applications and Existing Bond Applications, reviewed by OBED pursuant to §5013.2, request bond financing in an aggregate amount that is less than the District's 1986 Volume Cap remaining after allocation of a portion of the District's 1986 Volume Cap to industrial development bonds pursuant to §5013.1, OBED shall do the following:

(a) Evaluate and rank all remaining applications for bond financing to determine which best satisfy the objectives of the District's revenue bond program as set forth in §5000.6; and

(b) Make its findings for additional allocations under the District's 1986 Volume Cap based on the rankings.

5013.5 The OBED shall submit its findings to the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development.

5013.6 The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development shall furnish a copy of OBED's findings to the Mayor.

5013.7 The Mayor, or his or her designee, shall review the findings, and may, in his or her discretion, direct bond counsel to draft a proposed bond act and related documents.

5013.8 After the proposed bond act and related documents are drafted, the Mayor may, in his or her discretion, submit them to the Council.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 4438, 4440 (July 25, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5014** ISSUANCE AND REALLOCATION: VOLUME CAP {#sec-10-b5014 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5014}

5014.1 Industrial development bonds to which any portion of the District's 1986 Volume Cap has been allocated pursuant to §5013.1, shall be issued prior to October 1, 1986.

5014.2 In the event that the bonds described by §5014.1 are not issued by October 1, 1986, the allocation assigned to those bonds may, in the Mayor's discretion, be rescinded and the Mayor may seek to reallocate the rescinded allocation to other bond financings which meet the requirements of §5014.3, but which have not received an allocation of the District's 1986 Volume Cap.

5014.3 All facility applicants shall provide OBED evidence of receipt of the following:

(a) Commitments from purchasers, underwriters or other parties involved in the bond financing necessary, on the advice of the Corporation Counsel, to implement the bond financing; and

(b) All governmental approvals necessary, on the advice of the Corporation Counsel, to implement the bond financing.

5014.4 Governmental approvals shall include the following:

(a) Fully-executed Affirmative Action Plan; and

(b) Executed Certification and Co-Certification of Non-discrimination.

5014.5 If applicable, all facility applicants shall furnish satisfactory evidence to the District, at or before closing, as to the availability of the following:

(a) Zoning approvals;

(b) Certificates of Need;

(d) Other similar governmental approvals, except for those specified in §5014.4.

5014.6 The deadline for submission of the approvals required by §5014.4 shall be the earlier of the expiration of the Congressional layover period required by §602 of the Act, D.C. Code, § 1-233(c)(1), (1985 Supp.) or the date the bond act becomes law, in the event the layover period is waived by Congress.

5014.7 If a facility applicant meets the requirements of §5014.3, bonds requested by that facility applicant shall be issued within thirty (30) days after the earlier of the expiration of the Congressional layover period required by §602 of the Act, D.C. Code, §1-233(c)(1), (1985 Supp.) or the date the bond act becomes law, in the event the layover period is waived by Congress.

5014.8 In the event that the bonds described in §5014.1 are not issued within the period specified in §5014.7, the allocation assigned to those bonds may, in the Mayor's discretion, be rescinded and the Mayor may seek to reallocate the rescinded allocation to other bond financings which meet the requirements of this chapter, but which have not received an allocation of the District's 1986 Volume Cap.

5014.9 If any portion of the District's 1986 volume Cap becomes available for reallocation for any other reason, that portion may, in the Mayor's discretion, be rescinded and the Mayor may seek to reallocate the rescinded allocation to other bond financings which meet the requirements of this chapter, but which have not received an allocation of the District's 1986 Volume Cap.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 4438, 4445 (July 25, 1986).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5015** COSTS {#sec-10-b5015 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5015}

5015.1 The developer, owner, or applicant, whichever is applicable as determined by the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (Deputy Mayor), shall be responsible for all costs incurred by the District with respect to the financing of the facility, including, without limitation, the processing of the application, if applicable, all matters relating to the issuance of the bonds, financial advisor fees, bond counsel fees, and other matters.

5015.2 If, for any reasons whatsoever, the developer, owner, or applicant, whichever is applicable as determined by the Deputy Mayor, after receiving written notification from the Deputy Mayor, fails to conclude necessary negotiations or take requested action within a reasonable or specified period of time, or if the developer, owner, or applicant withdraws, abandons, cancels, or neglects the application, or if the developer, owner, or applicant is unable to find a purchaser for the bonds, or if the bonds are not issued for any reason (other than failure of the District to provide for issuance of the bonds), then upon presentation of an invoice, the developer, owner, or applicant shall pay to the District, or to persons or firms designated by it, all fees, charges, and other costs incurred with respect to the application and any proposed bond issue, up to that date and time, including fees of financial advisors and bond counsel for the District.

5015.3 In addition to the costs specified in § 5015.1, and except as specified in §5015.4, upon the delivery of any bonds issued pursuant to section 490 of the Act (other than bonds issued by the Chief Financial Officer or an instrumentality of the District, to whom bond issuance authority has been delegated by the Council pursuant to section 490 of the Act), the developer, owner, or applicant shall pay to the District an origination fee according to the following schedule:

(a) Up to twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) in face amount of bonds - twenty-five hundredths of a percent (0.25%) of the face amount of the bonds;

(b) More than twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) and up to and including one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in face amount of bonds - fifty hundredths of a percent (0.50%) of the face amount of the bonds; and

(c) More than one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in face amount of bonds - seventy-five hundredths of a percent (0.75%) of the face amount of the bonds.

5015.4 In addition to the costs specified in § 5015.1, upon delivery of bonds issued pursuant to section 490 of the Act (other than bonds issued by the Chief Financial Officer or an instrumentality of the District to whom bond issuance authority has been delegated by the Council pursuant to section 490 of the Act) that are secured either by payments in lieu of taxes or by tax increments, or both, the developer, owner, or applicant, whichever is applicable as determined by the Deputy Mayor, shall pay to the District an origination fee of one and one half percent (1.5%) of the face amount of the bonds on the date of delivery of the bonds and shall pay the District an annual administrative charge thereafter on each anniversary date of the date of delivery of the bonds equal to fifteen hundredths of a percent (0.15%) of the outstanding principal amount of the bonds on each applicable anniversary date.

5015.5 The entire origination fee shall be due on the date the bonds are delivered. With the written approval of the Deputy Mayor, a developer, owner, or applicant may pay the origination fee in up to five (5) equal installments, commencing on the date the bonds are delivered and continuing on each anniversary date thereafter until the entire origination fee is paid, without interest, upon written request to the Deputy Mayor no later than thirty (30) days prior to the date of delivery of the bonds evidencing the adverse impact of a single origination fee payment on the project to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds.

5015.6 Payment of the origination fee in installments may be found to have an adverse impact on the project to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds if it is evidenced to the satisfaction of the Deputy Mayor that without the allowance for payment of the origination fee in installments, the developer, owner, or applicant will be unable to pay all of the other costs of issuance of the bonds on the date of delivery thereof or within the year beginning on the date of issuance of the bonds.

5015.7 With the written approval of the the Deputy Mayor, the origination fee, but not the administrative charge, may be reduced or waived after written request to the Deputy Mayor no later than thirty (30) days prior to the date of delivery of the bonds evidencing that an origination fee concession in whole or in part will further the public interest because the present value of the special public purpose benefits offered by the developer, owner, or applicant at the project to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds exceeds the dollar amount of the origination fee, or that imposition of the origination fee is likely to adversely impact the financial feasibility of the project to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds, or if the imposition of the origination fee will result in a debilitating financial impact on the developer, owner, or applicant or on the operations of the project to be financed by the proceeds of the bonds. The special public purpose benefits, and the total value of the special public purpose benefits, shall be determined in the discretion of the Deputy Mayor and shall include, but not be limited to, public benefits the quality or quantity of which are not a necessary or natural consequence of the project that is to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds. The present value of the special public purpose benefits shall be the total value of the special public purpose benefits for the period of five (5) years from the date of the delivery of the bonds discounted to a present value at a per annum rate equal to the "Prime Rate" as published on the date the calculation is made by "The Wall Street Journal" in its listing of "Money Rates". The value of any fee concession granted shall not exceed the amount required to avoid such adverse or debilitating impacts.

5015.8 On or before the completion of a transaction in connection with outstanding bonds issued pursuant to section 490 of the Act that requires the filing of an information return with the United States Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Service (other than bonds issued by the Chief Financial Officer or an instrumentality of the District), the developer, owner, or applicant shall pay to the District, in addition to the costs specified in § 5015.1, and except as specified in § 5015.4, a modification or conversion fee according to the following schedule:

(a) Up to twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) in face amount of bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion: ten hundredths of a percent (0.10%) of the face amount of the bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion;

(b) More than twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) and up to and including one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in face amount of bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion: fifteen hundredths of a percent (0.15%) of the face amount of the bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion; and

(c) More than one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in face amount of bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion: twenty hundredths of a percent (0.20%) of the face amount of the bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion.

5015.9 With the written approval of the Deputy Mayor, the modification or conversion fee, but not the administrative charge, may be reduced after written request to the Deputy Mayor no later than thirty (30) days before the closing date of the transaction specified in § 5015.8 evidencing that the magnitude of cost savings realized by the developer, owner, or applicant in connection with the transaction will further the public interest because the benefits from the proceeds of the modification or conversion exceeds the amount of the modification or conversion fee, the imposition of the modification or conversion fee in whole is likely to adversely impact the financial feasibility of the project to be financed with the proceeds of the bonds, or the imposition of the modification or conversion fee will result in a detrimental financial impact on the developer, owner, or applicant or on the operations of the project to be financed by the proceeds of the bonds. The magnitude of the cost savings realized shall be calculated as a percentage of the costs of the original transaction by using the cost savings as the numerator and the costs of the original transaction as the denominator. Reductions in the modification or conversion fee shall not be in an amount exceeding five hundredths of a percent (0.05%) of the face amount of the bonds outstanding at the time of the modification or conversion. The request for reduction shall be made a part of the record of the transaction.

5015.10 For the purposes of § 5015, a developer shall mean a person who undertakes to develop a real estate project; an owner shall mean either an owner as defined in the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act of 2004, effective April 5, 2005 (D.C. Law 15-293; D.C. Official Code § 1-308.01 et seq.) with respect to bonds secured by payments in lieu of taxes or an owner of any building which is located in a Tax Increment Financing area with respect to bonds secured by tax increments pursuant to the Retail Incentive Act of 2004, effective September 8, 2004 (D.C. Law 15-185; D.C. Official Code § 2-1217.71 et seq.); and an applicant shall mean any individual or any public corporation, private corporation, association, partnership, firm or other entity, organized for the purpose of making a profit or as a nonprofit organization, other than the District or any of its agencies and instrumentalities, which, pursuant to the filing of an application, requests the District to participate in the financing of a project through the issuance of bonds pursuant to section 490 of the Act (other than bonds issued by the Chief Financial Officer or an instrumentality of the District to whom bond issuance authority has been delegated by the Council pursuant to section 490 of the Act).

5015.11 For the purposes of § 5015, payments in lieu of taxes shall have the meaning set forth in the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act of 2004, effective April 5, 2005 (D.C. Law 15-293; D.C. Official Code § 1-308.01 et seq.) and tax increments shall have the meaning set forth in section 490 of the Act.

5015.12 The applicant shall be responsible for all costs incurred in complying with applicable federal and state securities laws and with any registration or exemption requirements which the District and its counsel, in their sole discretion, determine shall be satisfied in connection with a bond issuance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4927 (September 23, 1983); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 6091 (July 28, 2006); as amended by Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 58 DCR 9018 (October 21, 2011).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5016** BOND COUNSEL {#sec-10-b5016 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5016}

5016.1 An applicant may be required to consult with bond counsel designated by the District with respect to any phase of the bond issuance process, including, but not limited to, the drafting of the bond act and the bond documents.

5016.2 Bond counsel shall participate with applicant's counsel, the Corporation counsel, and the purchaser's counsel in the scheduling of the work and preparation of all documentation in connection with the bond issue.

5016.3 Within sixty (60) days after the date of closing of any bonds issued under D.C. Code §47-334 (1981), bond counsel shall file with OBED a written statement setting forth, for informational purposes only the following:

(a) The name and address of the issuer and the designated title of the bond;

(b) The name and address of the facility applicant;

(c) The date of issue, the face amount, total purchase price, and the amount of lendable proceeds of the issue; and the interest rate stated or rate computation (if variable), term, and face amount of each bond which is part of the issue;

(d) The date on which the Council approved the bond act and the date on which the bond act became effective pursuant to the provisions of §602(c) of the Act;

(e) The name and address of the following:

(1) Each initial principal user of the bond financed facility;

(2) The common parent of any affiliated group of corporations (within the meaning of §1504(a) of the Internal Revenue Code) of which that initial principal user is a member; and

(3) Any person treated as a principal user under §5007.11; and

(f) A description of the facility being financed from proceeds of the issue.

5016.4 Concurrently with the issuance of bonds, bond counsel shall render an opinion with respect to the validity of the issue under §490 of the Act and with respect to the exemption of the interest on the bonds from federal and District taxes.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4926 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5017** APPLICANT'S STATEMENT AND VALIDITY OF ISSUES {#sec-10-b5017 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5017}

5017.1 Each application shall contain a written statement made under oath and signed by the applicant stating that the factual representations contained in the application are true.

5017.2 False statements in any application made under this chapter shall be subject to criminal prosecution pursuant to 31 Stat. 1329, ch. 854, §858 (1901), D.C. Code §22-2501 (1981).

5017.3 A misstatement in the application or a breach of a contractual undertaking may result in criminal or civil liability and disqualification of the responsible party from participation in other facilities financed by bonds, but it is not intended that a misstatement or breach shall itself affect the validity of the bond act or of any bonds issued pursuant to the bond act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4928 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5018** GENERAL ADMINISTRATION {#sec-10-b5018 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5018}

5018.1 Any bond considered under this chapter shall comply with applicable registration requirements as provided in §103(j) of the Internal Revenue Code.

5018.2 Each bond act proposed by the Executive Branch shall provide that bonds shall not constitute general obligations of the District, but shall, pursuant to D.C. Code §47-334(a)(2), constitute special obligations of the District, the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on which shall be payable from the receipts and revenues to be realized from the facility whose financing is undertaken by the issuance of the bonds and from any other moneys made available to the District for that purpose.

5018.3 Each bond act proposed by the Executive Branch shall provide that the bonds shall not be general obligations of the District and shall not be a pledge of or involve the faith and credit or the taxing power of the District, shall not constitute a debt of the District, and shall not constitute a lending of the public credit for private undertakings as contained in §602(a) (2) of the Act.

5018.4 Each bond act proposed by the Executive Branch with respect to a qualified industrial development bond shall provide that certification shall be submitted not less than annually by the facility applicant or its successor to OBED and the bondholder(s), or, if appropriate, the trustee for the bondholder(s), as to whether a substantial user or a related person holds a bond.

5018.5 Unless otherwise approved by the Executive Branch, any financial institution proposed to serve as the trustee with respect to a bond issue, shall be a financial institution whose principal office is located in the District.

5018.6 The public benefit agreements shall clearly indicate that violations shall not affect the validity of the bond act or an issue of bonds.

5018.7 In interpreting the provisions of this chapter, the Executive Branch shall rely, where specifically indicated in this chapter, on the Internal Revenue Code, the Internal Revenue Regulations, and Internal Revenue Rulings; Provided, that where the provisions of this chapter do not indicate specific reliance on the Internal Revenue Code, the Internal Revenue Regulations, and Internal Revenue Rulings, the Executive Branch shall be guided by those authorities unless the following apply:

(a) The precise application of those authorities to the District would be impractical; or

(b) The best interests of the District would be served by relying solely on the authority contained in §490 of the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4928 (September 23, 1983).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5099** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5099 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5099}

5099.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Acquisition -

(a) The acquisition, purchase, construction, reconstruction, improvement, renovation, rehabilitation, restoration, remodeling, repair, relocation, equipping, expansion, or extension of one (1) or more facilities;

(b) The acquisition of one hundred percent (100%) of the ownership interests of any corporation, partnership, trust, or other entity whose assets include one (1) or more eligible facilities, but only to the extent that the cost of acquisition is allocable to eligible facilities; or

Act - the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act of 1973, P.L. 93-198, D.C. Code § 1-201 et seq. (1981), presently in effect and as amended from time to time.

Allocation Application - an application received by OBED on or before the close of business on May 1, 1986, and which was complete on that date.

Application - the application described in §5011 of this chapter.

Bond or Bonds - District revenue bonds, notes, or other obligations (including refunding bonds, notes, or other obligations) issued and sold by the District in order to assist in the financing of one (1) or more eligible facilities or to refund outstanding bonds issued for the purpose of financing one (1) or more eligible facilities purpose bonds and qualified industrial development bonds. The terms "bonds" and "bonds" specifically exclude general obligation bonds and notes.

Bond act - a legislative act of the Council, pursuant to §490 of the Act, D.C. Code §47-334(a) (1981), authorizing the issuance of a bond or bonds.

Bond counsel - the law firm or law firms designated by the District to serve as bond counsel with respect to a bond issue.

Capital expenditures - shall have the meaning given to that term in §103 of the Internal Revenue Code, in §1.103-10(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Regulations, and as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings; except that, as provided in §§5007.2 and 5007.3 of this chapter capital expenditures are taken into account in the District only to the extent made with respect to a facility site.

Council - the Council of the District of Columbia.

Day - any day other than a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday in the District.

District - the District of Columbia.

District's 1986 Volume Cap - the volume cap of the District for calendar year 1986.

Eligible facility or eligible facilities - any facility or facilities which meet(s) the criteria described in §5002.2 of this chapter.

Executive Branch - the executive branch of the District government.

Exempt facility - any eligible facility which meets one (1) or more of the criteria described in §5006.9 of this chapter.

Exempt person -

(a) A governmental unit; or

(b) An organization described in §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and exempt from tax under §501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (but only with respect to a trade or business carried on by the organization which is not an unrelated trade or business). Whether a particular trade or business carried on by a tax-exempt organization is an unrelated trade or business shall be determined by applying the rules of §513(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and the Internal Revenue Regulations issued under §513 of the Internal Revenue Code to that organization without regard to whether the organization is an organization subject to the tax imposed by §511 (relating to the imposition of tax on unrelated business income of charitable, etc., organizations) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Exempt purpose bond - any bond issued pursuant to §490 of the Act which is not an industrial development bond and seventy-five percent (75%) or more of the proceeds of which are to be used to finance an eligible facility to be used directly or indirectly in any trade or business or other activity (which is not an unrelated trade or business) carried on by an exempt person.

Exempt small issue facility - any eligible facility which meets the criteria described in §5006.13 of this chapter.

Existing bond application - an application received by OBED prior to April 2, 1986, the date of adoption of the emergency rules, and for which bonds were not issued prior to the adoption of the emergency rules.

Extraordinary facility - any eligible facility which meets the criteria described in §§5006.14 and 5006.15 of this chapter.

Facility - any real property (including, but not limited to, land and interests in land, buildings, structures, and other improvements) or any interest in real property; appurtenances, including, but not limited to, streets, sewers, utilities, parks, site preparation, and landscaping; any personal property (including, but not limited to, machinery, equipment, furnishings, and other personal property) or any interest in personal property; any property which may be financed from the proceeds of the issuance and sale of bonds the interest on which is exempt from federal income taxation under §103 of the Internal Revenue Code to the extent not precluded by the Act, or any combination of the foregoing, the acquisition of which shall accomplish one (1) or more of the objectives set forth in §5000 of this chapter.

Facility applicant or applicant - any individual or any public corporation, private corporation, association, partnership, firm or other entity, organized for the purpose of making a profit or as a non-profit organization, other than the District and any of its agencies and instrumentalities, which, pursuant to the filing of an application, requests the District to participate in the financing of one (1) or more facilities, in the manner provided in this chapter, for use by one (1) or more facility users.

Facility site - shall have the same meaning as the term "lot" as defined in §199 of DCMR Title 11 (the Zoning Regulations) and includes any contiguous facility and any functionally integrated facility located within one-half (1/2) mile of the facility site. A facility is considered contiguous if it is adjacent to the facility site or would be adjacent to the facility site but for the intervention of public or private thoroughfare (e.g., a street, avenue, road, or alley).

Facility user - any individual, or any public corporation, private corporation, association, partnership, firm, or other entity, organized for the purpose of making a profit or as a non-profit organization, which owns, leases, or otherwise uses all or part of a facility. A facility user and a facility applicant may be the same person or entity.

Government unit - the District or any District agency or instrumentality, a state or local governmental unit, a territory or possession of the United States, or any political subdivision of any of the foregoing.

Inducement resolution - a resolution adopted by the Council which expresses preliminary interest in providing bond financing for a facility. The resolution, if adopted, shall not constitute enactment of a bond act, shall not bind the Mayor or the Council, respectively, to recommend or enact a bond act, nor shall it establish the content of any proposed or subsequently enacted bond act.

Industrial development bond - any bond which is issued as part of an issue all or a major portion of the proceeds of which are to be used directly or indirectly in any trade or business carried on by any person who is a non-exempt person and the payment of the principal or interest on which (under the terms of the bond or any underlying arrangement) is, in whole or in major part:

(a) Secured by any interest in property used or to be used in a trade or business or in payments in respect of that property; or

(b) To be derived from payments in respect of property, or borrowed money, used or to be used in a trade or business. The trade or business test and the security interest test are to be applied in accordance with the provisions of §1.103-7 of the Internal Revenue Regulations.

Industrial park - any eligible facility which meets the criteria described in §§5006.11 and 5006.12 of this chapter.

Internal Revenue Code - the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and in effect on September 23, 1983, and as subsequently amended from time to time.

Internal Revenue regulations - the federal income tax regulations, as amended, promulgated by the United States Department of the Treasury and in effect on September 23, 1983, and as subsequently amended from time to time.

Internal Revenue rulings - the published rulings and pronouncements of the Internal Revenue Service interpreting and applying the Internal Revenue Code and the Internal Revenue Regulations.

Major portion - more than twenty-five percent (25%).

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

Non-exempt person - any person or organization who is not an exempt person.

OBED - the Office of Business and Economic Development.

Official action - the earlier of the date, whether before or after September 23, 1983, of the following:

(a) Written direction by the Mayor or bond counsel to draft a proposed bond act as set forth in §5011.14 of this chapter;

(b) Date of adoption of an inducement resolution by the Council; or

Principal user - shall have the meaning given to that term in §103 of the Internal Revenue Code, in §1.103-10 of the Internal Revenue Regulations, and as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings.

Qualified industrial development bond - an industrial development bond described in §5006.1 of this chapter.

Related person - shall have the meaning given to that term in §103(b)(6)(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, in §1.103-10 of the Internal Revenue Regulations and as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings.

Substantially all - ninety percent (90%) or more.

Substantial user - shall have the meaning given to that term in §§1.103-11(b) and (c) of the Internal Revenue Regulations and as interpreted in Internal Revenue Rulings.

Volume Cap - shall have meaning given to that term in §145 of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") as it would be added to the Code if H.R. 3838, the Tax Reform Act of 1985, is enacted into law, or, if H.R. 3838 is not enacted into law, volume cap shall mean the aggregate amount of bonds that may be issued by the District for the benefit of non-governmental persons under any other federal tax legislation that is enacted by the Congress of the United States in 1986 and is effective in 1986.

Zoning Regulations - title 11 of the D.C. Municipal Regulations (DCMR), the Zoning Regulations of the District of Columbia, as in effect on September 23, 1983, and as amended from time to time.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 30 DCR 4905, 4906 (September 23, 1983); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 33 DCR 4438, 4446 (July 25, 1986).*

### **10-B51** QUALIFED ZONE ACADEMY REVENUE BONDS

##### **10-B DCMR § 5100** CRITERIA FOR SELECTING QUALIFYING SCHOOLS {#sec-10-b5100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5100}

5100.1 The Deputy Mayor shall determine which District of Columbia public schools and public charter schools will be presented to the Council for approval as Qualifying Schools.

5100.2 The Revenue Bond-Enterprise Zone Program within the Office of the Deputy Mayor shall be responsible for preparing application forms, soliciting applications, and processing and reviewing applications for designation as a Qualifying School and eligibility to receive Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bond financing and shall assist the Deputy Mayor in the determination of which District of Columbia public schools and public charter schools will be presented to the Council for approval as Qualifying Schools.

5100.3 All applications for designation as a Qualifying School and for eligibility to receive Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bond financing shall contain a certification that the school and the school's application meet the standards set forth in section 1397E(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved August 5, 1997 (111 Stat. 821; 26 U.S.C. §1397E(d)), including, but not limited to, a certification that the improvement proposal will be an Eligible Project.

5100.4 At his sole discretion, the Deputy Mayor may consider the following criteria when determining which schools will be presented to the Council for approval as Qualifying Schools and the proposed amount of Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bond financing for each school presented to the Council:

(a) The specific improvements to be made pursuant to the school's improvement proposal;

(b) The level of need for physical or educational improvements at the school;

(d) The consistency of the improvement proposal with any District of Columbia small area plans, development plans, or other planning efforts;

(e) The level of participation of certified business enterprises in the improvement proposal;

(f) The level of commitment of the school to hire District residents to implement the improvement proposal;

(f) The level of commitment of private partners to the improvement proposal;

(g) The level and specific elements of the qualified contributions;

(h) Consistency of the improvement proposal with the Mayor's vision and plans for educational improvement in the District;

(i) The level of economic development in the area where the school is located;

(j) If the school is a public charter school, whether the school is in good standing with its chartering authority; and

(k) Whether the school's application for qualified zone academy revenue bond financing is timely filed.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 54 DCR 6940 (July 20, 2007).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5199** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5199 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5199}

5199.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bond Project Forward Commitment Approval Act of 2005, effective October 18, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-28; 52 DCR 8093).

Certified business enterprise - has the same meaning as set forth from time to time in section 2302(1A) of the Small, Local, and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005, effective October 20, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.02(1A)).

Council - the Council of the District of Columbia.

Deputy Mayor - the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development.

Eligible Project - a project in the area of elementary, secondary, or college and university facilities undertaken at a Qualifying School which is subject to financing pursuant to section 490 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 809; D.C. Official Code § 1-204.90) as a Qualified Zone academy bond within the meaning of section 1397E(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved August 5, 1997 (111 Stat. 821; 26 U.S.C. § 1397E(d)(1)).

Improvement proposal - the project or projects proposed by a school to be funded through all or part of a Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bond financing.

Qualified contributions - has the same meaning as set forth from time to time in section 1397E(d)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved August 5, 1997 (111 Stat. 821; 26 U.S.C. § 1397E(d)(2)(B)).

Qualified Zone Academy Revenue Bonds - the revenue bonds authorized to be issued pursuant to the Act.

Qualifying School - any public school or public charter school the Council approves by resolution, for financing, refinancing, or reimbursement of the costs of its Eligible Project pursuant to the provisions of section 490 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 809; D.C. Official Code § 1-204.90) and the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 54 DCR 6940 (July 20, 2007).*

### **10-B53** COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS

##### **10-B DCMR § 5300** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b5300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5300}

5300.1 The Community Development Corporation (CDC) shall be a non-profit organization incorporated in the District of Columbia pursuant to §501(c) (3).

5300.2 The articles of incorporation for each Community Development Corporation shall state the geographic area and the boundaries for such area where the corporation will carry out its activities for community development.

5300.3 The articles of incorporation, or bylaws of each Community Development Corporation, shall provide for membership in the corporation by persons who are residents of the area; business owners or operators in the area; service group representatives, and other representatives of organizations in the geographic area which the Community Development Corporation represents.

5300.4 The articles of incorporation shall require a Board of Directors broadly representative of the community being served.

5300.5 The Board of Directors shall include but not be limited to individuals that possess development skills and experiences.

5300.6 The Community Development Corporation shall comply with all applicable federal and local statutes and regulations, including but not limited to, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and related acts.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §10 of the District of Columbia Economic Development Finance Corporation Act of 1985, D.C. Law 5-89, D.C. Code §1-2219, and Mayor's Order 84-169, 31 DCR 5133 (October 12, 1984).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 1547 (March 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5301** CRITERIA FOR CDCS SEEKING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b5301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5301}

5301.1 The Community Development Corporation shall document a neighborhood development strategy to include achievable project specific development opportunities appropriate to the area, consistent with the overall planning efforts of the District of Columbia, (as evidenced by the Comprehensive Plan), and the needs of the community to be represented.

5301.2 The Community Development Corporation shall demonstrate an organizational, management and development capacity to carry out its neighborhood development strategy.

5101.3 The Community Development Corporation shall demonstrate an ongoing relationship with the financial community and an ability to attract other necessary development team members.

5301.4 A Community Development Corporation shall sponsor a project by submitting a written statement in support of the project. The statement shall be submitted to the Economic Development Finance Corporation at the same time the application for the project is submitted.

5301.5 Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as prohibiting a for-profit subsidiary corporation of a Community Development Corporation from applying to the Economic Development Finance Corporation for funding of a project to be conducted by the subsidiary corporation.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 1547 (March 6, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5399** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5399 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5399}

5399.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Community Development Corporation - a community-based and community-controlled nonprofit corporation organized under chapter 5 of Title 29 of the D.C. Code, to carry out certain public purposes and with articles of incorporation and bylaws that are consistent with rules and regulations issued by the Mayor pursuant to D.C. Code §1-2219 (Supp. 1985).

Economic Development Finance Corporation - a quasi-public, nonprofit corporation organized for the purpose of stimulating economic development, business development, and job creation by assisting in the implementation of development projects within the District of Columbia and by providing financial and technical assistance to eligible businesses.

Eligible projects - any commercial, industrial, real estate, business, or other economic development activity designed to reduce conditions of blight, economic depression, unemployment of widespread reliance on public assistance, or which otherwise would contribute to the revitalization and improvement of economic conditions within the District.

Neighborhood development strategy - a program of concentrated community development activities including a comprehensive strategy for stabilizing and upgrading the area.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 1547, 1548 (March 6, 1987).*

### **10-B55** BUSINESS INCUBATOR FACILITY PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 5500** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b5500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5500}

5500.1 The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures to do the following:

(a) Facilitate the establishment of one (1) or more business incubator facilities in the District of Columbia by offering the use of city-owned property, credit support for financing businesses in the incubator, and other incentives to ensure that tenant business costs for space and services are kept at a minimum; and

(b) Design business incubator facilities to assist companies through the conceptual, start-up, and early growth stages of their businesses. The business incubator facility is not intended to serve merely as inexpensive quarters for established businesses.

5500.2 Administration of the Program shall be the responsibility of OBED pursuant to Mayor's Order 86-34.

5500.3 The OBED may, at its discretion, contract with a qualified contractor for the operations of a facility, consistent with this chapter. The selection of a contractor is subject to review by Committee on Housing and Economic Development (HED).

5500.4 The OBED may establish other administrative procedures it deems necessary to ensure effective administration of the Program, consistent with this chapter.

5500.5 The Advisory Board, established in §12 of the Act shall advise the Mayor and Council on ways in which the District can best support the incubator development and facilitate the delivery of services and resources to tenant businesses.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §14 of the Business Incubator Facilitation Act of 1985, D.C. Law 6-71, D.C. Code §1-2243 (1981); Mayor's Order 86-34, 33 DCR 1819 (March 21, 1986).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159 (May 15, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5501** INCUBATOR FACILITY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA {#sec-10-b5501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5501}

5501.1 The incubator facility shall house the types of businesses that are compatible and efficient in the use of facilities' services.

5501.2 To the extent possible, the incubator facility shall be geographically located, in areas conducive to the activities being performed by the businesses selected for occupancy and with the least prohibitive zoning to allow for a range of uses.

5501.3 Any business permitted to be housed in the incubator facility leased space shall meet the following requirements:

(a) Be based in the District of Columbia and the District is its principal place of business; and

(b) Be an independent business and not a subsidiary of another business.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3160 (May 15, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5502** TENANT ADMISSION CRITERIA {#sec-10-b5502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5502}

5502.1 Tenant admission into an incubator facility shall be by application on a form to be provided by OBED.

5502.2 In reviewing applications for eligibility, OBED shall place priority, but not limit its review to such factors as size, age and financial status of the business.

5502.3 The OBED may consider eligible businesses for admission into the incubator facility; Provided, that the following conditions are met:

(a) The business in operation or ready to start operations;

(b) A business plan which details the financial, marketing and operating aspects of the business and which shows the financial viability of the business has been submitted; and

5502.4 The OBED may rank eligible businesses for incubator space by the type and composition of businesses in each incubator facility.

5502.5 The OBED shall give priority for admission of a business as a tenant in an incubator facility to businesses that meet the following requirements:

(a) Make major contributions to job creation efforts for District residents. Examples of this priority include businesses such as light industrial, research and development, and business service companies; and

(b) Are owned by persons who are residents of the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3160 (May 15, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5503** FACILITY COVENANTS {#sec-10-b5503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5503}

5503.1 Prior to entering into a lease agreement, prospective tenants of an incubator facility shall do the following:

(a) Execute a First Source Employment agreement pursuant to the D.C. Code §1-1163 et seq. (1981); and

(b) Contract with the District to maintain its principal place of business within the District for a minimum of ten (10) years following its move from the business incubator.

5503.2 Each lease shall contain at a minimum the following provisions:

(a) Leasehold improvements which are to be made by the tenant and those to be made by the management of the facility;

(b) Tenant responsibility for the cost of office renovations and maintenance;

(d) Provisions regarding the goods and services that are to be provided by the targeted business, including the rate and form of compensation to be received for goods and services provided to the internal tenant businesses.

5503.3 A business shall not remain a tenant at an incubator facility for more than five (5) years.

5503.4 Periodic evaluations of tenant businesses shall be made to assess the tenant's level of development and determine whether the business should graduate or remain in the incubator facility.

5503.5 The assessment shall be based upon the following factors;

(a) Actual and projected cash flows;

(b) Return on investments; and

5503.6 The assessment outlined in §5503.5 shall be in the sole discretion of OBED.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3161 (May 15. 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5504** FACILITY SERVICES {#sec-10-b5504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5504}

5504.1 Selected basic services are included in the lease agreement for each tenant and shall include the following:

(a) Space design and lay-out plans;

(b) Information center;

(d) Janitorial;

(e) Building security;

(f) Receptionist;

(g) Building directory; and

(h) Building management.

5504.2 Services provided in the facility other than those contained in §5504.1 or in the lease shall be paid for on an as-used basis.

5504.3 The incubator facility shall not duplicate services that are available elsewhere; existing management support and service programs in the District, including financial services, shall be utilized.

5504.4 Businesses selected for occupancy in the facility shall, to the greatest extent possible, complement each other with services that may be compatible with other tenant businesses.

5504.5 Each incubator facility shall target tenant businesses that provide goods and services that are in demand by its other tenants.

5504.6 Except under extraordinary circumstances, businesses proposing services that are already being provided by tenant businesses shall not be accepted into the facility.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3162 (May 15, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5505** REPORTING REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b5505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5505}

5505.1 The OBED shall prepare annually a report for HED which shall describe the operations of each business incubator; including, but not limited to, a discussion of the following:

(a) The business operation of each tenant;

(b) The impact of the product or service provided to the public and the job training opportunities of each tenant to the economic development objectives of the District for which the tenant business was selected;

(c) The employment benefits and revenues generated to the District as a result of the establishment of the business incubator;

(d) The utilization of support services;

(e) Recurrent problems experienced in the management of the business incubator, as well as the recommended corrective action;

(f) Financial or technical assistance provided to a tenant business by the public or private sector;

(g) The establishment and implementation of business incubator policies, rules, and regulations; and

(h) Legislative initiatives which will increase the productivity, viability, and economic benefits of business tenants or a business incubator facility.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3163 (May 15, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5599** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5599 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5599}

5599.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Advisory Board - the Business Incubator Advisory Board.

Council - the Council of the District of Columbia.

District - the District of Columbia.

HED - the Council Committee on Housing and Economic Development.

Incubator facility - a building selected by the District for the purposes of this chapter, that provides low-cost space and services to eligible tenant businesses.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

OBED - the Office of Business and Economic Development.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 3159, 3164 (May 15, 1987).*

### **10-B57** BUSINESS PURCHASE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 5700** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b5700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5700}

5700.1 The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures to provide loans to District of Columbia residents for the following purposes:

(a) The acquisition and expansion of District of Columbia businesses;

(b) The acquisition of real property in the District of Columbia for the formation, as well as development of small businesses; and

(c) The creation of training, employment, and ownership opportunities for residents, including but not limited to, low and moderate income residents in the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §7(a) of the Economic Development Finance Corporation Act of 1984, D.C. Law 5-89; as amended by §2 of the Fiscal Year 1986 Follow Through Act of 1985, D.C. Law 6-74, D.C. Code §1-2223(b) (1981).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5701** GENERAL CONDITIONS {#sec-10-b5701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5701}

5701.1 The District of Columbia Economic Development Finance Corporation shall oversee the Business Purchase Assistance Program.

5701.2 Loan applications shall be analyzed and recommendations made by the Financial Services Division of the Office of Business and Economic Development to the Economic Development Finance Corporation Board.

5701.3 Decisions on loan applications shall be made by the Business Purchase Assistance Program Committee of the Economic Development Finance Corporation Board at a properly called meeting.

5701.4 No loans shall be made to applicants who, having received any loan made or granted by the District, or any subdivision, agency, instrumentality, or program, are not in good standing and in default under any material provision.

5701.5 No applicant, shall be considered who owes delinquent taxes to the District government and is unable to attest that tax obligations on currently operated or previously operated businesses have been met.

5701.6 The Business Purchase Assistance Program financing shall not be used to refinance loans obtained under other District government financial programs, but may be used in conjunction with those programs, as applicable.

5701.7 Borrowers shall be required to execute a First Source Employment Agreement with the Department of Employment Services pursuant to Mayor's Order 83-265, Employment Agreement Goals and Objectives for all D.C. Projects.

5701.8 The Economic Development Finance Corporation Board may, for good cause shown, vary the application of the rules of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5702** DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL STRIPS {#sec-10-b5702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5702}

5702.1 The following commercial areas shall be eligible for business or real property acquisition loans under the Business Purchase Assistance Program:

(a) Eighteenth Street, N.W. from Florida Avenue to Columbia Road, N.W.; and Columbia Road, N.W. from Belmont Street to Mozart Place (Ward 1);

(b) Georgia Avenue from Florida Avenue, N.W. to Eastern Avenue (Wards 1 and 4);

(c) Fourteenth Street from M Street, N.W. to Randolph Street, N.W., and 14th Street from Allison Street, N.W. to Decatur Street, N.W. ( Wards 1 and 4);

(d) U Street from Seventh Street, N.W. to 15th Street, N.E. (Wards 2 and 6);

(e) H Street from Third Street, N.E. to 15th Street, N.E. (Wards 2 and 6);

(f) Kennedy Street from Second Street, N.W. to Georgia Avenue, N.W. (Wards 1 and 2);

(g) Seventh Street from New York Avenue, N.W. to Florida Avenue, N.W. (Wards 1 and 2);

(h) Twelfth Street, N.E. from Michigan Avenue to Monroe Street, N.E. (Ward 5);

(i) Bladensburg Road from H Street, N.E. to Mt. Olivet Road, N.E. (Ward 5);

(j) Rhode Island Avenue from Fourth Street, N.E. to South Dakota Avenue, N.E. (Ward 5);

(k) Benning Road from Maryland Avenue, N.E. to Oklahoma Avenue, N.E. (Wards 5 and 6); and

(l) All commercial areas of Wards 6 (East of the River), 7 and 8.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680, 2681 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5703** GENERAL LOAN REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b5703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5703}

5703.1 The term of any loan shall not exceed twenty (20) years.

5703.2 Interest rates on loans shall be set on a project-by-project basis and shall take into consideration the projected cash flow of the business during the term of the loan and the prevailing interest rate at the time of the loan.

5703.3 Collateral shall be required in an amount to assure reasonable coverage with respect to the amount and duration of the loan. This collateral may be taken in any of the following forms:

(a) A lien on real estate;

(b) A lien on business or personal assets, or receivables;

(d) Any combination of paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of this subsection, or in such form as the Board deems appropriate.

5703.4 Each applicant shall show the ability to repay the loan. The recipient's ability to generate the cash flow necessary to service the proposed debt shall receive greater emphasis than the required collateral coverage in the decision to finance a project.

5703.5 The limit for each loan shall be established at a maximum of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) per business or eighty percent (80%) of the project cost, whichever is lower.

5703.6 Loans shall be used for the purpose of acquiring a business or real property on which a business can be established, and the business acquired or the new business being established shall be in operation after the operator has received a loan.

5703.7 No loan commitment shall be made until a firm timetable for when the business becomes operational has been established.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680, 2682 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5704** CRITERIA FOR BUSINESS ACQUISITION AND EXPANSION LOANS {#sec-10-b5704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5704}

5704.1 Applications shall be judged on the following factors:

(a) The suitability of the proposed business to the neighborhood;

(b) Projected ability to meet its obligations and continue as an on-going concern;

(d) The amount of equity invested in the business; and

(e) The level of management experience in the specific line of the proposed business.

5704.2 The proposed business use shall comply with the Zoning Regulations, any applicable Urban Renewal Plan, or the Comprehensive Plan, of which the one exercising the most restrictive use controls shall govern.

5704.3 Loans shall be used for the following:

(a) Small and large machinery and equipment;

(b) Inventory;

(d) Working capital; and

(e) In limited cases, refinancing.

5704.4 Refinancing shall be considered only in those instances where the proceeds will purchase all outstanding liens against the property and facilitates clear title for the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680, 2683 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5705** CRITERIA FOR REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION LOANS {#sec-10-b5705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5705}

5705.1 The proposed commercial use shall be in compliance with the Zoning Regulations, any applicable Urban Renewal Plan, or the Comprehensive Plan, of which the one exercising the most restrictive use controls shall govern.

5705.2 Where more than one application is submitted for an individual building, each application shall be evaluated with respect to the following factors:

(a) Proposed retail/service use;

(b) Compatibility with existing retail/service uses within the business district;

(d) Past business experience of applicant.

5705.3 A lottery method shall be used to select the Real Property Acquisition Loan recipient if there are two (2) or more proposals of equal merit per available property. Those applicants not selected shall be afforded an opportunity to obtain a property for a business elsewhere.

5705.4 A Real Property Acquisition Loan recipient shall have three (3) months in which to arrange satisfactory financing after being notified of selection unless extended by the Board for good cause shown.

5705.5 Only one (1) building shall be conveyed to each potential Real Property Acquisition Loan recipient.

5705.6 No funds shall be distributed hereunder until a timetable has been approved by the Board to bring the property up to D.C. Code requirements.

5705.7 The total of the District's loans on any real property acquired in connection with a project shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the appraised value of the property to be purchased and/or renovated.

5705.8 The District's loan may be subordinated to any private lender's or private investor's loan(s), but the combined amount of the District's loan(s), and any private lender's or investor's loan(s), shall not exceed ninety percent (90%) of the appraised value of the property.

5705.9 The Real Property Acquisition Loan recipient shall be the operator of the business and shall occupy or manage (as a branch operation) the business that is established with the Real Property Acquisition funds for a minimum of five (5) years from the date of initial receipt of Real Property Acquisition funds.

5705.10 After the expiration of the five (5) year period, the property or business may be sold privately. If the Real Property Acquisition recipient sells the property or business prior to the expiration of the five (5) year period, and a net profit is realized from the sale, the District shall share in the net profits realized as follows:

YEAR

DISTRICT SHARE OF PROFITS

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

5705.11 Loan documents for a Real Property Acquisition Loan shall provide that the Economic Development Finance Corporation shall have the right to cure a default on the loan within the initial five (5) period of the loan and shall have the rights as specified.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680, 2684 (April 24, 1987).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5799** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5799 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5799}

5799.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Board - the Board of Directors of the District of Columbia Economic Development Finance Corporation.

Business acquisition and expansion loan - a loan made to a borrower to purchase, establish, or expand a business in the District of Columbia and to facilitate the revitalization of commercial corridors in designated neighborhoods.

Economic Development Finance Corporation - a quasi-public, nonprofit corporation organization for the purpose of stimulating economic development, business development, and job creation by assisting in the implementation of development projects within the District of Columbia and by providing financial and technical assistance to eligible businesses.

Eligible business - any for profit corporation, partnership or proprietorship; and owner operated business that is currently located or about to be located in the District of Columbia on a designated neighborhood commercial strip.

Ineligible business - a business which is engaged in live entertainment and dancing, sexually oriented products or services, drug paraphernalia sales, lending, gambling brokering, real estate development, political consultants, lobbyists, publishing companies, and all non-profit corporations excluding Community Development Corporations and subsidiaries.

Loan documents - the Deed of Trust, Deed of Trust Note, Loan and Security Agreement, Financing Statement, or any other document required by the Board to close the loan provided in this chapter.

Office of Business and Economic Development - an office established by D.C. Law 1-97 within the Executive Office of the Mayor to serve as a focal point for economic development functions of the District.

Real property acquisition loan - a loan made to a business operator to acquire real property in a designated area for a business which is not an ineligible business.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 34 DCR 2680, 2685 (April 24, 1987).*

### **10-B58** SECURITY DEPOSIT AND AFFORDABLE FACILITIES ASSISTANCE FOR QUALIFIED HIGH TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES

##### **10-B DCMR § 5800** SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b5800 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5800}

5800.1 A Qualified High Technology Company may qualify for security deposit assistance to meet a security deposit required for a lease of real property to be used in the operations of that Qualified High Technology Company.

5800.2 In order to qualify for security deposit assistance, a Qualified High Technology Company must demonstrate that it has, at the time of the filing of its application for security deposit assistance, at least:

(a) $500,000 in retained earnings;

(b) $500,000 in accounts receivables (with a 10% allowance for credit loss);

(d) $500,000 in liquid assets.

5800.3 In lieu of the financial thresholds enumerated in section 5800.2, the Mayor may consider other evidence of financial resources available to the Qualified High Technology Company in determining whether to grant the requested security deposit assistance.

5800.4 In order to qualify for security deposit assistance under this section, the Qualified High Technology Company must meet the requirements established in sections 5800.2 or 5800.3, unless the Mayor has waived the requirements.

5800.5 The Mayor may waive any of the requirements set forth in these regulations pursuant to a written determination by the Mayor that the waiver:

(a) Does not conflict with the provisions of the New E-Conomy Transformation Act of 2000 (Act), effective April 3, 2001 (D.C. Law 13-256; D.C. Official Code sec. 47-1817.1 et seq.); and

(b) Furthers the purposes of the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5801** RESTRICTIONS ON SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE {#sec-10-b5801 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5801}

5801.1 No security deposit assistance shall be provided to the applicant if:

(a) Other financial assistance meeting the requirements of the applicant is available on reasonable terms from private sources; or

(b) Other financial assistance meeting the requirements of the applicant is available on reasonable terms from federal or District of Columbia government sources.

5801.2 No security deposit assistance shall be provided to the applicant if the Mayor determines that there exists a reasonable expectation that the Qualified High Technology Company will not perform the covenants and conditions of the lease or any other pertinent agreement.

5801.3 No security deposit assistance may be provided for a lease the term of which is less than 6 months.

5801.4 The maximum security deposit assistance that may be provided to any one applicant shall be limited to the least of:

(a) 10 percent of the retained earnings of the applicant;

(b) 50% of the amount of the security deposit; or

5801.5 Any security deposit assistance granted to an applicant must be repaid to the District by or on behalf of the grantee no later than two years after the date the security deposit assistance is paid by the District to the recipient designated by the applicant.

5801.6 The agreement to repay any security deposit assistance provided shall require that:

(a) Any amounts released from the security deposit shall first be used to repay the funds advanced by the District;

(b) The Qualified High Technology Company shall not receive any portion of the security deposit until the funds advanced by the District have been repaid in full;

(c) The funds advanced by the District be repaid in no more than two years following the date on which the funding was approved;

(d) Any claims or interests in the security deposit are subordinated to that of the District of Columbia government; and

(e) There shall have been no material change in the applicant's financial condition from the information provided in the application.

5801.7 The Mayor may enter into any other agreements deemed necessary by the Mayor to secure repayment of any security deposit assistance provided under these regulations, including, but not limited to, agreements described in section 5809.

5801.8 No Qualified High Technology Company may receive the security deposit assistance described in this section more than once.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5802** APPLICATION CONTENT {#sec-10-b5802 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5802}

5802.1 In order to qualify for security deposit assistance, a Qualified High Technology Company must submit an application on forms prescribed by the Mayor.

5802.2 The application must be accompanied by the following information about the applicant and the proposed lease transaction:

(a) An original notarized affidavit, on a form prescribed by the Office of Tax and Revenue, certifying in good faith that the applicant is a Qualified High Technology Company;

(b) A copy of the organizing documents of the Qualified High Technology Company;

(d) The proposed lease and all addenda;

(e) A current balance sheet for the applicant;

(f) A cash flow projection for the applicant covering the current and next three fiscal years of operation;

(g) An income statement for the applicant;

(h) A proposed statement of commitments that will be undertaken by the applicant, in good faith, in exchange for any assistance granted; and

(i) Such other information as the Mayor deems appropriate.

5802.3 The applicant shall submit 3 copies of the application and attachments.

5802.4 An application fee in an amount to be determined by the Mayor shall accompany the application.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5803** APPLICATION PROCEDURE {#sec-10-b5803 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5803}

5803.1 The application and all supporting materials shall be filed with the Mayor.

5803.2 If an Advisory Panel is established in accordance with section 5811, the Mayor shall transmit a copy of the application and all attachments to the Advisory Panel for review and a recommendation of approval or disapproval by the Mayor.

5803.3 The Mayor shall render a decision on an application and shall notify the applicant of the decision and the reasons therefor within 45 days after the date on which the application was filed.

5803.4 An applicant whose application for security deposit assistance has been denied may file a new application no earlier than 90 days after the applicant's receipt of the notice of disapproval.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5804** EXPIRATION OF SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE; EXTENSION {#sec-10-b5804 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5804}

5804.1 If security deposit assistance is approved and the applicant fails to utilize the security deposit assistance within 90 days after the applicant's receipt of notification of approval, the approval shall expire.

5804.2 Prior to the expiration of the 90-day period, an applicant may file an application for extension of the approval, on a form prescribed by the Mayor. The application for extension shall:

(a) State the reason for requesting an extension;

(b) Include a statement from the applicant, under oath, that there has been no material change in the applicant's financial condition or, if a material change has occurred, describe the change;

(c) Include a statement by the applicant, under oath, that there has been no material change in the terms of the proposed lease or, if a material change has occurred, describe the change; and

(d) If the application for extension concerns a lease other than the lease contained in the application, include a copy of the new lease.

5804.3 The Mayor may grant an extension of the funding approval for a period of up to 60 days.

5804.4 The decision whether to grant or deny a request for extension is in the sole discretion of the Mayor.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5805** COMMITMENTS FOR SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE OR BENEFITS {#sec-10-b5805 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5805}

5805.1 In order to satisfy the requirement that certain commitments be made by the applicant as a condition to receiving security deposit assistance, the applicant shall propose to engage in one or any combination of the following activities:

(a) Offering training courses to District of Columbia Public School teachers and administrators for the more efficient use of technology in the education process;

(b) Offering internships to District of Columbia Public School students throughout the calendar year;

(d) Offering technical support or expertise, including networking and maintaining computer systems and related activities as determined by the Mayor to further the purposes of the Act; or

(e) Any other activity or assistance deemed appropriate or acceptable by the Mayor.

5805.2 The statement of commitments shall serve as the basis for an agreement between the Mayor and the applicant that shall include, but not be limited to, the following terms:

(a) The level and extent of the security deposit assistance or other benefit to be provided to the applicant;

(b) The specific activities to be engaged in by the applicant in exchange for the security deposit assistance or other benefit;

(d) A description of the adverse action that may be taken against the applicant for the applicant's failure to conduct the activities agreed to, which may include:

(1) A repayment by the applicant of any security deposit assistance provided (with interest);

(2) The disallowance of any credit or other benefit claimed by the Qualified High Technology Company under the Act; or

(3) Any other action authorized by law.

5805.3 If the Mayor determines that an applicant has failed to engage in the activities agreed upon in accordance with this section, prior to taking any adverse action against the applicant, the Mayor shall notify the applicant of the deficiency. The applicant shall cure the deficiency within 30 days from the date of the notice, or within a longer period of time following the notice, as determined by the Mayor in writing. If the applicant fails to cure the deficiency within the allotted time period, the Mayor may take appropriate adverse action against the applicant in accordance with this section.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5806** AFFORDABLE FACILITIES LEASE PROGRAM {#sec-10-b5806 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5806}

5806.1 The Mayor may lease real property (or sublease real property which is the subject of a master lease) within the District of Columbia to a Qualified High Technology Company or its sponsor for use in the operation of the Qualified High Technology Company.

5806.2 The Mayor may lease or sublease real property to Qualified High Technology Companies at reasonable below-market rates, as determined by the Mayor.

5806.3 The Mayor may sublease the premises under a master lease for an amount that is less than the rental rate under the master lease.

5806.4 Under no circumstances may the Mayor lease the premises under a master lease for an amount in excess of the rental rate under the master lease.

5806.5 No sublease shall be for a term that is less than 12 months or more than 36 months, including any option to extend the sublease.

5806.6 The application for a lease or sublease shall conform to the requirements of section 5802 of these regulations, except that, in lieu of a proposed lease, the applicant shall submit a statement describing the amount of space desired and the desired lease term.

5806.7 An application for a lease or sublease shall be considered in accordance with the procedure established in section 5803 of these regulations.

5806.8 A Qualified High Technology Company that enters into a lease or sublease pursuant to this section shall be required to make the commitments described in section 5805 of these regulations.

5806.9 No application for a lease or sublease shall be granted if the Mayor determines that there exists a reasonable expectation that the Qualified High Technology Company will not perform the covenants and conditions of the lease, sublease, or any other pertinent agreement.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5807** DISTRICT-OWNED FACILITIES {#sec-10-b5807 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5807}

5807.1 In the report required by section 303 of the Act, the Mayor shall describe any properties owned or leased by the District of Columbia government and the District of Columbia Public School System that shall be made available for lease or sublease to Qualified High Technology Companies.

5807.2 The report shall state, at a minimum:

(a) The address or location of the property, the amount of space available for lease or sublease;

(b) Whether the property is the subject of a Request for Proposals ("RFP"); and

(c) Contact information for the government official responsible for reviewing RFPs or otherwise negotiating a lease on the property.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5808** MINIMUM QUALIFYING REQUIREMENTS FOR LEASE OR SUBLEASE {#sec-10-b5808 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5808}

5808.1 In order to qualify for a lease or sublease, the applicant must demonstrate that it is unable to secure financing for the facility, or a comparable facility, on prevailing commercial terms.

5808.2 The provisions of sections 5800.2 through 5800.5 of these regulations shall apply to any Qualified High Technology Company seeking to lease or sublease space under the Affordable Facilities Lease Program described in section 5806 of these regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5809** SECURITY FOR OBLIGATIONS {#sec-10-b5809 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5809}

5809.1 The Mayor shall make reasonable provisions to ensure repayment of any security deposit assistance provided to, or the payment of any obligations undertaken by, a Qualified High Technology Company pursuant to the Act or these regulations.

5809.2 The Mayor may accept as security for any security deposit assistance or obligation:

(a) Warrants;

(b) Options;

(d) Preferred shares;

(e) Convertible debt; or

(f) Any combination of the foregoing.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5810** SPONSORS OF QUALIFIED HIGH TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES {#sec-10-b5810 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5810}

5810.1 The following entities may serve as the sponsor of a Qualified High Technology Company:

(a) A commercial real estate broker;

(b) A venture capitalist;

(d) A technology company;

(e) A commercial bank;

(f) An investment banker;

(g) A for-profit individual or entity;

(h) A nonprofit entity; or

(i) A government-owned or sponsored entity.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5811** ADVISORY PANEL {#sec-10-b5811 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5811}

5811.1 The Mayor may establish an Advisory Panel ("Panel") to:

(a) Review applications for assistance under the Security Deposit Assistance Program and the Affordable Facilities Lease Program and make a recommendation to the Mayor on whether an application should be approved or disapproved; and

(b) Provide recommendations to the Mayor and appropriate agencies of the District of Columbia government on improvements to the Security Deposit Assistance Program and the Affordable Facilities Lease Program that may be implemented to ensure that these programs achieve the purposes of the Act.

5811.2 The panel shall:

(a) Develop internal review and underwriting criteria, consistent with the Act and these regulations, to be used in evaluating applications;

(b) Develop standards for determining the nature and extent of commitments to be undertaken by applicants in exchange for any assistance provided; and

(c) Serve as a clearinghouse for information on the Security Deposit Assistance Program and Affordable Facilities Lease Program.

5811.3 Within 30 days after receipt of an application, the Panel shall review the application and make a recommendation to the Mayor on whether the application should be approved or disapproved.

5811.4 The Panel shall append to the recommendation a statement describing the justification for the recommendation.

5811.5 Recommendations of approval shall be accompanied by a proposed statement of commitments to be undertaken by the applicant in exchange for the assistance provided.

5811.6 The Panel may take such other action as it deems appropriate to assist the Mayor and appropriate agencies of the District of Columbia government in meeting the purposes of the Act.

5811.7 The Panel shall be comprised of individuals appointed by the Mayor.

5811.8 A majority of Panel members shall be District of Columbia residents.

5811.9 The following areas of expertise shall be represented on the panel:

(a) Banking and lending;

(b) Real estate transactions;

(d) High technology industry; and

(e) The practice of law.

5811.10 Members of the Panel shall serve in their capacity at the pleasure of the Mayor.

5811.11 Members of the Panel shall serve for a term of 3 years, except that, of the members first appointed to the Panel, one-third (1/3) shall be appointed for three year terms, one-third (1/3) shall be appointed for two year terms; and one-third (1/3) shall be appointed for a one year term. The date the first Panel members are installed shall become the anniversary date for all subsequent appointments.

5811.12 Panel members shall serve without compensation.

5811.13 Expenses of the Panel, when authorized in advance by the Mayor, shall become obligations against funds designated for that purpose.

5811.14 The Panel may adopt internal rules to govern its operation and decision-making. The rules shall be published in accordance with the District of Columbia Administrative Procedures Act.

5811.15 The Mayor shall provide administrative and staff support for the Panel. Other District of Columbia departments and agencies shall provide assistance to the Panel upon request.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 49 DCR 7502(August 2, 2002).*

### **10-B59** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 5900** GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION {#sec-10-b5900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5900}

The Tax Abatements for New Residential Development Program is intended to provide tax abatements as incentives for the production of new housing downtown and for the production of affordable, mixed-income housing in high-cost areas of the District of Columbia. The tax abatements are targeted to three areas of eligibility as defined below. In general, these three areas are the downtown area (including the area between New Hampshire Avenue on the west and Delaware Avenue on the east), the NoMa area, and the remainder of the District of Columbia where rents are projected to be greater than 120% of fair market rents.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5901** PURPOSES {#sec-10-b5901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5901}

The purpose of these regulations is to implement Title VI of the Housing Act of 2002, effective April 19, 2002 (D.C. Law 14-144; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-857.01 et seq.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5902** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b5902 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5902}

5902.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

"Act" means the Housing Act of 2002, effective April 19, 2002 (D.C. Law 14-144; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-857.01 et seq.).

"Affordable" means the calculation of rent levels made in accordance with the requirements of section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code. The methodology to determine affordable unit rent levels shall be calculated from annual HUD median income data by unit size and rent levels for each unit type (e.g., efficiencies, one bedrooms, two bedrooms) and shall be independent of the actual income or household size of the unit occupant. At the time of initial approval, a unit is affordable if the monthly rent is not more than 35% and not less than 20% of the occupant's and co-signer's monthly income.

"Area median income" means:

(a) For a household of four (4) persons, the area median income for a household of four (4) persons in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by HUD as a direct calculation without taking into account any adjustments made by HUD for the programs it administers;

(b) For a household of three (3) persons, 90% of the area median income for a household of four (4) persons;

(d) For a household of one (1) person, 70% of the area median income for a household of four (4) persons; and

(e) For a household of more than four (4) persons, the area median income for a household of four (4) persons, increased by 10% of the area median income for a family of four (4) persons for each household member exceeding four (4) persons (e.g. the area median income for a household of six (6) shall be 120% of the income of the area median income for a family of four (4)).

"Caps" means upward limits or ceilings which cannot be exceeded, except by authorization of additional budgetary authority by the Council of the District of Columbia.

"Certificate of occupancy" means the certificate of occupancy which permits the use of all residential areas of the building.

"Certified by the project architect" means the architect has affixed his or her stamp to the document.

"Concrete construction" means building construction in which the principal material used in the construction of the building frame and floorplates is concrete. Concrete construction shall include projects in which at least fifty (50%) percent of the project is new concrete construction or the project is a substantial renovation of a concrete structure.

"DCRA" means the Director of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs or designee.

"District" means the government of the District of Columbia.

"DMED" means the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development or designee.

"Eligible Area # 1" means:

(a) Real property within or abutting a street in the area known as Downtown, the original commercial area between the Capitol and the White House bounded generally by North Capitol Street on the east, Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. on the south, 15th Street, N.W. on the west and Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. on the north, and as designated on the District of Columbia Generalized Land Use Policies Map; and

(b) Real property with a street frontage in the area bounded by and including New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. to the west, Delaware Avenue, N.E. to the east, Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. to the south, and Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. and N.E. to the north, that is zoned C-4, C-5, or SP-1.

"Eligible Area # 2" means Housing Priority Area A, as described in subsection 1706.8 of Title 11 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (11 DCMR § 1706.8).

"Eligible Area # 3" means:

(a) Census tracts where the average rent for one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartments exceeds the fair market rent, as established by HUD for the purposes of the Section 8 housing program, by 20% or more, as a direct calculation without taking into account any adjustments made by HUD for the programs it administers; and

(b) Geographic areas in which it is unlikely that new or rehabilitated housing with rents of less than 120% of the fair market rent will be produced, as determined by DMED after an analysis of the economic conditions and development pressures in the geographic area; provided, that after such analysis DMED shall publish a list of such geographic areas in the D.C. Register.

"Eligible real property" means real property that:

(a) Is classified, in whole or in part, as Class 1 or Class 2 property under D.C. Official Code § 47-813(c-3), or would be so classified but for the operation of § 47-813(c-3)(4);

(b) Is improved by new structures or undergoes rehabilitation, as the term "rehabilitation" is defined in this chapter; and

"Extremely low-income household" means a household consisting of one (1) or more persons with a household income equal to 30% or less of the area median income, as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by HUD as a direct calculation without taking into account any adjustments made by HUD for the programs it administers.

"Final building permit" means the final building permit issued to the owner for the full scope of the project including mechanical, electrical, plumbing and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems and superstructure; provided, that permits for the installation of electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems shall be allowed to follow after the final building permit is issued to the owner; in addition, revision permits shall be allowed to address customary deviations due to field and construction conditions.

"First level of concrete has been laid" means the foundation to grade permit has been issued, the pouring of concrete for the floor of the lowest level of the structure to be constructed (i.e., cellar, basement, sub-cellar, sub-basement, or similar level) has commenced and the concrete work testing reports have been submitted to DMED.

"Household income" means gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal services of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, including salaries, wages, and compensation paid by the United States to its officers and employees, or income derived from any trade or business or sales or dealings in property whether real or personal, including capital assets as defined in D.C. Official Code § 47-1801 et seq. growing out of the ownership or sale of or interest in such property; income from rent, royalties, interest, dividends, securities, or transactions of any trade or business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever, including but not limited to cash distributions from a business or investment entity in which the claimant has an interest, alimony, and separate maintenance payments (including amounts received under separate maintenance agreements), strike benefits, cash public assistance and relief (not including relief or credit granted under D.C. Official Code § 47-1806.06), sick pay, workmen's compensation, proceeds of life insurance policies, the gross amount of any pension or annuity (including railroad retirement benefits, veterans' disability pensions, or payment received under the federal Social Security Act), state or District of Columbia unemployment compensation laws, and nontaxable interest received from the United States, a state or any agency or instrumentality thereof. The word "income" does not include gifts from nongovernmental sources, food stamps, or food or other relief in kind supplied by a governmental agency.

"HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

"Low-income household" means a household consisting of one (1) or more individuals with a household income equal to, or less than, 80% of the area median income and greater than 50% of the area median income, as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by HUD as a direct calculation without taking into account any adjustments made by HUD for the programs it administers.

"Occupied" means units that are physically occupied by or made available to low-income, very-low income, or extremely low-income households as follows:

(i) for the first thirty (30) days, the owner shall offer the unit to a qualified tenant for the purpose of finding a qualified household and may market the unit to a non-profit housing organization for the purpose of assisting in finding a qualified household;

(ii) if the unit is not leased after the first thirty (30) days, then for the next thirty-five (35) days, the owner may offer the unit to a qualified household whose income is 5% greater than the applicable percentage of median income; and

(iii) if the unit is not leased after the first sixty (65) days, then the owner may thereafter offer the unit to a qualified household whose income is 10% greater than the applicable percentage of median income. In addition, for households whose lease is being renewed or extended after a twelve (12) month period of occupancy, "occupied" shall also mean a household whose household income does not exceed 140% of the applicable median income.

"OTR" means the Deputy Chief Financial Officer for Tax and Revenue or designee.

"Owner" means the property owner or person authorized by the owner.

"Rehabilitation" means the substantial renovation of a structure for housing for sale or rental which is not habitable for dwelling purposes because it is in substantial violation of the Housing Regulations (14 DCMR).

"Sixty (60) percent of area-median-income households" means such percentage (%) determined through a direct mathematical calculation based on the periodic calculation provided by HUD and shall not take into account any adjustments made by HUD for the purposes of the programs it administers.

"Total residential FAR square footage" means the total gross floor area of the project that is devoted to residential uses based on the plans and drawings submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. (The terms "gross floor area" and "residential uses" shall have the meanings set forth in 11 DCMR § 199.1 and 1799.1, respectively.)

"Units devoted to residential use" means (a) occupied units that were constructed, rehabilitated, or converted for residential use, or (b) unoccupied units that are in the process of being constructed, rehabilitated, converted, marketed, leased, or sold for residential use, in either event pursuant to a building permit for such residential use. The use of an eligible unit for a "home occupation," as such term is defined in the Zoning Regulations (DCMR, Title 11), shall not make a unit that is otherwise eligible ineligible. (The term "residential use" shall have the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR § 1799.1.)

"Very low-income household" means a household consisting of one (1) or more individuals with a household income less than 50% of the area median income, as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by HUD as a direct calculation without taking into account any adjustments made by HUD for the programs it administers.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5903** REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS {#sec-10-b5903 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5903}

5903.1 As a prerequisite to a property receiving a tax abatement, the provisions of section 5903 of this chapter must be satisfied. No request for certification will be accepted by DMED until the date this chapter becomes effective. The application process for a residential tax abatement is governed by the following subsections:

(a) 5903.2 and 5903.3, Excluded projects;

(b) 5903.4, Eligible area deadlines;

(d) 5903.6, Threshold requirement for Eligible Area # 2;

(e) 5903.7, Threshold requirements for Eligible Area # 3;

(f) 5903.8, Building permit or first level of concrete requirement;

(g) 5903.9, Certification request process if an owner has a certificate of occupancy;

(h) 5903.10, Certification request process if owner does not have a certificate of occupancy;

(i) 5903.11, Review process for certification requests and issuance of reservation letter;

(j) 5903.12, Compliance deadlines;

(k) 5903.13, Ordering of certification requests;

(l) 5903.14, Final requirements for certification following issuance of reservation letter;

(m) 5903.15, Certification of tax abatement;

(n) 5903.16, Condominiums; and

(o) 5903.17, Penalties.

5903.2 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be allowed for a project which is financed in any part by the Tax Increment Financing program set forth in subchapter IX of chapter 12 of Title 2 (D.C. Official Code § 2-1217.01 et seq.).

5903.3 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be allowed for a property which receives relief as the result of the Distressed Properties Program under D.C. Official Code § 42-3508.02.

5903.4 A tax abatement shall not be allowed unless the owner obtains the documents required by section 5903.8(a) or (b) of this chapter and submits to DMED the letter and other documents required by section 5903.9 of this chapter prior to the following deadlines:

(a) December 31, 2003, if the property is located in Eligible Area # 1;

(b) December 31, 2005, if the property is located in Eligible Area # 2; or

5903.5 A tax abatement in Eligible Area # 1 shall only be allowed if the final building permit was issued after April 30, 2001; or, if the final building permit was issued before April 30, 2001 and the last of the building's excavation and sheeting and shoring permits were issued after January 1, 2001.

5903.6 A tax abatement in Eligible Area # 2 shall only be allowed if the final building permit was issued after April 19, 2002.

5903.7 A tax abatement in Eligible Area # 3 shall only be allowed if the final building permit was issued after April 19, 2002 and the owner has received a letter from DMED stating that such tax abatement is needed to supplement, or is in lieu of, financial assistance granted by the D.C. Housing Finance Agency or the Department of Housing and Community Development.

5903.8 Prior to requesting certification of a tax abatement, the owner must receive:

(a) A final building permit; or

(b) Letters from the building architect and DMED certifying that the first level of concrete has been laid and the building has received building permits for both (1) the building's sheeting and shoring and excavation work and (2) the building's foundation to grade structural work. Certification by DMED that the first level of concrete has been laid shall be deemed to have been given upon the submission by the owner of the standard test reports to DCRA. DMED shall issue a certification letter regarding the first layer of concrete being laid within ten (10) business days following receipt of written request from the owner and receipt of the standard concrete tests reports by DCRA, if such reports are required by DCRA. However, if the owner has obtained a certificate of occupancy prior to requesting certification of a tax abatement, section 5903.8 shall not be applicable.

5903.9 If a certificate of occupancy has been issued to the owner, the owner shall submit a letter to DMED requesting a tax abatement certification that the property is eligible for a certain annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement as set forth in Title VI of the Housing Act of 2002. The letter shall include the information required in 5903.10(a) (i) -- (iv), (vi), (vii), (ix) and (x) and, if applicable (xi) -- (xiii), along with the documents in 5903.10(b) (iv) (A), (B) and (E), 5903.10(b) (v), and 5903.14.

5903.10 If a certificate of occupancy has not been issued to the owner, the owner shall submit a letter to DMED requesting a tax abatement certification that the property is eligible for a certain annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement as set forth in Title VI of the Housing Act of 2002.

(a) The owner's request letter shall include the following information about the project:

(i) the Eligible Area in which the project is located;

(ii) the address of the project;

(iii) the square and lot number;

(iv) the proposed number of residential units;

(v) a statement that the documents required by subsection 5903.8 of this chapter have been obtained and are attached;

(vi) the total residential FAR square footage;

(vii) the annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement requested;

(viii) confirmation of the use of concrete construction and underground parking;

(ix) a statement that no financing is being provided under the Tax Increment Financing program referenced in subsection 5903.2 of this chapter;

(x) a statement that no relief is being provided under the Distressed Properties program referenced in subsection 5903.3 of this chapter;

(xi) for projects eligible pursuant to sections 5906 through 5909, a statement that the units made available to a low-income household, sixty (60%) percent of area median income household, very low-income household or extremely low-income household are equivalent in size and quality to the other dwelling units in the development and reasonably similar to the variety of sizes of the dwelling units in the eligible property as a whole; and

(xii) for projects in Eligible Area # 3, a statement that the tax abatement is needed to supplement, or is in lieu of, financial assistance from the D.C. Housing Finance Agency or the Department of Housing and Community Development, and any additional information DMED may require.

(b) the owner's request letter shall include the following attachments:

(i) No more than three (3) dated photographs of the project taken within the ten (10) day period that proceeds the date of submission of the owner's request for tax abatement reservation to DMED; provided, that if the owner's request letter states that the first level of concrete has been laid, at least one (1) photograph must show the first level of concrete;

(ii) the documents specified under section 5903.8(a) or (b) of this chapter;

(iii) certification of the total residential FAR square footage certified by DMED or by the owner's architect;

(iv) the following items:

(A) an area map showing the applicable eligibility area boundary and the project by location arrow;

(B) scaled site plan with building footprint; provided, that the plans shall be submitted in both full size and 11" by 17" format;

(C) tabulation of the zoning data for the project prepared and certified by the project architect, which includes both allowed and used lot occupancy, height, FAR, yards, courts, parking and loading, and if any zoning variance is being requested;

(D) a calculation of the total residential FAR square footage; and

(E) a calculation of the annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement being requested, showing total residential FAR square footage and tax abatement per square foot of total residential FAR square footage; and

(v) if a project is in Eligible Area # 3, then a letter from DMED stating that such tax abatement is needed to supplement, or is in lieu of, financial assistance granted by the D.C. Housing Finance Agency or the Department of Housing and Community Development.

5903.11 Within ten (10) business days of receipt of the owner's request letter and documents specified in section 5903.9 or 5903.10 of this chapter, DMED shall:

(a) transmit a reservation letter to the owner

(i) acknowledging that the property is eligible for the applicable tax abatement and,

(ii) stating that the District has reserved a tax abatement of a certain authorized annual dollar amount for the property based on the total residential FAR square footage submitted under 5903. 10(b)(iii). In addition, DMED shall also post biweekly such individual amounts and the then cumulative annual amounts reserved for all previously reserved properties on the DMED website and inform the owner of the deadlines as set forth in section 5903.4 and the additional documents which must be filed pursuant to section 5903.14 prior to DMED's issuance of a certificate approval letter.

(b) if an owner's request letter is not complete, transmit a letter to the owner requesting the required additional information, which shall not affect the date of the submission by the owner of its request to DMED for certification (unless such letter was grossly deficient) or otherwise negate DMED's acceptance of the original submission of the owner's request letter;

(c) transmit a letter of partial reservation and partial non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement authorized for the property partially exceeds the amount of abatement remaining under caps set forth in section 5910 of this chapter; or

(d) transmit a letter of non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement requested exceeds the caps set forth in section 5910 of this chapter.

DMED may extend the ten (10) day review period up to thirty (30) days for a project submitted pursuant to sections 5908 or 5909.

5903.12 A tax abatement authorized by the Act and reserved by DMED pursuant to section 5903.11 shall not be allowed:

(a) unless the first level of concrete for the project has been laid within six (6) months after the date the reservation letter required by section 5903.11(a) of this chapter is transmitted by DMED, if certification was requested pursuant section 5903.10 of this chapter; or

(b) if the project does not receive a certificate of occupancy within thirty (30) months after the date the reservation letter is transmitted by DMED pursuant to section 5903.11(a) of this chapter; provided, that DMED may extend the thirty (30) month period by up to an additional six (6) months if the building's construction has reached grade, as certified by the project architect and DCRA.

5903.13 Requests for certification shall be reviewed by DMED pursuant to section 5903.11 of this chapter in the order in which they were received, and without regard to the type of tax abatement for which certification is requested; provided, that such requests are for projects in an Eligible Area and include the documents specified in sections 5903.8 and 5903.10 or section 5903.9 of this chapter; provided further, however, that any project which has achieved the requirements of section 5903.5, 5903.6, or 5903.7 prior to the effective date of this chapter shall be given preference for review and certification of eligibility in order of the date the requirements of section 5903.5, 5903.6, or 5903.7 were achieved; and provided further, that this preference shall be applicable beginning on the date this chapter becomes effective and only for the first thirty (30) days thereafter. No request for certification will be accepted by DMED until the date this chapter becomes effective.

5903.14 Once the certificate of occupancy has been issued by DCRA and the owner has complied with sections 5903.9 or 5903.10, the owner shall submit the following documents to DMED:

(a) a copy of the certificate of occupancy to DMED;

(b) a calculation of the "as-built" total residential FAR square footage certified by the project architect; and

(c) a schedule of the dollar amounts for the property's twenty (20) semiannual tax abatements for the ten (10) year tax abatement period beginning with the first full six month period of the tax year (October 1 through March 31 or April 1 through September 30) following the issuance date of the certificate of occupancy.

5903.15 Upon receipt of the documents required under section 5903.14, DMED shall certify the total residential FAR square footage and within twenty (20) days:

(i) issue to the owner a letter certifying the tax abatement pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-857.02(a)(3),

(ii) notify OTR of the owner's eligibility for the annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement, provided that such annual dollar amount shall not exceed the amount reserved under 5903.11, and provide OTR with a schedule of the tax abatement dollar amounts to be reflected on for the property's twenty (20) semiannual tax bills issued during the ten (10) year tax abatement period, and

(iii) post such certification of a project's annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement on DMED's website according to its bi-weekly update schedule. OTR shall thereafter reflect the tax abatement in a real property tax bill issued for the first full six month period of the tax year (October 1 through March 31 or April 1 through September 30) following the issuance date of the certificate of occupancy; provided, that the tax abatement is a deduction that cannot be carried forward or carried back. Certification by DMED of the building's total FAR square footage shall be deemed to have been given upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy by DCRA.

5903.16 In the event that a condominium regime is established at the property pursuant to District of Columbia law, and condominium units are sold, the tax abatement shall be prorated among the residential unit owners of the condominium in proportion to their percentage interest in the condominium regime, and the tax abatement shall accrue only to residential unit owners. DMED shall appropriately allocate the tax abatement to the individual units, based on a schedule of the dollar amounts for the semiannual tax abatements for the then remaining portion of the ten (10) year tax abatement period. The owner shall provide this schedule to DMED at the time of the unit sale, DMED shall certify such allocation to OTR and OTR shall notate the tax bills for such units to specifically reflect the abatement.

5902.17 The imposition of any penalty or disallowance of the tax abatement by DMED pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to the notice and hearing provisions of Title 16 DCMR, Chapter 31 (the Civil Infractions Act of 1985).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5904** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR ALL NEW HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 1 {#sec-10-b5904 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5904}

5904.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property in Eligible Area # 1 shall be allowed in an amount computed as $ 0.81 per residential FAR square foot, multiplied by the building's total residential FAR square footage as certified by the project architect and DMED pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a project does not use concrete construction throughout the building or does not include underground parking, the per residential FAR square foot tax abatement shall be determined by DMED so that the total tax abatement is in an amount estimated to be equal to 45% of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development of such project;

(b) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this section shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) year after the abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; and

(c) If, during a tax year for which the tax abatement is authorized by this section, the property for which the abatement was granted contains fewer than ten (10) dwelling units, the abatement shall not be allowed, such disallowance to become effective during the first six (6) month period following the date on which such property first contained less than ten (10) dwelling units.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5905** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR ALL NEW HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 2 {#sec-10-b5905 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5905}

5905.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 on an eligible property in Eligible Area # 2 shall be allowed in an amount computed as $ 1.10 per residential FAR square foot, multiplied by the building's total residential FAR square footage as certified by the project architect and DMED pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a project does not use concrete construction throughout the building or does not include underground parking, the per residential FAR square foot tax abatement shall be determined by DMED so that the total tax abatement is in an amount estimated to be equal to 60% of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development;

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5906** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW, MIXED-INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 1 {#sec-10-b5906 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5906}

5906.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property in Eligible Area # 1 shall be allowed in an amount computed as $ 1.38 per residential FAR square foot, multiplied by the building's total residential FAR square footage as certified by the project architect and DMED pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a project does not use concrete construction throughout the building or does not include underground parking, the per residential FAR square foot tax abatement shall be determined by DMED so that the total tax abatement is in an amount estimated to be equal to 78% of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development;

(b) Ten (10%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(c) The dwelling units occupied by low-income households shall be equivalent in size and quality to other dwelling units in the development as certified by the owner, at the time of the request for certification pursuant to section 5903.3 of this chapter, that the units are comparable in size and the materials used in all units are of comparable quality.

(d) The variety of the sizes of dwelling units occupied by low-income households shall be reasonably similar to the variety of sizes of dwelling units in the eligible property as a whole as certified by the owner;

(e) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this section shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) year after the tax abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; and

(f) If, during a tax year for which the tax abatement is authorized by this section, the property for which the abatement was granted contains fewer than ten (10) dwelling units, the abatement shall not be allowed, such disallowance to become effective during the first six (6) month period following the date on which such property first contained less than ten (10) dwelling units.

5906.2 If, during one (1) of the last ten (10) years of the twenty (20) year period of affordability required by section 5906.1(b) of this chapter, ten (10%) percent of the housing units are not affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households, the owner of the property shall be assessed a penalty of $ 10,000 per year for each unit which should be, but is not, affordable to low-income households unless such noncompliance results from a casualty to or condemnation of the property; provided, that DMED may waive the penalty upon a showing of good cause, including the inability of the owner to sell or lease such units to low-income households based on factors outside the control of the owner and notwithstanding the commercially reasonable, but unsuccessful, efforts of the owner to market the unit(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, a change in the qualified tenant's income during such tenant's occupancy which caused such tenant to no longer meet the income qualification requirements for that unit shall not constitute a breach or default and, in such event, the property shall remain eligible for the tax abatement.

5906.3 DMED may require an owner to demonstrate that the rents and tenant income for eligible real property are consistent with the requirements for tax abatement set forth in Title VI of the Act. If the requirements are not met, after notice by DMED to the owner and a public hearing if requested by the owner, the abatement shall not be allowed and the owner shall remit all taxes owed for the period of non-compliance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5907** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW, MIXED-INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 2 {#sec-10-b5907 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5907}

5907.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property in Eligible Area # 2 shall be allowed in an amount computed as $ 1.75 per residential FAR square foot, multiplied by the building's total residential FAR square footage as certified by the project architect and DMED pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a project does not use concrete construction throughout the building or does not include underground parking, the per residential FAR square foot tax abatement shall be determined by DMED so that the total tax abatement is in an amount estimated to be equal to 95% of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development;

(b) Ten (10%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued, as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(c) The dwelling units occupied by low-income households shall be equivalent in size and quality to other dwelling units in the development as certified by the owner, at the time of the request for certification under pursuant to 5903.3 of this chapter, that the units are comparable in size and the materials used in all units are of comparable quality;

(e) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this section, shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) year after the tax abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; and

5907.2 If, during one (1) of the last ten (10) years of the twenty (20) year period of affordability required by section 5907.1(b) of this chapter, ten (10%) percent of the housing units are not affordable to, and occupied by low-income households, the owner of the property shall be assessed a penalty of $ 10,000 per year for each unit which should be, but is not, affordable to low-income households unless such non-compliance results from a casualty to or condemnation of the property; provided that, DMED may waive the penalty upon a showing of good cause, including the inability of the owner to sell or lease such units to low-income households based on factors outside the control of the owner and notwithstanding the commercially reasonable, but unsuccessful, efforts of the owner to market the unit(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, a change in the qualified tenant's income during such tenant's occupancy which caused such tenant to no longer meet the income qualification requirements for that unit shall not constitute a breach or default and, in such event, the owner shall remain eligible for tax abatement.

5907.3 DMED may require an owner to demonstrate that the rents and tenant income for eligible real property are consistent with the requirements for tax abatement set forth in Title VI of the Act. If the requirements are not met, after notice by DMED to the owner and a public hearing if requested by the owner, the abatement shall not be allowed and the owner shall remit all taxes owed for the period of non-compliance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17,2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5908** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW, MIXED-INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 3 {#sec-10-b5908 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5908}

5908.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property in Eligible Area # 3 shall be allowed in an amount computed as follows: seventy-five (75%) percent of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project by D.C. Official Code § 47-811 before and after development or a dollar amount based on negotiations with DMED which results in approximately seventy-five (75%) percent of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development; provided that, in either event:

(a) Five (5%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued, as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(b) An additional ten (10%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, households with household incomes of sixty (60%) percent or less of the area median income for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued, as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(c) The dwelling units occupied by low-income households and the sixty (60%) percent-of-area-median-income households shall be equivalent in size and quality to other dwelling units in the development, as certified by the owner at the time of the request for certification pursuant to section 5903.3 of this chapter, that the units are comparable in size and the materials used in all units are of comparable quality;

(d) The variety of the sizes of dwelling units occupied by low-income households and the sixty (60%) percent-of-area-median-income households shall be reasonably similar to the variety of sizes of dwelling units in the eligible property as a whole as certified by the owner;

5908.2 If, during one (1) of the last ten (10) years of the twenty (20) year period of affordability required by subsection 5908.1(a) of this chapter, five (5%) percent of the housing units are not affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households, the owner of the property shall be assessed a penalty of $ 10,000 per year for each unit which should be, but is not, affordable to low-income households unless such non-compliance results from a casualty to or condemnation of to the property; provided that, DMED may waive the penalty upon a showing of good cause, including the inability of the owner to sell or lease such units to low-income households based on factors outside the control of the owner and notwithstanding the commercially reasonable, but unsuccessful, efforts of the owner to market the unit(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the change in a qualified tenant's income during such tenant's occupancy which caused such tenants to no longer meet the income qualification requirements for such unit shall not constitute a breach or default and, in such event, the property shall remain eligible for tax abatement.

5908.3 DMED may require an owner to demonstrate that the rents and tenant income for eligible real property are consistent with the requirements for tax abatement set forth in Title VI of the Act. If the requirements are not met, after notice by DMED to the owner and a public hearing if requested by the owner, the abatement shall not be allowed and the owner shall remit all taxes owed for the period of non-compliance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5909** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW, VERY MIXED-INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE AREA # 3 {#sec-10-b5909 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5909}

5909.1 Subject to the requirements of section 5903 of this chapter, an abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property in Eligible Area # 3 shall be allowed in an amount computed as follows: one hundred (100%) percent of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project by D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development or a dollar amount based on negotiations with DMED which results in approximately one hundred (100%) percent of the difference between the residential real property tax imposed on the project pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 immediately before and immediately after development; provided that, in either event:

(a) Five (5%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, low-income households for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(c) An additional five (5%) percent of the housing units in the eligible real property shall be affordable to, and occupied by, extremely low-income households for twenty (20) years after the certificate of occupancy for the eligible real property is issued, as certified by the owner annually in a written statement to DMED;

(d) The dwelling units occupied by low-income households, the sixty (60%) percent-of-area-median-income households and the extremely low-income households shall be equivalent in size and quality to other dwelling units in the development as certified by the owner, at the time of the request for certification pursuant to section 5903.3 of this chapter, that the units are comparable in size and the materials used in all units are of comparable quality;

(e) The variety of the sizes of dwelling units occupied by low-income households, the sixty (60%) percent-of-area-median-income households and the extremely low-income households shall be reasonably similar to the variety of sizes of dwelling units in the eligible property as a whole as certified by the owner;

(f) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this section shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) year after the tax abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to section 5903.10 of this chapter; and

(g) If, during a tax year for which the tax abatement is authorized by this section, the property for which the abatement was granted contains fewer than ten (10) dwelling units, the abatement shall not be allowed, such disallowance to become effective during the first six (6) month period following the date on which such property first contained less than ten (10) dwelling units.

5909.2 If, during one (1) of the last ten (10) years of the twenty (20) year period of affordability required by subsection 5909.1(a) of this chapter the owner of the property shall be assessed a penalty of $ 10,000 per year for each unit which should be, but is not, affordable to low-income households unless such non-compliance results from a casualty to or condemnation of the property; provided that DMED may waive the penalty upon a showing of good cause, including the inability of the owner to sell or lease such units to low-income households based on factors outside the control of the owner and notwithstanding the commercially reasonable, but unsuccessful, efforts of the owner to market the unit(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the change in a qualified tenant's income during such tenant's occupancy which caused such tenant to no longer meet the income qualification requirements for that unit shall not constitute a breach or default and, in such event, the property shall remain eligible for tax abatement.

5909.3 DMED may require an owner to demonstrate that the rents and tenant income for eligible real property are consistent with the requirements for tax abatement set forth in Title VI of the Act. If the requirements are not met, after notice by DMED to the owner and a public hearing if requested by the owner, the abatement shall not be allowed and the owner shall remit all taxes owed for the period of non-compliance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 5910** ABATEMENT CAPS {#sec-10-b5910 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B5910}

5910.1 Caps for Eligible Areas 1, 2, and 3 on the total amount of tax abatements authorized under the Act are as follows:

(a) The DMED may approve up to $ 2.5 million in annual tax abatements for Eligible Area # 1;

(b) The DMED may approve up to $ 2 million in annual tax abatements for Eligible Area # 2; and

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 50 DCR 553 (January 17, 2003).*

### **10-B60** SPECIAL MERITS

##### **10-B DCMR § 6000** AUTHORITY AND SCOPE {#sec-10-b6000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6000}

6000.1 The Tax Increment Financing ("TIF") program is administered jointly by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer ("OCFO") and the Office of Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development ("ODMPED"). The TIF program is intended to enhance the feasibility of private capital projects that are of significant economic, cultural, social, and financial value, which cannot otherwise proceed because of the high costs of urban development. This rulemaking describes the standards and procedures under which the OCFO and the ODMPED shall determine whether a project for which TIF assistance is sought has Special Merits.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 7009 (August 25, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6001** DETERMINATION OF SPECIAL MERITS {#sec-10-b6001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6001}

6001.1 Except for the determination required of the OCFO pursuant to Section 4(c)(3) of the TIF Act, the designation of Special Merits is within the discretion of the ODMPED.

6001.2 In evaluating whether a Project has Special Merits, ODMPED will take into consideration the criteria set forth in this subsection. The ODMPED will be entitled to give priority or more weight to any one of these criteria based on its view of the current needs of the District or as directed by law. These criteria are not intended to be used in a mathematical equation; consequently, mere compliance with a majority of these criteria does not guarantee a designation of Special Merits. The following criteria shall be used by the ODMPED to determine Special Merits:

(a) the quantity and quality of housing units (both rental and owner-occupied) to be constructed by the Project that are affordable to low-and-moderate-income residents;

(b) the quantity and quality of housing units that are available and accessible to physically or mentally challenged persons;

(c) the quantity of permanent full time jobs and part time administrative, managerial, technical and service jobs that will be generated during construction and operation of the Project after its completion that pay 10% or more above Minimum Wage;

(d) the quantity of the jobs set forth in subparagraph (c) above that pay wages that are equal to or exceed the prevailing wages in comparable jobs in the area;

(e) the quantity of jobs generated during construction of the Project that pay 10% or more above the Minimum Wage;

(f) the quantity of jobs generated during construction of the Project that will pay Davis Bacon wages;

(g) the amount of expected Local Small Disadvantaged Business Enterprise ("LSDBE") participation in the Project above the LSDBE Minimum Requirement;

(h) the extent to which the Project is expected to serve as a catalyst for other related development, particularly development that will not require additional public subsidy;

(i) the extent to which the Project will increase property values and growth in net tax revenue collection by the District;

(j) the extent to which the Project takes unproductive property and makes it more productive and profitable to the District from the standpoint of tax revenue generation;

(k) the history of efforts to develop the proposed site of the Project;

(l) the extent to which the Project is a rehabilitation of an historically significant site;

(m) the amount of direct and indirect tax revenues that will flow to the District after payment of debt service on the TIF Bonds;

(n) the extent to which the Project draws new and diverse businesses into the District, both in terms of the quantity of employers and the types of businesses (e.g., high-tech companies and scientific research companies);

(o) the extent to which the Project reduces the need for other direct expenditures by the District, such as for streets, traffic controls, and sewers that otherwise would be funded from the General Fund;

(p) the extent to which the Project maximizes the use of the District's public transportation infrastructure or enhances the utilization of mass transit facilities;

(q) the extent to which the Project provides parking in excess of legal requirements;

(r) the extent to which the Project improves environmental air, water, and soil quality within the District;

(s) the extent to which the Project provides community meeting and recreational space;

(t) the extent to which the Project will have a positive effect on tourism by increasing the quantity of tourists who come to the District, the length of their stay, or the amount of money that they spend, or by enhancing the experience of tourists in the District in a manner that strengthens the District's reputation as an important and attractive tourist destination;

(u) the extent to which the Project contributes to the expansion of shopping, dining, cultural, and educational activities in the Downtown Area;

(v) the extent to which the Project will improve the vitality or economic health of a neighborhood commercial center or corridor;

(w) the extent to which the Project will encourage activities within the District, including the production and performance or display of works of art including, but not limited to, music, drama, dance, film, and writing;

(x) the extent to which the Project will enhance a District-sponsored or supported development project which already has been approved or is already developed.

6001.3 Any application for tax increment financing that was filed with the OCFO prior to April 30, 2001, was the subject of a favorable Special Merits ruling issued in the form of a memorandum from the ODMPED to the OCFO prior to April 30, 2001, and was approved by resolution of the Council of the District of Columbia prior to April 30, 2001, shall be deemed to have Special Merits as defined by this rulemaking.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 7009 (August 25, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6099** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6099 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6099}

District - the Government of the District of Columbia.

Downtown Area - the Downtown Area, as defined by § 2 of the TIF Act.

Project - a private capital improvement project for which tax increment financing is sought.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 7009 (August 25, 2006).*

### **10-B61** RULES OF OPERATION FOR THE DOWNTOWN RETAIL PRIORITY AREA

##### **10-B DCMR § 6100** PUBLIC PURPOSE OF THE RETAIL INCENTIVE ACT OF 2004 {#sec-10-b6100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6100}

6100.1 The Retail Incentive Act of 2004 (Act) is intended to provide a means to: (1) encourage commercial development in the District of Columbia; (2) expand the tax base through the use of tax increment financing; and (3) provide economic assistance to encourage development of retail facilities in the District of Columbia in Retail Priority Areas.

6100.2 Retail Priority Areas include the Downtown Retail Priority Area (as defined in the Act) and any other areas or areas in the District of Columbia designated by the Mayor and approved by the Council.

6100.3 The Act provides that the Mayor is also to designate the areas known as Columbia Heights, Georgia Avenue, Minnesota/Benning, Shaw, and H Street, NE Corridor as Retail Priority Areas.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6101** ELIGIBLE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS {#sec-10-b6101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6101}

6101.1 Under the Act, a Retail Development Project is defined as the establishment of a business engaged in direct onsite retail sales to consumers. With respect to the Downtown Retail Priority Area, Retail Development Projects are limited to businesses that engage in sales of home furnishings, apparel, and general merchandise goods to specialized customers. Under the Act, liquor stores, nightclubs, hotels, restaurants, banks, pharmacies, phone stores and service retail outlets are businesses that do not qualify for inclusion in the Downtown Retail Priority Area.

6101.2 Pursuant to the Act, bonds issued by the District of Columbia to provide financing for Retail Development Projects may be secured by available sales tax revenues (tax increment revenues) as well as the pledge of other assets of the District of Columbia and are to be used to fund the retail development costs of Retail Development Projects. The aggregate principal amount of Bonds that may be issued in the Downtown Retail Priority Area shall not exceed $30 million.

6101.3 A Retail Development Project that has already received proceeds of bonds through another Tax Increment Financing (TIF) program, either directly or as part of a larger development project, is not eligible to be designated a TIF Area under the Act. Bonds shall not be issued with respect to any TIF Area until the TIF Area is open for business to the general public.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6102** APPLICATION OF RULES OF OPERATION {#sec-10-b6102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6102}

6102.1 The Rules of Operation shall be applied uniformly within the Downtown Retail Priority Area as defined in the Act.

6102.2 The Mayor shall have the authority to suspend and re-institute, from time to time, the designation of TIF Areas in response to market conditions.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6103** DOWNTOWN RETAIL COTNMITTEE {#sec-10-b6103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6103}

6103.1 The Mayor shall create the Downtown Retail Committee for the Downtown Retail Priority Area for the purpose of evaluating and recommending to the Mayor proposed Retail Development Projects for the Downtown Retail Priority Area as well as the allocable portion of Bond proceeds for each Retail Development Project.

6103.2 The Downtown Retail Committee shall consist of not less than 3 nor more than 15 members. The Downtown Retail Committee shall be comprised of the Mayor, retail brokers and property owners in the Downtown Retail Priority Area and such other persons as the Mayor shall designate. The Mayor shall designate the members of the Downtown Retail Committee and may designate the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of the Committee

6103.3 Members of the Downtown Retail Committee may not participate in connection with the evaluation of a Retail Development Project in which they may have any ownership or financial interest in either the entity serving as the Retail Project Developer or the retail tenant.

6103.4 Each Downtown Retail Committee member serves at the pleasure of the Mayor and the Mayor may replace any member at any time for any reason.

6103.5 The duties of the Downtown Retail Committee are to:

(a) Apply the rating system (Rating System) provided in Appendix 2 for proposed Retail Development Projects; review and revise the Rating System from time to time as necessary to respond to market conditions;

(b) Compute the Bond allocation (Bond Allocation Amount) based on a numeric formula (Bond Allocation Formula) for each Retail Development Project and adjust the Bond Allocation Formula, as necessary or appropriate, to maximize the use of Bond proceeds to achieve the purposes of the Act;

(c) Recommend Retail Development Projects to the Mayor for designation as TIF Areas in the Downtown Retail Priority Area;

(d) Review Downtown Retail Development Projects applications and recommendations of the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) as prescribed in section 6106.6 and vote whether to recommend to the Mayor (i) the Retail Development Project in the Downtown Retail Priority Area for designation as a TIF Area and (ii) a Bond Allocation Amount with respect to such Retail Development Project;

(e) In the event that the Downtown Retail Committee votes to recommend to the Mayor (i) the Retail Development Project for designation as a TIF Area and (ii) a Bond Allocation Amount with respect to such Retail Development Project, direct DMPED, subject to the Mayor's approval and certification of the Retail Development Project, to send a written approval letter (Approval Letter) to the Applicant, as further described in section 6106.7;

(f) Take such other actions as the Mayor may consider necessary or appropriate to facilitate the selection and funding of TIF Areas in the Downtown Retail Priority Area.

6103.6 A simple majority shall constitute a quorum for any meeting or for purposes of any vote. All recommendations to the Mayor with respect to any Retail Development Project shall be by a two-thirds vote of the Downtown Retail Committee.

6103.7 All meetings shall take place in person or by teleconference.

6103.8 Voting may be evidenced in person during a meeting or orally during a teleconference. No member may vote on any issue that was considered at any meeting that such member did not attend.

6103.9 The Chairperson or Vice Chairperson of the Downtown Retail Committee or their designee is to provide prior written notice to each member at least three (3) business days prior to any meeting of the Downtown Retail Committee. Such notice may be provided by e-mail, telecopy (provided the sender receives confirmation that such notice was received), hand delivery, or by United States first-class, certified mail, postage prepaid. Notice shall be deemed received: (1) on the date the e-mail or telecopy is transmitted (provided the sender has electronic or telegraphic evidence of successful transmission) or on the date of hand delivery (with a signed receipt); or (2) two (2) business days following receipt of proof of service by United States first class certified mail.

6103.10 The Downtown Retail Committee may request technical assistance from DMPED at any time for any reason, including but not limited to, the evaluation of any Application or any proposed revision of the Rating System or the Bond Allocation Formula.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6104** RATING SYSTEM FOR RANKING RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FOR DOWNTOWN RETAIL PRIORITY AREA {#sec-10-b6104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6104}

6104.1 The Application will be scored in conformance with the Rating System as provided in Appendix 2. The Rating System is based on the following objective criteria:

(a) Likelihood of Bond repayment based on projected Tax Increment Revenues from the Retail Development Project;

(b) Uniqueness of the retailer(s) (i.e. type of product, anticipated demand, likelihood of success based on market or feasibility study, experience and public recognition of "brand name" or product(s)) that will be in the Retail Redevelopment Project;

(c) The market position of each retailer and whether each retailer is first in its market to locate in the Downtown Retail Priority Area;

(d) Likelihood that each retailer will attract other retailers to locate nearby (i.e. confidence of other retailers in success and stability of the retailer(s), "draw" factor of the retailer(s), hours and days of operation);

(e) Extent to which each retailer will promote the Downtown Retail Priority Area in its advertising (each retailer to submit a marketing plan for first two years of operation, including prototype of marketing materials (print and radio/TV), types of window displays, etc.);

(f) Vertical integration of retailer(s) (the portion of the product mix that is sold under the retailer's brand);

(g) Intention of each retailer in a given Retail Development Project to locate on more than one level of the building in which it is located;

(h) Extent to which each retailer's storefront is expressive (quality of architecture, "draw" of signage and display windows, extent to which store appearance enhances and upgrades the area);

(i) The location of the ownership of the retailer, i.e. whether the retailer is a District-owned business;

(j) Square footage of retail space; and

(k) Whether the retailer(s) in the Downtown Retail Priority Area is one of multiple retailers that co-locate in the Downtown Retail Priority Area (i.e. is retailer part of a group of retailers that is willing to locate in the Downtown Retail Priority Area).

6104.2 The Downtown Retail Committee may revise the Rating System at any time and from time to time by a two-thirds vote, but may not revise the Rating System for any Application that has been submitted to DMPED.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6105** BOND ALLOCATION FORMULA {#sec-10-b6105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6105}

The Bond Allocation Formula (based upon the Rating System) for determining aggregate principal amount of Bonds to be allocated to a Retail Development Project if approved as a TIF Area, is as follows:

Grand Total (reflected on the Rating System) X $2.55 X total square feet of Retail Development Project.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6106** APPLICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b6106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6106}

6106.1 Owners of proposed Retail Development Projects within a specified Retail Priority Area (Applicants) shall complete an Application (see Appendix 1).

6106.2 The Application shall include all exhibits and attachments specified in the Application to the extent applicable to the Retail Development Project.

6106.3 All Applications are to be submitted to DMPED postage prepaid by hand delivery (with signed receipt of delivery), by overnight mail requiring a signed receipt, or by United States Postal Service certified mail.

6106.4 Neither DMPED nor the Downtown Retail Committee has any obligation to review or consider for approval any Application that is not complete.

6106.5 (a) DMPED will review each Application and provide to the Downtown Retail Committee a preliminary scoring of such Application based on the Rating System (see Appendix 2) and indicate a recommended Bond Allocation Amount for each Retail Development Project.

(b) Following DMPED's preliminary scoring of the Application, DMPED will forward the Application, together with DMPED's recommendation for each Retail Development Project, including the score received and the recommended Bond Allocation Amount, and any comments, concerns or further recommendations with respect to such Retail Development Project, to the Downtown Retail Committee.

6106.6 Upon receipt by the Downtown Retail Committee from DMPED of an Application and the recommendations of DMPED, the Downtown Retail Committee shall review the Application and the recommendations of DMPED pursuant to Section 6103.5 and shall vote whether to recommend to the Mayor (i) the Retail Development Project in the Downtown Retail Priority Area for designation as a TIF Area and (ii) a Bond Allocation Amount with respect to such Retail Development Project. In reviewing the Application, the Downtown Retail Committee shall apply the Rating System and compute the Bond Allocation Amount. The Downtown Retail Committee shall have the right to accept, reject or revise any or all of the recommendations of DMPED.

6106.7 In the event that the Downtown Retail Committee votes to recommend to the Mayor (i) the Retail Development Project for designation as a TIF Area and (ii) a Bond Allocation Amount with respect to such Retail Development Project, the Downtown Retail Committee shall direct DMPED, subject to the Mayor's approval and certification of the Retail Development Project, to send a written Approval Letter to the Applicant indicating that such. Retail Development Project has been approved by the Mayor and stating the reserved Bond Allocation Amount that the Applicant shall receive, subject to the Applicant meeting all program criteria and all requirements necessary for issuance of the Bonds as set forth in the Development Agreement required by section 5(b)(5) of the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6107** MAYOR'S APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION {#sec-10-b6107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6107}

6106.1 Upon receipt of the recommendation of the Downtown Retail Committee with respect to a Retail Development Project, the Mayor may approve and certify the rating of the Retail Development Project, the designation of the Retail Development Project as a TIF Area, the issuance of Bonds in an amount equal to the Bond Allocation Amount and such other matters as the Mayor considers necessary or appropriate to achieve the goals and objectives of the Downtown Retail Priority Area.

6106.2 DMPED shall facilitate and manage the financing process with the Owner, including negotiating the Development Agreement and any other related documents.

6106.3 In connection with the issuance of the Bonds, the Owner shall enter into a Development Agreement with the District, such Development Agreement to be satisfactory to the Mayor, and consistent with the requirements of the Act and any other applicable laws of the District of Columbia. Such Development Agreement shall also include, among other things, the terms and conditions relative to the issuance of the Bonds.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6199** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6199 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6199}

6199.1 Terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Act. 6199.2 For purpose of this chapter, the following terms shall have the meaning ascribed.

Development agreement - Development Agreement means an agreement between the District and the owner of a building in the TIF area relating to matters specified in section 5(b)(5) of the Act and may include the funding agreement, if any, as specified in section 6 of the Act.

Rating System - Rating System means the Rating Matrix contained in Appendix 2.

Appendix 1 Retail Development Project Application

District of Columbia Retail Incentive Second Congressional Review Emergency Act of 2004 and Retail Incentive Review Act of 2004

Application for Tax Increment Financing

Pursuant to the District of Columbia Retail Incentive Second Congressional Review Emergency Act of 2004 and the Retail Incentive Act (collectively, Retail TIF Act), the undersigned Applicant hereby applies to the District of Columbia for tax increment financing for a Retail Development Project in the Downtown Retail Priority Area. This Application shall be submitted to the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development ("DMPED").

Applicant:

[name of applicant], a [form of legal entity] organized under the laws of , and owner of the Building. A copy of the Deed providing evidence of ownership is attached as Exhibit A.

Tenant :

[legal tenant name], doing business as [tenant], a [legal entity], organized under the laws of The 20xx Annual Report of [parent company name] its parent company, if applicable, is attached as Exhibit B.

Building:

The [building name], [building address] Street, N.W , Washington, D.C., located on the Land.

Land:

Lot [xxx] in Square [yyy], as shown on Exhibit C.

Retail Development Project:

The leasing of [xx,xxx] rentable square feet of space in the Building to [tenant] pursuant to the [tenant] Lease, and the build- out of such space for the retail sale by [tenant] of [describe goods sold]. [Description of the timeline of proposed tenant build-out.]

[Tenant] Lease:

Applicant and [legal tenant name] have executed a Lease dated [lease execution date], pursuant to which [legal tenant name] is leasing the TIF Area. A copy of the Lease is attached as Exhibit D.

TIF Area:

The space occupied by [tenant] in the Building, as shown on Exhibit E. The space consists of [xx,xxx] square feet of rentable area on the [floor number(s)] floor(s) of the Building.

Retail Development Costs:

The estimated costs to be incurred in connection with the Retail Development Project and the plans and specifications for the build- out of the tenant space are included in Exhibit F.

Projected Sales:

A projection of [tenant's] sales at the TIF Area including projected sales taxes, is attached as Exhibit G.

Certificate of Occupancy:

The Applicant expects that the District of. Columbia will issue a Certificate of Occupancy to [tenant] to operate the TIF Area for retail use on [projected date]. The Applicant expects the [tenant] to open for business on [date]. A copy of the Certificate of Occupancy will be required to be delivered pursuant to the Development Agreement prior to the issuance of the TIF Note or Bonds.

Requested TIF Amount:

The Requested TIF amount of $[Requested TIF amount]

TIF Note/Bond Structure:

The Applicant proposes that the District of Columbia issue a TIF Bond or Note [describe proposed terms and provisions of TIF Note or Bond].

LSDBE Participation

The Applicant has affirmed its agreement with respect to LSDBEs in the Development Agreement between the Applicant and the District. The Development Agreement is attached as Exhibit H.

First Source Commitment:

The Applicant will, and will require that, its tenant also execute a First Source Agreement, the forms of which are attached to the Development Agreement.

Non-Discrimination and EEO:

Attached as Exhibit I is Applicant's Non-Discrimination Certification. Attached as Exhibit J is Applicant's Equal Employment Opportunity Policy Statement Attached as Exhibit K is Applicant's Assurance of Compliance with Equal Employment Opportunity Requirements.

Tax Certification Affidavit:

Attached as Exhibit L is the Applicant's Tax Certification Affidavit.

No Other Incentives:

The Applicant has not received from the District of Columbia any other funds (including without limitation proceeds of bonds through any other program of tax increment financing) for development of this Retail Development Project.

Sources and Uses:

Attached as Exhibit M is a statement of sources and uses for the Building, showing (i) the total estimated costs of the Building (including the Retail Development Costs for this Retail Development Project), and (ii) the sources of funds (including debt, equity and TIF) anticipated to pay these costs including copies of lender commitments, if applicable.

Certification of Application:

A certification of this Application for Tax Increment Financing is attached as Exhibit N.

Applicant has executed this Application for Tax Increment Financing as of , 2005.

[Applicant's legal name]

By:[ ]

List of Exhibits:

Deed

[Parent company] 2Oxx Annual Report

Plat of Land

Copy of Lease

Diagram of TIF Area

Retail Development Costs and Plans and Specifications

Projected Sales Taxes

Development Agreement

Non-Discrimination Certification

Equal Employment Policy Statement

Assurance of Compliance with Equal. Employment Opportunity Requirements

Tax Certification Affidavit

Sources and Uses

Certification of Application

Appendix 2 - Rating System

Downtown Washington DC Retail Incentive Program Rating Chart

This electronic rating worksheet has been designed so that brokers, owners and retailers can self-rate potential recipients of downtown DC retail incentives. Final ratings are made by the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. To use the sheet, fill in all 15 yellow boxes. The blue boxes contain formulas and should not be changed. After you have properly filled out this electronic worksheet it will return the approximate amount that the retailer is eligible to receive from the District in the form of a Downtown TIF incentive for tenant improvements (assuming the information provided is verified). You can either send an electronic copy of the completed sheet, or you can fax it to: Susan Linsky, Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development susan.finsky@dcgov or fax to 727-6703 with a request that the retailer be officially rated by the District. See the bottom of the sheet for a full explanation of each rating factor. [This rating chart was last approved 10-20-03]

Name of Retailer Phone Date

Contact Person E-mail

Address DC Contact

First Threshold Test (to be completed by Office of Deputy Mayor or Marketing Partner)

Projected Sales Per Sq. Ft.

Tax/sq. ft

Today's LIBOR plus 425 basis points

0.0545

Supportable

$0.00

borrowing

Tax rate = 5.75%

Payback period

#NUM months

RATING FACTOR

RATINGS CALE

RATING

Uniqueness factor

Unique

2nd in

region

<5 in

region

>5 in

region

Number of stores in

region=

store

Stores

Collateral Leasing Benefit (exclusive of #4)

(Depends on # of co-tenants anticipated to follow this retailer)

sales/ft

factor

sales/ft

factor

sales/ft

factor

Sales per square foot and factor

$ 200

$ 400

700

$ 250

$ 450

800

/square

foot

$ 300

$ 500

900

$ 350

$ 600

1000

Yes

Dominate category or 1st in market

Fulfills clustering goal

(must be part of a 3+store deal)

Minimum 10 points needed to be eligible for TIF incentive. If <10, stop here

Subtotal

Advertise in region

($ of advertising/square feet of store)

> $ 10

> $ 5

$ 0

Vertically integrated retailed

(percentage of Goods carried under the retailers label)

>50%

<50%

<25%

Yes

Highly expressive retail facade

Second floor occupied(75% of 1st)

DC owned business

square

factor

square

factor

square

factor

Square footage of retail store(Anchor ability)

feet

square feet=

<7000

20,000

50,000

7,000

30,000

75,000

10,000

40,000

100,000

15,000

Unique circumstance (awarded ; by Deputy Mayor)

Grand Total

If subtotal on line 4b is >=10, then multiply grand total by

$2.55

Incentive / sq foot

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TIFINCENTIVE

$ 0.00

1 Uniqueness factor/number of stores in region is the number of other stores that the retailer has in the Washington DC region. This includes DC, Montgomery, Prince Georges, Fairfax, Arlington, Alexandria, and the independent cities in this area. If the retailer is not an anchor, the deputy mayor may determine that the geographic area for rating that retailer as unique is larger

2 Collateral Leasing Benefit (exclusive of #4) is the strong likelihood that one or more additional retail co-tenants as defined in the developer's MOU will sign leases to locate in close proximity to the retailer being rated as a direct result of that retailer coming into the area.

3 Sales per square foot and factor are the projected sales per square foot based on a retailers other stores in similar demographic markets and the rating factor that matches the projected sales per square foot listed.

4 Dominates category or 1st in market is whether a retailer is either the most dominant retailer in its category (i.e. women's shoes) or whether it is the first in its category to locate in the shopping district (i.e. men's suits).

4a Fulfills clustering goal is an alternative to #4. If three retailers sign leases together as a package and satisfy other criteria, they can each be awarded 5 points for creating a critical mass.

5 Advertises in region is whether the retailer does, or will, spend more than a certain dollar amount per square foot on regional advertising that will promote its downtown location.

6 Vertically integrated retailer is the extent to which the retailer sells only its own brand name goods.

7 Highly expressive retail facade is how well the retailer designs its storefront, signage and display windows to animate both its store and the sidewalk.

8 Second floor occupied (75% of 1st) is whether the retailer occupies a minimum amount of space on a second floor (either above or below) in addition to its ground floor space.

9 DC owned business is whether the retailer is a District of Columbia business, or whether the primary owner is a DC resident.

10 Square footage of retail store (Anchor ability) is the number of square feet of retail space to be leased. This does not include back of the house space.

11 Unique circumstances include issues such as higher build out costs due to historic preservation requirements, or unique buildings or locations that have very high retail impact. Points are awarded at the discretion of the Deputy Mayor.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 9326 (October 1, 2004); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 53 DCR 825 (February 10, 2006).*

### **10-B62** NOMA TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW RESIDENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 6200** GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION {#sec-10-b6200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6200}

B6200 GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

B6200.1 The NoMA Tax Abatements for New Residential Development Program is intended to provide tax abatements as incentives for the production of new housing in the NoMA area of the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122 (July 16, 2010).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6201** PURPOSES {#sec-10-b6201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6201}

B6201 PURPOSE

B6201.1 The purpose of this chapter is to implement the NoMA Residential Development Tax Abatement Act of 2009 (D.C. Law 18-10; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-859.01 et seq.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122 (July 16, 2010).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6202** REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS {#sec-10-b6202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6202}

B6202 REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS

B6202.1 As a prerequisite to a property receiving a tax abatement under this chapter, the provisions of this section must be satisfied.

B6202.2 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be allowed for a project which is financed in any part by the Tax Increment Financing program established by the Tax Increment Financing Authorization Act of 1998 (D.C. Law 12-143; D.C. Official Code § 2-1217.01 et seq.).

B6202.3 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be allowed for a property which receives relief as the result of the Distressed Properties Improvement Program under the Rental Housing Act of 1985 (D.C. Law 6-10; D.C. Official Code § 42-3508.02).

B6202.4 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be allowed for a property owned by the District of Columbia or one of its instrumentalities as of January 1, 2008.

B6202.5 A tax abatement shall not be allowed unless the owner obtains the documents required by sections B6202.7 or B6202.9 of this chapter and submits to DMPED the letter and other documents required by section B6202.10 of this chapter prior to December 31, 2012.

B6202.6 A tax abatement shall only be allowed if the building permit for the project’s superstructure was issued after January 1, 2008.

B6202.7 Except as provided in subsection B6202.8, prior to requesting certification of a tax abatement, the owner must receive:

(a) A final building permit; or

(b) Letters from the building architect and DMPED certifying that the first level of concrete has been laid and the building has received building permits for both (1) the building’s sheeting and shoring and excavation work and (2) the building’s foundation to grade structural work. Certification by DMPED that the first level of concrete has been laid shall be given upon the submission by the owner of the standard test reports to DCRA. DMPED shall issue a certification letter regarding the first layer of concrete being laid within ten (10) business days after receipt of a written request from the owner and receipt of the standard concrete tests reports by DCRA, if such reports are required by DCRA.

B6202.8 If an owner has obtained a certificate of occupancy prior to requesting certification of a tax abatement, section B6202.7 shall not apply.

B6202.9 If a certificate of occupancy has been issued to the owner, the owner may submit a letter to DMPED requesting a tax abatement certification that the property is eligible for a certain annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement as set forth in the NoMA Residential Development Tax Abatement Act of 2009 (D.C. Law 18-10; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-859.01 et seq.). The letter shall include the information required by section B6202.10(a)(i) - (iii), (v), (vi), (vii) and (viii), along with the documents required by section B6202.10(b)(iv)(A), (B) and (E), and section B6202.14.

B6202.10 (a) If a certificate of occupancy has not been issued to the owner, the owner may submit a letter to DMPED requesting a tax abatement certification that the property is eligible for a certain annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement as set forth in the NoMA Residential Development Tax Abatement Act of 2009 (D.C. Law 18-10; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-859.01 et seq.).

(b) The owner’s request letter shall include the following information about the project:

(1) The address of the project;

(2) The square and lot number;

(3) The proposed number of residential units;

(4) A statement that the documents required by subsection B6202.7 of this chapter have been obtained and are attached;

(5) The total residential FAR square footage;

(6) The annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement requested;

(7) A statement that no financing is being provided under the Tax Increment Financing program referenced in subsection B6202.2 of this chapter; and

(8) A statement that no relief is being provided under the Distressed Properties program referenced in subsection B6202.3 of this chapter;

(1) Three (3) dated photographs of the project taken within the ten (10) day period that precedes the date of submission of the owner’s request letter. If the owner’s request letter states that the first level of concrete has been laid, at least one (1) photograph must show the first level of concrete;

(2) The documents specified by section B6202.7 (a) or (b) of this chapter;

(3) Certification of the total residential FAR square footage certified by the project architect; and

(4) The following items:

(A) An area map showing the eligible area boundary and the project by location arrow;

(B) A scaled site plan with building footprint. The site plan shall be submitted in both full size and eleven inch (11″) by seventeen inch (17″) format;

(C) A tabulation of the zoning data for the project prepared and certified by the project architect, which shall include both the allowed and used lot occupancy, height, FAR, yards, courts, parking, and loading, and an indication of any zoning variance that is being requested;

(D) A calculation of the total residential FAR square footage; and

(E) A calculation of the annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement being requested, showing total residential FAR square footage, and tax abatement per square foot of total residential FAR square footage.

B6202.11 Within fifteen (15) business days after receipt of the owner’s request letter and documents specified in subsections B6202.9 or B6202.10 of this chapter, DMPED shall:

(a) Transmit a reservation letter to the owner stating:

(1) Whether the property is eligible for the applicable tax abatement;

(2) Whether the District of Columbia has reserved a tax abatement for the project; and

(3) If the District of Columbia has reserved a tax abatement for the property, the authorized annual dollar amount for the property.

(b) If an owner’s request letter is not complete, transmit a letter to the owner requesting the required additional information, which shall not affect the date of the submission by the owner of its request to DMPED for certification (unless such letter was significantly deficient);

(c) Transmit a letter of partial reservation and partial non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement authorized for the property partially exceeds the amount of abatement remaining under caps set forth in section B6204 of this chapter; or

(d) Transmit a letter of non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement requested exceeds the caps set forth in section B6204 of this chapter.

B6202.12 A tax abatement authorized by the Act and reserved by DMPED pursuant to section B6202.11 shall not be allowed:

(a) Unless the first level of concrete for the project has been laid either before, or within six (6) months after, the date the reservation letter is transmitted by DMPED under subsection B6202.11 of this chapter, if certification was requested pursuant section B6202.9 of this chapter; or

(b) If the project does not receive a certificate of occupancy within thirty-six (36) months after the date the reservation letter is transmitted by DMPED pursuant to section B6202.11 of this chapter; provided, that DMPED may extend the thirty-six (36) months period by up to an additional six (6) months if the building’s construction has reached grade, as certified by the project architect and DCRA.

B6202.13 Valid and complete requests for certification shall be reviewed by DMPED pursuant to section B6202.11 of this chapter in the order in which they are received; provided, however, that any project which has achieved the requirements of section B6202.7, B6202.9, or B6202.10 prior to the effective date of this chapter shall be given preference for review and certification of eligibility in order of the date the requirements of sections B6202.9 or B6202.10 were achieved; and provided further, that this preference shall be applicable beginning on the date this chapter becomes effective and only for the first thirty (30) days thereafter.

B6202.14 Once the certificate of occupancy has been issued by DCRA and the owner has complied with sections B6202.9 or B6202.10, the owner shall submit the following documents to DMPED:

(a) A copy of the certificate of occupancy;

(b) A calculation of the “as-built” total residential FAR square footage certified by the project architect; and

(c) A schedule of the dollar amounts for the property’s twenty (20) semiannual tax abatements for the ten (10) year tax abatement period beginning with the first full six (6) month period of the tax year (October 1 through March 31 or April 1 through September 30) following the issuance date of the certificate of occupancy.

B6202.15 Upon receipt of the documents required under section B6202.14, DMPED shall certify the total residential FAR square footage and, within twenty (20) business days:

(a) Issue to the owner a letter certifying the tax abatement pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-8579.03; and

(b) Notify OTR of the owner’s eligibility for the annual dollar amount of residential tax abatement, provided that such annual dollar amount shall not exceed the amount reserved under B6202.11, and provide OTR with a schedule of the tax abatement dollar amounts to be reflected on the property’s twenty (20) semiannual tax bills issued during the ten (10) year tax abatement period.

B6202.16 After receiving notification from DMPED under subsection B6202.15, OTR shall reflect the tax abatement in a real property tax bill issued for the first full six (6) month period of the tax year (October 1 through March 31 or April 1 through September 30) following the issuance date of the certificate of occupancy.

B6202.17 If a condominium regime is established at the property pursuant to District of Columbia law and condominium units are sold, the tax abatement shall be prorated among the residential unit owners of the condominium in proportion to their percentage interest in the condominium regime, and the tax abatement shall accrue only to residential unit owners. DMPED shall allocate the tax abatement to the individual units, based on a schedule of the dollar amounts for the semiannual tax abatements for the then remaining portion of the ten (10) year tax abatement period. The owner shall provide this schedule to DMPED at the time of the unit sale, DMPED shall certify such allocation to OTR, and OTR shall notate the tax bills for such units to specifically reflect the abatement.

B6202.18 The imposition of a penalty or disallowance of the tax abatement by DMPED pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to the notice and hearing provisions of the Civil Infractions Act of 1985 (D.C. Law 6-42; D.C. Official Code §§ 2-1801.01 et seq.), and its implementing regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122, 6123 (July 16, 2010).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6203** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR ALL HOUSING PROJECTS IN NOMA AREA {#sec-10-b6203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6203}

B6203 TAX ABATEMENTS FOR ALL NEW HOUSING PROJECTS IN NOMA AREA

B6203.1 Subject to the requirements of section B6202 of this chapter, an annual abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 for an eligible property shall be allowed in an amount computed as one dollar and fifty cents ($1.50) multiplied by the building’s total residential FAR square footage as certified by the project architect and DMPED pursuant to subsection B6202.15 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a certificate of occupancy permits the use of only part of the residential portion of the eligible property, the amount of the abatement shall be computed as one dollar and fifty cents ($1.50) per each residential FAR square foot that is subject to the certificate of occupancy.

(b) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this section shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) tax year after the abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to section B6202.14 of this chapter; and

(c) If, during a tax year for which the tax abatement is authorized by this section the property for which the abatement was granted contains fewer than ten (10) dwelling units, the abatement shall not be allowed, such disallowance to become effective during the first six (6) month period following the date on which such property first contained less than ten (10) dwelling units.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122, 6127 (July 16, 2010).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6204** ABATEMENT CAPS {#sec-10-b6204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6204}

B6204 ABATEMENT CAP

B6204.1 DMPED may approve up to five million dollars ($5,000,000) in annual tax abatements for the Eligible Area, up to the fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) cumulative tax abatement cap.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122, 6128 (July 16, 2010).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6299** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6299 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6299}

B6299 DEFINITIONS

B6299.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Act - the NoMA Residential Development Tax Abatement Act of 2009, effective July 7, 2009 (D.C. Law 18-10; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-859.01 et seq.).

Certificate of occupancy - the certificate of occupancy which permits the use of all or part of the residential areas of the building.

Certified by the project architect - the architect has affixed his or her stamp to the document.

DCRA - the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

DMPED - the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development or designee.

Eligible Area - those portions of Wards 5 and 6 which comprise the geographic area defined by a line that starts at the center of the street at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., and 1st Street, N.E.; continuing north along the center line of 1st Street, N.E., to the center line of H Street, N.E.; continuing east along the center line of H Street, N.E., to the center line of 2nd Street, N.E.; continuing north along the center line of 2nd Street, N.E., to the center line of K Street, N.E.; continuing east along the center line of K Street, N.E., to the center line of 3rd Street, N.E.; continuing north along the center line of 3rd Street, N.E. (and including Square 0774, Lot 0058), to the center line of M Street, N.E.; continuing east along the center line of M Street, N.E., to 4th Street, N.E.; continuing along the center line of 4th Street, N.E., to the center line of Florida Avenue, N.E.; continuing northwest along the center line of Florida Avenue, N.E., until it crosses the WMATA rail line; continuing northeast along the boundary of the WMATA rail line until it crosses R Street, N.E.; continuing west along the center line of R Street, N.E., to Eckington Place, N.E.; continuing south along the center line of Eckington Place, N.E., to the center line of Q Street, N.E.; continuing west along the center line of Q Street, N.E. (and including Square 3519, lots 0043, 0063, and 0070), to the center line of North Capitol Street (but excluding Square 3516, lots 0104 through 0114 and 0118 through 0133, and 0807); continuing south along the center line of North Capitol Street to the center line of Eye Street N.W.; continuing west along the center line of Eye Street, N.W., to the center line of New Jersey Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along the center line of New Jersey Avenue, N.W., to the center line of Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., continuing southeast along Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., to the center line of 1st Street, N.E. (the starting point).

Eligible real property - real property that:

(a) Is in the Eligible Area;

(b) Is classified, in whole or in part, as Class 1 or Class 2 property under D.C. Official Code § 47-813(c-7);

(c) Is improved by new structures or by previously uninhabitable structure(s) which undergo substantial renovation for residential use; and

(d) Has ten (10) or more units devoted to residential use.

Final building permit - the final building permit issued to the owner for the project including mechanical, electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, and superstructure; provided, that permits for the installation of electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems shall be allowed to follow after the final building permit is issued to the owner; provided further, that revision permits shall be allowed to address customary deviations due to construction conditions and other modifications.

First level of concrete has been laid - the foundation to grade permit has been issued, the pouring of concrete for the floor of the lowest level of the structure to be constructed (that is, the cellar, basement, sub-cellar, sub-basement, or similar level) has commenced and the concrete work testing reports have been submitted to DCRA.

Gross floor area - has the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR § 199.1.

OTR - the District of Columbia Office of Tax and Revenue.

Owner - the property owner or person authorized by the owner.

Rehabilitation - the substantial renovation of a structure for housing for sale or rental which is not habitable for dwelling purposes because it is in substantial violation of the Housing Regulations (title 14 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations) .

Residential use - has the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR § 1799.1.

Total residential FAR square footage - the total gross floor area of the project that is devoted to residential uses, including common areas and areas devoted to accessory uses to the residential use of the building or a portion thereof, based on the plans and drawings submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. (The terms “gross floor area” and “residential use” shall have the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR §§ 199.1 and 1799.1, respectively.)

Units devoted to residential use - (a) occupied units that were constructed, rehabilitated, or converted for residential use, or (b) unoccupied units that are in the process of being constructed, rehabilitated, converted, marketed, leased, or sold for residential use, in either event pursuant to a building permit for such residential use. The use of an eligible unit for a “home occupation,” as such term is defined in the Zoning Regulations (Title 11 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations), shall not make a unit that is otherwise eligible ineligible.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 6122, 6128 (July 16, 2010).*

### **10-B63** TAX ABATEMENT FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS LOCATING IN EMERGING COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOODS

##### **10-B DCMR § 6300** PURPOSE; GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION {#sec-10-b6300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6300}

6300.1 The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Nonprofit Tax Abatement Act of 2010, effective September 24, 2010 (D.C. Law 18-223 D.C. Official Code §§ 47-857.13, et seq.) (as amended) (NPTA Act).

6300.2 The Nonprofit Tax Abatement Program provides tax abatements to nonprofit organizations to provide an incentive for the organizations to locate their offices in emerging commercial neighborhoods in the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *Source: Notice of Emergency and Proposed Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 11748 (December 10, 2010)[EXPIRED]; as amended by Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 58 DCR 4022 (May 6, 2011).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6301** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN ELIGIBLE NONPROFIT ZONES {#sec-10-b6301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6301}

6301.1 Subject to the requirements of this chapter, an annual abatement of the real property tax imposed pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-811 shall be allowed for an eligible real property if office space in the property is occupied by a qualified nonprofit organization on or before September 30, 2013, if the office space is in the Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone, Mount Vernon Nonprofit Zone, or NoMa Nonprofit Zone, or on or before September 30, 2016, if the office space is in the Anacostia Nonprofit Zone, a Designated Nonprofit Zone, or Minnesota-Benning Nonprofit Zone.

6301.2 The amount of the tax abatement authorized by this subsection shall be computed as the lower of either the total real property tax liability for the office space that is receiving the abatement or eight dollars ($8) multiplied by the total commercial FAR square footage of the office space as certified by the office space landlord and Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) pursuant to subsections 6303.1-6303.2; 6304.2-6304.3, and 6305.1 of this chapter; provided, that:

(a) If a certificate of occupancy permits the use of only part of the commercial portion of the eligible property, the amount of the abatement shall be computed as the lower of either the total real property tax liability attributable to the portion of the eligible property to which the certificate of occupancy applies or eight dollars ($8) per each commercial FAR square foot of the portion of the eligible property to which the certificate of occupancy applies;

(b) The tax abatement for an eligible real property allowed by this subsection shall expire at the end of the tenth (10th) tax year after the abatement was first reflected in a real property tax bill issued pursuant to subsections 6304.2 and 6304.3 of this chapter or at the end of the tenth (10th) year of the tenant’s lease pursuant to subsection 6304.1; and

6301.3 The organization receiving a tax abatement must annually certify that it occupies the office space eligible for the tax abatement by submitting a statement attesting to its occupancy in the eligible office space, a copy of its valid, non-expired certificate of occupancy for the office space awarded the abatement in the procedure described in subsections 6303.1 through 6305.4, and through a visual inspection of office space by DMPED.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6302** LIMITATIONS ON ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b6302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6302}

6302.1 A tax abatement under this chapter shall not be granted:

(a) For a project that is financed in any part by the Tax Increment Financing program established by the Tax Increment Financing Authorization Act of 1998, effective September 11, 1998 (D.C. Law 12-143; D.C. Official Code §§ 2-1217.01 et seq.) (as amended) or by any other form of tax increment financing program issued by the Government of the District of Columbia;

(b) For a property that receives any other real property tax abatement;

(c) For an organization that purchases or leases office space less than five thousand square feet (5,000 sq. ft.) or more than one hundred thousand square feet (100,000 sq. ft.) in total size;

(d) For an organization that does not occupy at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the leased office space and use that space for the organization’s stated mission;

(e) For an organization whose current office space (its location prior to relocation) is in an Eligible Nonprofit Zone and the proposed office space is also located in an Eligible Nonprofit Zone;

(f) Unless the owner and, if the space is to be leased, the tenant obtain the documents required by subsection 6303.1 of this chapter and submit them to Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) the letter and other documents required by subsection 6303.1 of this chapter prior to September 30 of the calendar year preceding the year for which the organization is applying for the abatement, starting with September 30, 2011. For Fiscal Year 2011, applicants will be accepted until all funds have been allocated, or March 15, 2011; provided, that the Deputy Mayor may extend the date if funds remain unallocated;

(g) Unless the office space is leased to the qualified nonprofit organization at a rate that is net of real estate taxes; and

(h) Unless the owner and, if the space is to be leased, the tenant both sign the submitted application.

6302.2 If an organization vacates the office space that has been certified for the tax abatement prior to the end of the tenth (10th) year of the abatement, the tax abatement will stop and neither the office space being vacated or the organization that is vacating the office space will be allowed to keep, continue, or transfer the tax abatement.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6303** APPLICATION {#sec-10-b6303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6303}

6303.1 To be considered for tax abatement, a qualified nonprofit organization must submit an application to Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED), which shall include:

(a) A letter of intent for the lease or purchase of eligible office space showing the organization’s current rent net of taxes. The letter of intent shall include:

(1) The address of the office space;

(2) The square and lot number of the property;

(3) The total commercial FAR square footage to be leased or purchased by the nonprofit organization;

(b) The annual dollar amount of nonprofit tax abatement requested;

(c) A statement that no financing is being provided under the Tax Increment Financing program or by any other form of tax increment financing referenced in subsection 6302.1(a) of this chapter;

(d) A statement that no other real property tax abatement is being provided to the property;

(e) A statement that the rent of the proposed office space is no more than the current fair market value of the average rent of similar office space lease or purchase prices commercially available in the respective Eligible Nonprofit Zone;

(f) A statement that the nonprofit organization shall occupy at least seventy five percent (75%) of the office space and will use that space for the organization’s stated mission;

(g) A statement providing information about benefits that are expected to accrue to District residents, non-profit groups and cultural organizations located in the District;

(h) Three (3) dated photographs of the proposed office space taken within the ten (10) day period that precedes the date of submission of the owner’s letter of intent;

(i) Certification of the total commercial FAR square footage certified by the office space landlord;

(j) A copy of the Internal Revenue Service’s determination letter to the organization designating the organization’s status as tax-exempt under sections 501(c)(3), (4), or (6) of the Internal Revenue Code;

(k) An area map showing the eligible area boundary and the office space to be occupied by location arrow;

(l) An area map showing all eligible areas in the District and the organization’s current office space by location arrow;

(m) A scaled site plan with building footprint. The site plan shall be submitted in both full size and eleven inch by seventeen inch (11" x 17″) format;

(n) A calculation of the total commercial FAR square footage of the office space to be occupied by the organization;

(o) A calculation of the annual dollar amount of nonprofit tax abatement being requested, showing total commercial FAR square footage, and tax abatement per square foot of total commercial FAR square footage;

(p) A calculation of the Eligible Nonprofit Zone’s average office lease and purchase prices for the current tax year;

(q) A calculation of the total percent of commercial FAR square footage that will be owned or leased by the organization that will be occupied by the organization;

(r) A calculation of the expected number of jobs based out of the new location by the organization for the District and a calculation of the expected share of those jobs that will be held by District residents; and

(s) A statement on the number of jobs based out of the current location of the organization.

6303.2 Within twenty-five (25) business days after receipt of the owner’s application, DMPED shall:

(a) Transmit a letter of reservation to the owner stating:

(1) That the property is eligible for the applicable tax abatement;

(2) That the District of Columbia has reserved a tax abatement for the project; and

(3) The authorized annual dollar amount for the property.

(b) If the application is not complete, transmit a letter to the owner requesting the required additional information. The transmittal of the letter shall toll the twenty-five (25) day review period, which shall restart upon the receipt of a complete application;

(c) Transmit a letter of partial reservation and partial non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement authorized for the property exceeds the amount of abatement remaining under the caps set forth in section 6306 of this chapter or if a portion of the property is otherwise not eligible for certification;

(d) Transmit a letter of non-certification, if the amount of the tax abatement requested exceeds the caps set forth in section 6306 of this chapter, and a notification that the organization has been waitlisted for the second round of fund distribution described in subsections 6303.4 and 6305.3; or

(e) Transmit a letter of rejection, if the property or project is not eligible for the tax abatement.

6303.3 Valid and complete requests for certification shall be reviewed by DMPED pursuant to subsection 6303.2 of this chapter in the order in which they are received beginning thirty (30) days after the date this chapter becomes effective.

6303.4 An organization that submits an application and is deemed eligible pursuant to subsections 6303.1 and 6303.2, but for which abatement funds were not available in the Eligible Nonprofit Zone for which they applied, shall be placed on a waiting list with preference given to the order in which the original applications under subsection 6303.1 were received. This subsection does not apply to organizations who have received a partial reservation and partial non-certification.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6304** POST-APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b6304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6304}

6304.1 The organization shall submit to Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) a notarized copy of the signed lease or office space sales contract within four (4) months after the date of approval of its application; provided, however, that the Deputy Mayor may extend this deadline one (1) time by an additional twenty (20) days.

6304.2 Within fifteen (15) business days after DMPED receives the organization’s lease or sales contract, DMPED shall, if the lease or sales contract meets the requirements of the NPTA Act and this chapter and is consistent with the organization’s application, issue a letter of confirmation to the organization certifying that the organization has met all eligibility and application requirements for the tax abatement. The letter shall also state that the organization shall be eligible to receive a tax abatement after receipt of a certificate of occupancy issued by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs and confirmation by the District that the organization has moved into the eligible office space on or before September 30, 2013, if the office space is in the Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone, Mount Vernon Nonprofit Zone, or NoMa Nonprofit Zone, or on or before September 30, 2016, if the office space is in the Anacostia Nonprofit Zone, a Designated Nonprofit Zone, or Minnesota-Benning Nonprofit Zone; provided, however, that the Deputy Mayor may extend either deadline one (1) time by an additional forty (40) days.

6304.3 Once the certificate of occupancy has been issued by Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs and the District has confirmed that the organization has moved into the eligible office space within the time periods set forth in subsection 6304.2, the owner shall submit the following documents to DMPED:

(a) A copy of the certificate of occupancy;

(b) A calculation of the “as-built” total commercial FAR square footage certified by the office space landlord; and

##### **10-B DCMR § 6305** AWARD OF TAX ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b6305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6305}

6305.1 After receiving the documents required under subsection 6304.3, the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) shall certify the total commercial FAR square footage and, within twenty (20) business days:

(a) Issue to the organization a letter of award certifying the tax abatement pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 47-8579.03; and

(b) Notify the District of Columbia Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR) of the organization’s eligibility for the annual dollar amount of nonprofit tax abatement, provided that such annual dollar amount shall not exceed the amount reserved under subsection 6303.2, and provide OTR with a schedule of the tax abatement dollar amounts to be reflected on the property’s twenty (20) semiannual tax bills issued during the ten (10) year tax abatement period.

6305.2 After receiving notification from DMPED under subsection 6305.1(b), OTR shall reflect the tax abatement in a real property tax bill issued for the first full six (6) month period of the tax year (October 1 through March 31 or April 1 through September 30) following the issuance date of the certificate of occupancy.

6305.3 If, four (4) months after the date when applications begin to be considered as described in subsection 6303.3, there remains any unused abatement funds for any of the Eligible Nonprofit Zones, unused funds may be cumulated and awarded to applicants from any Eligible Nonprofit Zone placed on the waiting list described under subsection 6303.4 in the order of preference based on the date of receipt of the organizations’ original applications under subsection 6303.1 and following the distribution and certification procedures in subsections 6303.2-6305.2. The waitlist will be terminated when all funding is allocated, or April 30, 2011; provided, that DMPED may extend the date of termination to a date after April 30, 2011, if funding remains unallocated.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6306** ABATEMENT CAPS {#sec-10-b6306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6306}

6306.1 The total abatement granted under this chapter shall not exceed five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) per year for Fiscal Years 2011 through 2014.

6306.2 The total amount of real property tax abatement approved per year for Fiscal Years 2011 through 2014 for qualified nonprofit organizations in each Eligible Nonprofit Zone shall be limited to:

(a) Forty thousand dollars ($40,000) in the Anacostia Nonprofit Zone;

(b) One hundred seventy seven thousand five hundred dollars ($177,500) in the Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone;

(d) Sixty five thousand dollars ($65,000) in the Mount Vernon Triangle Nonprofit Zone;

(e) One hundred seventy seven thousand five hundred dollars ($177,500) in the NoMa Nonprofit Zone.

6306.3 For each year starting in 2015 Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) may approve up to eight million four hundred thousand dollars ($8,400,000) per year in annual tax abatements for all Eligible Nonprofit Zones with maximum individual zone tax allocations of:

Six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) in the Anacostia Nonprofit Zone;

Two million six hundred thousand dollars ($2,600,000) in the Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone;

Eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) in all Designated Nonprofit Zones

Six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) in the Minnesota-Benning Nonprofit Zone;

One million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) in the Mount Vernon Triangle Nonprofit Zone; and

Two million six hundred thousand dollars ($2,600,000) in the NoMa Nonprofit Zone.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6399** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6399 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6399}

6399.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Anacostia Nonprofit Zone - all real property fronting on:

Good Hope Road, S.E. between the Anacostia Freeway and the 18th Street, S.E.;

Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, S.E., between S Street, S.E., and Suitland Parkway;

Howard Road, S.E., between the Anacostia Freeway and Bowen Road, S.E.; and,

Shannon Place, S.E., between U Street, S.E., and Chicago Street, S.E.

Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone - the area described in section 208 (b) of the Business Improvement Districts Act of 1996, effective March 29, 1996 (D.C. Law 11-134; D.C. Official Code § 2-1215.58) (as amended).

Certificate of Occupancy - the certificate of occupancy which permits the use of all or part of the commercial areas of the building.

Certified by the Office Space Landlord - that the landlord has signed and notarized the document.

Commercial Use - has the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR § 1799.1.

DCRA - the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.

Designated Nonprofit Zone - an area of the District designated by the Mayor as one that will benefit from the location of a nonprofit organization or an area to which a nonprofit organization seeks to locate and for which the Mayor determines that it is in the best interests of the District to offer a tax abatement under this subsection to the nonprofit organization and which the Council approves by act.

DMPED - the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development or designee.

Eligible Nonprofit Zone - an Emerging Neighborhood Nonprofit Zone or a Designated Nonprofit Zone.

Eligible Real Property - real property that:

(a) Is in the Eligible Area;

(b) Is classified, in whole or in part, as Class 2 property under section 2043(b) of the “Vacant Property Disincentivization Amendment Act of 2010,” effective September 24, 2010 (D. C. Law 18-223; D.C. Official Code § 47-813(c-8)) (as amended)

Emerging Neighborhood Nonprofit Zone – the Anacostia Nonprofit Zone, Capitol Riverfront Nonprofit Zone, Minnesota-Benning Nonprofit Zone, Mount Vernon Triangle Nonprofit Zone, and NoMa Nonprofit Zone.

Gross floor area - has the meaning set forth in 11 DCMR § 199.1.

Letter of intent - a letter submitted by an organization stating the organization’s desire and intent to lease or purchase qualified property for the tax abatement.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

Minnesota-Benning Nonprofit Zone - the area bounded by a line beginning at the intersection of Hayes Street, N.E. and Minnesota Avenue, N.E., continuing northwest to the intersection of Hayes Street, N.E., and Kenilworth Avenue, N.E., continuing northwest along Hayes Street, N.E., to Anacostia Avenue, N.E.; continuing due west to the eastern shoreline of the Anacostia River; continuing south along the eastern shoreline of the Anacostia River to Benning Road, N.E.; continuing east along Benning Road, N.E., to Anacostia Avenue, N.E.; continuing southerly along Anacostia Avenue, N.E., to Dix Street, N.E.; continuing east along Dix Street, N.E., to 34th Street, N.E.; continuing north along 34th Street, N.E., to Eads Street, N.E., ; continuing southeast along Eads Street, N.E., to 36th Street, N.E.; continuing south along 36th Street, N.E., to Kenilworth Avenue, N.E.; continuing southeast along a straight line to the intersection of 35th Street, N.E., and Clay Place, N.E.; continuing southeast along Clay Place, N.E., to Minnesota Avenue, N.E., continuing northeast along Minnesota Avenue, N.E., to Clay Place, N.E., continuing southeast and then east along ClayPlace, N.E., to 40th Street, N.E.; continuing along 40th Street, N.E., to Benning Road, N.E. (and including the area to the immediate east of 40th Street, N.E., that is zoned C-3-A); continuing northwest along Benning Road, N.E., to Minnesota Avenue, N.E. (and including the area to the immediate north of Benning Road, N.E., that is zoned C-3-A); continuing northeast along Minnesota Avenue, N.E., to Hayes Street, N.E., (and including the area to the immediate east of Minnesota Avenue, N.E., that is zoned C-3-A), the starting point.

Mount Vernon Triangle Nonprofit Zone - the area described in section 205 of Business Improvement Districts and Anacostia Waterfront Corporation Clarification Amendment Act of 2004, effective March 17, 2005 (D.C. Law 15-257; D.C. Official Code § 2-1215.55) (as amended).

NoMa Nonprofit Zone - the area described in section 207 of the NoMa Improvement Association Business Improvement District Amendment Act of 2006, effective March 8, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-245; D.C. Official Code § 2-1215.57 (b)) (as amended).

NPTA Act - the Nonprofit Tax Abatement Act of 2010, effective September 24, 2010 (D.C. Law 18-223; D.C. Official Code §§ 47-857.11, et seq.) (as amended).

OTR - the District of Columbia Office of Tax and Revenue.

Owner - the property owner or person authorized by the owner.

Qualified nonprofit organization - an entity that is exempt from taxation under section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, approved August 16, 1954 (68A Stat. 163; 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3), (4), and (6)).

Total commercial FAR square footage - the total gross floor area of the project that is devoted to commercial uses, including common areas and areas devoted to accessory uses to the commercial use of the building or a portion thereof, based on the plans and drawings submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. (The terms “gross floor area” and “commercial use” shall have the meanings set forth in 11 DCMR §§ 199.1 and 1799.1, respectively.)

### **10-B64** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AREAS WITH HIGH NEEDS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

##### **10-B DCMR § 6400** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b6400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6400}

6400.1 The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Tax Abatement for Affordable Housing in High-Need Areas Amendment Act of 2020 (the “Act”), effective December 3, 2020 (D.C. Law 23-149; D.C. Official Code § 47-859.06), which provides for an abatement of the tax imposed by D.C. Official Code § 47-811 on certain real property developed with affordable housing in certain designated areas in high need of affordable housing.

6400.2 An agency’s failure to act within a timeframe established in this chapter shall not constitute a default by the agency and shall not permit any person to take or refuse to take any action governed by the Act or any other law or regulation.

6400.3 No tax abatements granted pursuant to this chapter shall begin before October 1, 2023.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6400*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6401** ABATEMENT CAP AND AVAILABILITY {#sec-10-b6401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6401}

6401.1 Abatements granted pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the availability of funding. When funds are available for the purpose of granting the abatements, the total amount of tax abatements awarded to all developments in a given fiscal year shall not exceed two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) in Fiscal Year 2024, four million dollars ($4,000,000) in Fiscal Year 2025, four million one hundred sixty thousand dollars ($4,160,000) in Fiscal Year 2026, or the prior fiscal year’s cap increased by four percent (4%) in each fiscal year thereafter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6401*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6402** REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b6402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6402}

6402.1 To be eligible to be granted a tax abatement under this chapter, the following requirements must be satisfied:

(a) The real property on which the development is located shall be in an eligible area;

(b) At least one third (1/3) of the housing units developed or redeveloped on the real property shall be affordable to and rented by households earning no more than one hundred percent (100%) of Median Family Income. Housing units included in the development as part of the Inclusionary Zoning (“IZ”) Program shall be counted toward the one third (1/3) requirement;

(c) The average Median Family Income of the households that occupy the one third (1/3) of the housing units described in paragraph (b) of this subsection shall be no greater than eighty percent (80%) of Median Family Income.

(d) The developer shall file an affordability covenant in the land records, as described in section 6406 of this chapter;

(e) The developer shall enter into an agreement with the District that requires the developer to, at a minimum, contract with certified business enterprises for at least thirty-five percent (35%) of the contract dollar volume of the construction and operations of the development, in accordance with section 2346 of the CBE Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-218.46), to the extent section 2346 is applicable;

(f) The developer shall enter into a First Source Agreement for the operations of the development;

(g) The developer shall enter into an abatement agreement with DHCD setting forth the requirements of this chapter and such other terms and conditions as DHCD deems appropriate; and

(h) The developer and development shall satisfy the other requirements of this chapter, as applicable.

6402.2 As provided in D.C. Official Code § 47-859.06(f), the requirements of the First Source Act shall not apply to the construction or development of a development granted a tax abatement under this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6402*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6403** APPLICATION; COMPETITIVE PROCESS {#sec-10-b6403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6403}

6403.1 In order to be considered for the award of a tax abatement under this chapter, a developer shall submit an application to DHCD. The application shall be in such a form and include such information as may be required by DHCD.

6403.2 An application for a tax abatement under this chapter may be submitted by a developer only in response to a competitive process initiated by DHCD. The competitive process shall set forth the requirements of an application and the standards by which applications will be reviewed and tax abatement reservations granted.

6403.3 Each application shall include:

(a) The name of the owner of the development;

(b) The eligible area in which the development is located;

(d) The square and lot number(s) of the development;

(e) The total number of residential units that have been or will be developed or redeveloped as part of the development;

(f) The total number of affordable residential units that have been or will be developed or redeveloped as part of the development;

(g) For each such affordable residential unit, the number of bedrooms in the unit and the Median Family Income level of affordability for the unit;

(h) An acknowledgment that the affordable residential units shall be administered in the same manner as, and pursuant to the same rules and standards of, Inclusionary Units for the term of the tax abatement;

(i) A statement that the attachments required by section 6403.4 of this chapter have been submitted as part of the application; and

(j) The annual dollar amount of tax abatement requested.

6403.4 The application shall also include the following attachments:

(a) The documents required by section 6403.3 of this chapter;

(b) Three (3) dated photographs of the development taken within the thirty (30) day period that precedes the date of submission of the developer’s application;

(c) If applicable, a copy of the agreement the developer executed, or will execute, with DSLBD requiring the developer to, at a minimum, contract with certified business enterprises for at least thirty-five percent (35%) of the contract dollar volume of the construction and operations of the development, in accordance with section 2346 of the Certified Business Enterprise Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-218.46), and a certification from DSLBD that the developer met the requirements of the CBE agreement.

(d) An area map showing the boundaries of the eligible area with the development identified by a location arrow;

(e) A copy of the certificate of occupancy for the development or the estimated date a certificate of occupancy for the development will be issued;

(f) A copy of the First Source Agreement for the operations of the development executed, or that will be executed, with DOES and a certification from DOES that the developer is in compliance with the requirements of that agreement, as applicable;

A calculation of the annual dollar amount of tax abatement being requested supported by a pro forma or other financial analysis; and

A copy of the deed evidencing fee simple ownership, the applicable lease, or the contract of sale.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6403*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6404** APPLICATION REVIEW AND RESERVATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b6404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6404}

6404.1 DHCD shall review each application submitted in accordance with the standards of the competitive process and this chapter.

6404.2 Within thirty (30) business days after receiving an application, DHCD shall review the application and approve the application, deny the application, or request additional information from the applicant.

6404.3 If DHCD approves an application, DHCD shall transmit a reservation letter to the developer that:

(a) Confirms the development is eligible for the applicable tax abatement and that DHCD has reserved a tax abatement for the project;

(b) States the annual dollar amount of the abatement;

(c) Lists the project development milestones that must be met by dates certain to not forfeit the tax abatement reservation; and

(d) Details the information required and process to request a tax abatement certification.

6404.4 If an application is submitted that is not complete, DHCD shall transmit to the developer a request for the additional information required for consideration of the application.

6404.5 If DHCD denies an application, DHCD shall transmit to the developer a denial letter which shall state the reason for the denial.

6404.6 DHCD shall deny an application if:

(a) The amount of the tax abatement requested exceeds the maximum amount set forth in Section 6401.1;

(b) The development is ineligible for the abatement; or

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6404*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6405** TAX ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b6405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6405}

6405.1 If a development meets the milestones listed by DHCD pursuant to subsection 6404.3(c), the developer shall request a tax abatement certification and provide any outstanding information, documents, or attachments, including a copy of the certificate of occupancy if not previously provided.

6405.2 Within thirty (30) business days after receiving a complete request for tax abatement certification:

DHCD and the developer shall execute an abatement agreement and the affordability covenant described in section 6406 ;

The developer shall file the affordability covenant in the land records of the District, as required by section 6406 of this chapter;

DHCD shall certify to OTR the development’s eligibility for the tax abatement, and that certification shall include:

The street address, square, suffix, and lot of the real property on which the development is located;

The date the certificate of occupancy was issued for the final housing unit counted toward satisfying the affordability requirements of the Act and this chapter;

The dates the tax abatement begins and ends;

The annual dollar amount of the tax abatement and the schedule of the tax abatement dollar amounts to be reflected on the development’s real property tax bills; and

A statement that the conditions required by D.C. Official Code § 47-859.06(a) and this chapter have been satisfied; and

DHCD shall provide the developer a copy of the certification DHCD provided to OTR.

6405.3 An approved tax abatement shall begin in the tax year immediately following the tax year during which the certificate of occupancy was issued for the final housing unit counted toward satisfying the affordability requirement of the Act and shall continue for a period of thirty (30) tax years; provided that the abatement is not earlier terminated;

6405.4 Notwithstanding section 6405.3, DHCD may approve a tax abatement to continue for forty (40) tax years after the tax year during which the certificate of occupancy is issued for the final housing unit counted toward satisfying the affordability requirement of the Act if the developer provided in its application information showing a need for a tax abatement of forty (40) tax years for the development and DHCD determines that it is in the interests of the District to award a tax abatement of forty (40) tax years for the development.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6405*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6406** AFFORDABILITY COVENANT {#sec-10-b6406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6406}

6406.1 Prior to the issuance of the tax abatement certification by DHCD, the developer shall file an affordability covenant in the land records, which shall be binding on the developer and all of its successors, including assigns in interest with respect to the development, covenanting to comply with the requirements of D.C. Official Code § 47-859.06(a)(3).

6406.2 The affordability covenant shall include the following:

The affordable residential units shall meet the square footage, design, material, finish, amenity, and other requirements of, and be administered pursuant to the same rules and standards that apply to, Inclusionary Units, including Title 14, Chapter 22 of the DCMR;

The time period during which each affordable residential unit must be maintained as an affordable residential unit;

The number of affordable residential units required to be included and maintained as part of the development;

The method by which the income of a household residing in an affordable residential unit will be calculated;

The maximum allowable Median Family Income level for each affordable residential unit, and that the maximum allowable rents and maximum allowable incomes will be determined by the then-current Inclusionary Zoning price schedule;

Requirements for annual re-certification of household income and size for each affordable residential unit;

Initial designation of the affordable residential units; and

The process for redesignating affordable residential units if a household’s income exceeds the maximum allowable income for the unit upon lease renewal.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6406*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6407** ONGOING AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b6407 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6407}

6407.1 To continue to be eligible to receive the tax abatement provided by this chapter and the Act:

(a) At least one third (1/3) of the housing units in the development shall, for the duration of the tax abatement period, be affordable to and rented by households that earn one hundred percent (100%) of the Median Family Income;

(b) The average Median Family Income of these households that occupy the one third (1/3) of the housing units described in paragraph (a) of this subsection shall be no greater than eighty percent (80%) of the Median Family Income.

6407.2 At the time of each lease execution for an affordable residential unit, the developer shall calculate the average household income for all housing units considered under the one-third (1/3) requirement described in section 6402.1(b). If such average household income exceeds eighty percent (80%) of the Median Family Income, the real property on which the development is located shall become ineligible to receive a tax abatement under this chapter.

6407.3 Operation of the affordable residential units, including calculation of incomes, maximum allowable rents, renewals, and re-certifications of income and household size, shall follow the rules and standards of the Inclusionary Zoning Program, including re-designation of units if a household’s income exceeds the maximum allowable income upon lease renewal.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6407*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6408** NONCOMPLIANCE {#sec-10-b6408 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6408}

6408.1 If at any time during the term of the tax abatement DHCD believes that the development has become ineligible for the tax abatement by not complying with the recorded covenant or the abatement agreement or section 6407, DHCD shall notify the developer of this belief, provide the developer thirty (30) days to respond, and then consider that response. Should the response be insufficient to show compliance, DHCD shall determine that the development has become ineligible for the tax abatement and shall:

(a) Notify OTR of the ineligibility, specifying the date the development became ineligible; and

(b) Notify the developer that OTR has been notified.

6408.2 The entire development shall be ineligible for the abatement on the first day of the tax year following the date when the ineligibility occurred.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6408*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6499** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6499 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6499}

When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Act - the Tax Abatements for Affordable Housing in High-Need Areas Amendment Act of 2020, effective December 3, 2020 (D.C. Law 23-149; D.C. Official Code § 47-859.06).

Affordable residential unit – a housing unit that is income and rent restricted.

Annual income – annual income as defined in section 2299.1 of the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (14 DCMR 2299.1).

Bedroom – a room in a development, with immediate access to an exterior window and a closet, that is designated as a “bedroom” or “sleeping room” on construction plans submitted with an application for a building permit for the development.

CBE Act - the Small and Certified Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005, effective October 20, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq.).

Certified business enterprise - a business enterprise certified pursuant to the CBE Act.

Competitive process - a request for applications (“RFA”) or similar process by which applications for tax abatements under this chapter are solicited or accepted by DHCD.

DCMR– the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations.

DCRA– the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs

Developer– the owner or owner’s agent of a development.

Development – the buildings or improvements that include affordable residential units on real property.

DHCD– the Department of Housing and Community Development.

DOES – the Department of Employment Services.

DSLBD– the Department of Small and Local Business Development.

Eligible area– each area defined as a “high-need affordable housing area” in the Act, which includes the Rock Creek West, Rock Creek East, Capitol Hill, and Upper Northeast planning areas identified in the District’s Housing Equity Report, (available from https://housing.dc.gov) published in October 2019, plus one thousand feet (1,000 ft.) in any direction beyond any boundary of these planning areas.

Final certificate of occupancy - a document issued by DCRA certifying a building’s compliance with applicable building codes and other laws, and indicating it to be in a condition suitable for occupancy.

First Source Act–the First Source Employment Agreement Act of 1984, effective June 29, 1984 (D.C. Law 5-93; D.C. Official Code § 2-219.01 et seq.).

First Source Agreement - an agreement with the District governing certain obligations of the developer regarding job creation and employment, pursuant to section 4 of the First Source Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-219.03) and Mayor’s Order 83-265, dated November 9, 1983.

Household – all persons who will occupy an affordable residential unit, which may, subject to occupancy standards contained in Title 14 Chapter 22 of the DCMR, be:

(a) A single family;

(b) One (1) person living alone;

(d) Any other group of related or unrelated persons who share living arrangements.

HUD – the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Inclusionary Unit – a dwelling unit set aside for sale or rental as required by the Inclusionary Zoning Program.

Inclusionary Zoning Program – all of the provisions of the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations and the Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Amendment Act of 2006, effective March 14, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-275; D. C. Official Code § 6-1041.01 et seq.).

Inclusionary Zoning Regulations – the regulations published at Title 14, Chapter 22 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations and at Title 11-C, Chapter 10 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations.

Land records – the land records of the Office of the Recorder of Deeds.

Median Family Income - the median family income for a household in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by HUD, adjusted for household size without regard to any adjustments made by HUD for the purposes of the programs it administers.

Operations –all property maintenance, resident services, and related functions necessary to operate and maintain a development.

OTR– the Office of Tax and Revenue.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 69 DCR 001348 (February 18, 2022). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6499*

### **10-B65** ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE ZONES

##### **10-B DCMR § 6500** SCOPE {#sec-10-b6500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6500}

6500.1 This chapter shall govern the following procedures pertaining to economic development zones:

(a) The application and certification requirements for economic development zone designations;

(b) The application and qualification requirements of real property located in economic development zones for tax reductions and for deferral or forgiveness of any indebtedness owed the District, including deferral or forgiveness of tax liens, assessments for failure to abate nuisances, and sewer and water charges;

(c) The application and qualification requirements of businesses located in economic development zones for credits against income and franchise taxes;

(d) Certification of qualification; and

(e) The presentment of a Council of the District of Columbia Resolution (hereafter "Council").

**History**
- *AUTHORITY: Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is §13 of the Economic Development Zone Incentives Amendment Act of 1988, D.C. Code §5-1406 (1993 Supp.), Mayor's Order 90-161 (October 31, 1990).*
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626 (December 17, 1993).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6501** APPLICATION FOR TAX INCENTIVES FOR OARS OF REAL PROPERTY {#sec-10-b6501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6501}

6501.1 To apply for a reduction in real property taxes, special assessments, assessment for failure to abate a nuisance, or water and sewer charges, the owner of improved real property within a designated economic development zone shall submit to the Development Zone Administrator the following supporting information:

(a) Identity of owner or owners:

(b) Street address, lot, and square of each piece of real property for which a claim for an incentive is made (including identification of zone);

(d) Proposed economic development activity or project;

(e) Amount of claim;

(f) Certificate of taxes;

(g) Certification of assessed valuation of improved real property (not more than sixty (60) days old);

(h) Certification of amount of indebtedness (tax bills, water and sewer bills, assessment for failure to abate nuisance, special assessments, or other assessments by the District government;

(i) Certification of conformance with zoning regulations;

(j) Beginning date of rehabilitation or construction;

(k) Statement of actual costs of rehabilitation or construction;

(l) Permits (building, occupancy, other); and

(m) Other relevant documents as requested by the Development Zone Administrator.

6501.2 To apply for deferral or forgiveness of real property taxes, special assessments, assessments for failure to abate a nuisance, or water and sewer charges, the owner of improved real property shall submit to the Development Zone Administrator the following supporting information:

(a) The information required by §6501.1;

(b) Evidence of how the proposed activity will improve the economic development zone by doing the following:

(1) Reducing the rate of poverty;

(2) Reducing the unemployment rate;

(3) Reducing economic distress;

(4) Increasing the median income level;

(5) Improving the standard of living;

(6) Increasing the level of owner-occupied housing;

(7) Increasing commercial activity;

(8) Increasing industrial activity; or

(9) Employing area residents;

(d) Evidence of private sector commitments.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626, 8627 (December 17, 1993).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6502** APPLICATION FOR TAX INCENTIVES FOR BUSINESSES {#sec-10-b6502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6502}

6502.1 To apply for a credit against the corporate franchise tax, or the unincorporated business franchise tax, the owner of the business shall submit to the Development Zone Administrator the following supporting information:

(a) The location of the business, including street address, lot and square, identification of zone;

(b) A copy of the First Source Agreement;

(d) A certified copy of District Income Tax Returns (D-20 or D-30) for the last two (2) years;

(e) An identification of each franchise tax credit sought:

(1) Year; and

(2) Amount;

(f) Employment information (number of employees, DOES vouchers certification of employees, income, residency);

(g) Evidence of the workmen's compensation premiums paid;

(h) Evidence of the nonprofit status of child development center;

(i) Copy of the lease to a nonprofit child development center;

(j) Evidence of actual rent paid by child development center;

(k) Form FR-500;

(l) Certificate of occupancy;

(m) Certificate of good standing;

(n) A copy of a valid license to operate a child development center at subject location; or

(o) Other relevant documents as requested by the Development Zone Administrator.

6502.2 The maximum amount of a credit shall be equal to the sum of the following:

(a) Fifty percent (50%) of the wages of all certified employees subject to the provisions of §§3 (b), (c), and (d) of the District of Columbia Income and Franchise Tax Act of 1947, D.C. Code §46-1807.4;

(b) Fifty percent (50%) of the workmen's compensation liability insurance premiums attributable to all certified employees subject of the provisions of §§4(b) and (c) of the District of Columbia Income and Franchise Tax Act of 1947, D.C. Code §47-1807.5; and

(c) The difference between the rental market value of the space actually leased to a licensed nonprofit child development center and the actual rent paid subject to the provisions of §5(c) of the District of Columbia Income Franchise Tax Act of 1947, D.C. Code §47-1807.6.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626 , 8628 (December 17, 1993).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6503** APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION OF NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ZONES {#sec-10-b6503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6503}

6503.1 An applicant for designation of a new economic development zone shall submit to the Development Zone Administrator an application form, prescribed by the Development Zone Administrator, including the following information:

(a) The percentage of the labor force unemployed in the proposed economic development zone according to the Department of Labor;

(b) The poverty rate in the proposed economic development zone according to U.S. Census data;

(c) The percentage of population change between 1980 and 1990 in the proposed economic development zone according to U.S. Census data;

(d) The percentage of households in the proposed economic development zone with income less than eighty percent (80%) of the median income of the District of Columbia;

(e) The District-wide annual average unemployment rate for the calendar year;

(f) The annual average unemployment rate of the proposed development zone for the calendar year; and

(g) Comparative labor force data for the District and the proposed economic development zone.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626, 8630 (December 17, 1993).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6504** CERTIFICATION OF QUALIFICATIONS {#sec-10-b6504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6504}

6504.1 Within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the application, the Development Zone Administrator shall give an applicant written notice of the Administrator's decision as to whether to recommend that the Mayor seek Council approval of the incentive sought.

6504.2 The Development Zone Administrator shall submit findings to the Mayor. At a minimum the Administrator shall make findings as follows:

(a) That an applicant qualifies for named real property tax incentives, specified as to amount and tax year(s) because of the following:

(1) Ownership of real property located in a designated economic development zone;

(2) The subject real property is either Class III or Class IV real property;

(3) The subject real property conforms with zoning regulations;

(4) Rehabilitation of the subject real property began after October 20, 1988;

(5) Costs of rehabilitation exceed fifty percent (50%) of assessed value of property; or

(6) Construction of the subject property began after October 20, 1988;

(b) That an applicant qualifies for a franchise tax credit, in a stated amount, because of the following:

(1) The applicant is a business entity;

(2) The business is located in the District of Columbia; and

(3) The applicant has entered into a First Source Agreement with the District; or

(c) That a proposed area qualifies for designation as a new economic development zone because of the condition of the proposed economic development zone when compared with the District as a whole, based on the following factors:

(1) The unemployment rate;

(2) The poverty rate;

(3) The level of income;

(4) The population decline;

(5) The degree of commercial or industrial development;

(6) The rate of owner-occupied housing;

(7) Job opportunities;

(8) The strength of neighborhood support; and

(9) Private sector commitments.6504.3 The Development Zone Administrator shall furnish a copy of the Development Zone Administrator's findings, a proposed council resolution, and related documents to the Mayor, so that the Mayor may decide, at the Mayor's discretion, whether or not to submit the proposed resolution to the Council.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626 , 8631 (December 17, 1993).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6505** DELAYED APPLICABILITY {#sec-10-b6505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6505}

6505.1 An abatement of real property taxes authorized by Council Resolution shall become effective for the tax year beginning on July 1st following the date of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the qualified real property unless otherwise provided by Council Resolution.

6505.2 A credit against incorporated or unincorporated franchise tax shall become effective when authorized by Council Resolution.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 40 DCR 8626, 8631 (December 17, 1993).*

### **10-B66** TAX ABATEMENTS FOR HOUSING IN DOWNTOWN

##### **10-B DCMR § 6600** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b6600 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6600}

6600.1 The purpose of this chapter is to implement D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.01 - .04), which provides for an abatement of the tax imposed by D.C. Official Code § 47-811 on certain real property that is developed with at least ten (10) housing units.

6600.2 An agency’s failure to act within a timeframe established in this chapter shall not constitute a default by the agency and shall not permit any person to take or refuse to take any action governed by D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.01 - .04 or this chapter.

6600.3 No tax abatements approved pursuant to this chapter shall begin before October 1, 2023.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6600*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6601** ABATEMENT CAP AND AVAILABILITY {#sec-10-b6601 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6601}

6601.1 Abatements approved pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the availability of funding.

6601.2 The total amount of tax abatements approved, certified, or restored for all developments shall not exceed:

Two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) for each of Fiscal Years 2024, 2025, and 2026;

Six million eight hundred thousand dollars ($6,800,000) for Fiscal Year 2027;

Forty-one million dollars ($41,000,000) for Fiscal Year 2028; and

For each succeeding fiscal year after Fiscal Year 2028, one hundred four percent (104%) of the prior fiscal year’s cap.

6601.3 Abatements approved pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the availability of appropriated funding.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6601*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6602** REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX ABATEMENT; EXEMPTIONS FROM CERTAIN LAWS {#sec-10-b6602 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6602}

6602.1 For real property to be eligible for a tax abatement under this chapter, the following requirements must be satisfied:

The parcel is located in an eligible area;

There is a change in use of the parcel, as indicated by the certificate of occupancy for the development, resulting in the creation of at least ten (10) housing units;

The development must meet the following affordability criteria:

At least ten percent (10%) of the housing units developed on the parcel shall be affordable to, and set aside for, households earning sixty percent (60%) or less of the median family income for a period of at least twenty (20) years; or

At least eighteen percent (18%) of the housing units developed on the parcel shall be affordable to, and set aside for, households earning eighty percent (80%) or less of the median family income for a period of at least twenty (20) years.

The affordable housing units required by paragraph (c) shall be designed and administered in accordance with the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Program for the term of the tax abatement;

The owner shall file a covenant in the land records, as described in § 6606 of this chapter;

The owner, or its designee or assignee, shall enter into an agreement with the District that requires the owner, or its designee or assignee, to, at a minimum, contract with certified business enterprises for at least thirty-five percent (35%) of the contract dollar volume of the construction and operations of the development, in accordance with Section 2346 of the Small and Certified Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act (CBE Act), approved October 20, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.46);

The owner, or its designee or assignee, shall enter into a First Source Agreement for the operation of the development; and

The owner and development shall satisfy the other requirements of this chapter, as applicable.

6602.2 Housing units included in the development as part of the Inclusionary Zoning Program or other affordable housing units included in the development pursuant to Zoning Commission requirements shall be counted towards the affordability requirement of § 6602.1(c) of this chapter if they meet or exceed the affordability requirements of § 6602.1(c) of this chapter.

6602.3 Each real property for which the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) has approved a tax abatement under D.C. Official Code § 47-860.02(a) shall be:

Exempt from the requirement to enter into a First Source Agreement for the construction and development phases of the development; and

(b) Exempt from the requirements of the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) of 1980, effective September 10, 1980 (D.C. Law 3-86; D.C. Official Code § 43-3404.01 et seq.), for the first sale within ten (10) years after the certificate of occupancy has been issued for the real property.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6602*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6603** APPLICATION FOR TAX ABATEMENT {#sec-10-b6603 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6603}

6603.1 In order to be considered for the award of a tax abatement under this chapter, an owner, or its designee or assignee, shall submit an application for its development to DMPED. The application shall be in such form and include such information as required by DMPED pursuant to § 6603.3 of this chapter.

6603.2 An application for a tax abatement under this chapter may be submitted only in response to a competitive process initiated by DMPED. The competitive process shall set forth the requirements of an application and the standards by which applications will be reviewed and tax abatement reservations granted.

6603.3 Each application shall include:

Proof of current non-residential use of the parcel, or, if the parcel is currently vacant, proof that the most-recent use of the parcel was non-residential;

The name(s) of the owner of the real property and, if different than the owner, the applicant and the developer;

The address or addresses of the parcel;

The square, suffix, if any, and lot number(s) of the parcel;

A description of the planned development on the parcel;

The total number of housing units that will be constructed as part of the development;

The total number of affordable housing units that will be constructed as part of the development, including housing units required pursuant to the Inclusionary Zoning Program and other affordable housing units included in the development pursuant to Zoning Commission requirements;

For each affordable housing unit, the number of bedrooms in the unit and the median family income level of affordability for the unit;

An acknowledgment that the affordable housing units shall be designed and administered in accordance with the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Program for the term of the tax abatement;

Three (3) dated photographs of the parcel taken within the thirty (30) day period that precedes the date of submission of the application;

A copy of the agreement required under § 6602.1(f) of this chapter for the construction of the development, and a certification from the owner, or its designee or assignee, that it is in compliance with the requirements of the agreement;

An area map showing the boundaries of the eligible area with the parcel identified by a location arrow;

Anticipated entitlement and construction milestones for the development, including the estimated date the certificate of occupancy will be issued for the development;

The years for which the tax abatement is requested and the annual dollar amount of tax abatement provided that, the length of the requested tax abatement shall not exceed twenty (20) years;

Pro formas and other financial analyses for the construction and operation of the development to justify the development’s financial need for the tax abatement;

A copy of the recorded deed evidencing the owner’s fee simple ownership of the parcel;

If the applicant is not the owner of the parcel, an agreement evidencing the owner’s designation of the applicant as an assignee or designee of the owner for purposes of the program, such as a copy of an executed lease evidencing the applicant’s leasehold interest in the parcel or an executed contract of sale for the parcel by which the applicant will obtain fee simple ownership of or a leasehold interest in the parcel; and

Any additional materials requested by DMPED in the competitive process.

6603.4 Each applicant shall supplement its application with such information and documentation as DMPED may request during the competitive process.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6603*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6604** APPLICATION REVIEW {#sec-10-b6604 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6604}

6604.1 DMPED shall review each application submitted in the order in which it is received. DMPED shall assess each application, and give preference to applications, based on the benefit of the proposed development to the area surrounding the parcel and the District, as a whole, as described in the competitive process.

6604.2 Within thirty (30) business days after receiving a complete application, DMPED shall review the application and either:

Approve the application;

Deny the application;

Request additional information from the applicant; or

Inform the applicant that additional time is needed to complete the review of the application.

6604.3 DMPED shall determine the amount of a tax abatement award based on a development’s financial feasibility and need, as evidenced by the pro formas or other financial analyses submitted as part of the application.

6604.4 If DMPED approves an application, DMPED shall transmit an eligibility and reservation letter to the applicant that:

Confirms the real property is eligible for a tax abatement and that DMPED has reserved a tax abatement for the development;

States the annual dollar amount of the abatement, which may be less than the amount requested in the application;

Identifies the conditions that must be met, including dates certain of entitlement and construction milestones for the development, to avoid a forfeiture of the tax abatement reservation and to be eligible to receive a tax abatement certification; and

Details the information required to be submitted by the applicant and the process to request a certification of tax abatement.

6604.5 If an application is submitted that is not complete, DMPED shall transmit to the applicant either a denial letter or a request for additional information required for consideration of the application.

6604.6 If DMPED denies an application, DMPED shall transmit to the applicant a denial letter that shall state the reason for the denial.

6604.7 DMPED shall deny an application if:

The amount of the tax abatement requested would place the total allocated funding for the abatement program above the maximum amount set forth in § 6601.2 of this chapter;

The real property is ineligible for the abatement; or

(c) DMPED determines that the benefits to the District are inadequate or that other competitive proposals provide more benefit to the District.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6604*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6605** TAX ABATEMENT CERTIFICATION PROCESS {#sec-10-b6605 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6605}

6605.1 If a development meets the requirements and conditions in the eligibility and reservation letter, the owner may request a tax abatement certification.

6605.2 An owner’s request for a tax abatement certification shall include:

A copy of the covenant filed in the land records, as required by § 6606.1 of this chapter;

The certificate of occupancy for the development;

The certificate of inclusionary zoning compliance for the development or another certification from the Department of Buildings that all the affordable housing units are designed in accordance with the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Program;

A copy of the agreement required under § 6602.1(f) of this chapter for the operation of the development, and a certification from the owner, or its designee or assignee, that it is in compliance with the requirements of the agreement;

A copy of the agreement required under § 6602.1(g) of this chapter, and a certification from the Department of Employment Services that the owner, or its designee or assignee, is in compliance with the requirements of the agreement; and

Any other outstanding information or documents that DMPED has required.

6605.3 Within thirty (30) business days after receiving a complete request for a tax abatement certification, DMPED will review the request and approve the request, deny the request, request additional information from the owner, or inform the owner that additional time is needed to complete review of the request.

6605.4 If the owner submits an incomplete request, DMPED shall either transmit to the owner either a denial letter or a request for additional information required for consideration of the request.

6605.5 If DMPED approves the request, DMPED shall issue a certification of the real property’s eligibility for the tax abatement and shall provide a copy of the certification to the owner and the Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR).

6605.6 The tax abatement certification shall include:

The street address, square, suffix, if any, and lot(s) of the parcel;

The date of the certificate of occupancy was issued for the development;

The dates the tax abatement begins and ends;

The annual dollar amount of the tax abatement and the schedule of the tax abatement dollar amounts to be reflected on the real property tax bills for the real property; and

A statement that the conditions required by D.C. Official Code § 47-860.02 and this chapter have been satisfied.

6605.7 An approved tax abatement shall begin in the tax year during which the certificate of occupancy is issued for the development and shall continue for a period of twenty (20) tax years unless earlier terminated by DMPED in accordance with D.C. Official Code § 47-860.03(a)(2) and this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6605*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6606** COVENANT {#sec-10-b6606 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6606}

6606.1 Before DMPED issues a tax abatement certification under § 6605 of this chapter, the owner shall file a covenant in the land records covenanting to comply with the requirements of D.C. Official Code § 47-860.02(a)(2) and (3) and §§ 6608.3 and 6608.4 of this chapter.

6606.2 The covenant shall include such declarations as the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) may require and shall be in a form found legally sufficient by the Office of the General Counsel of DHCD.

6606.3 The covenant shall run with the land and shall bind the owner and all of its successors and assigns.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6606*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6607** ONGOING AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b6607 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6607}

6607.1 To continue to be eligible to receive the tax abatement provided by this chapter and D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.01 - .04, the owner shall:

Maintain during the tax abatement period:

At least ten percent (10%) of the housing units in the development as affordable to, and set aside for, households that earn no more than sixty percent (60%) of the median family income; or

At least eighteen percent (18%) of the housing units in the development as affordable to, and set aside for, households that earn no more than eighty percent (80%) of the median family income; and

Comply with other requirements of the covenant.

6607.2 If the calculation of the number of affordable housing units required under Section § 6607.1 of this chapter results in a fractional number, then the required number of affordable housing units shall be rounded up to the next whole number.

6607.3 Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.01 - .04, the affordable housing units shall be designed and administered in accordance with the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Program.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6607*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6608** TOPA EXEMPTION {#sec-10-b6608 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6608}

6608.1 The TOPA exemption shall start on the first day of the applicability of the tax abatement for the real property.

6608.2 The TOPA exemption shall only apply to the first sale of the real property or the development within ten (10) years after the certificate of occupancy for the development has been issued.

6608.3 Before an individual enters into a lease for a housing unit located on the real property that is exempt from TOPA, the owner of the real property shall provide written notice to the individual of the property’s exemption from TOPA.

6608.4 The owner shall provide periodic reports to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) evidencing its compliance with the requirements contained in § 6608.3 of this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6608*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6609** NONCOMPLIANCE {#sec-10-b6609 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6609}

6609.1 DMPED shall deem a real property ineligible for the tax abatement if it determines that the owner or the real property fails to meet the conditions in the tax abatement certification, in this chapter, or in the D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.01 - .04 during the tax abatement period.

6609.2 If at any time during the tax abatement period DMPED determines that the real property has become ineligible for the tax abatement, DMPED shall transmit to OTR and the owner a letter of termination, setting forth the reason(s) for the termination and the date on which the termination took, or shall take, effect.

6609.3 If DMPED determines that the real property has become ineligible for the tax abatement, DMPED may, in its sole discretion, provide the owner a period to cure the real property’s ineligibility. If the owner cures the property’s ineligibility during the period to cure, DMPED may, subject to D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.03(b), restore the tax abatement. The tax abatement shall not be provided for the period during which the real property was ineligible, and the period of cure shall not toll the 20-year period set forth in D.C. Official Code §§ 47-860.03(a)(1) and § 6605.7 of this chapter.

6609.4 The real property shall be ineligible for the abatement on the first day of the tax half year following the date when DMPED determined the real property to be ineligible.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6609*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6699** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6699 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6699}

6699.1 When used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed:

Affordable housing unit – a housing unit that is affordable to, and set aside for, households meeting the income limits required by § 6602.1(c) of this chapter.

CBE Act – the Small and Certified Business Enterprise Development and Assistance Act of 2005, effective October 20, 2005 (D.C. Law 16-33; D.C. Official Code § 2-218.01 et seq.).

Certificate of inclusionary zoning compliance – the certificate approved by the Department of Buildings in accordance with Section 105 of the Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Amendment Act of 2006, effective March 14, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-275; D.C. Official Code § 6-1041.05).

Certificate of occupancy – a document issued by the Department of Buildings pursuant to 12A DCMR § 110.4.1. If more than one certificate of occupancy is issued for the development, then the latest issued certificate of occupancy shall be used for approvals and determining the start of the tax abatement under this chapter.

Certified business enterprise – a business enterprise or joint venture certified pursuant to the CBE Act.

Change in use – a change in use from non-residential use to residential use through any manner of conversion, including adaptive reuse or full redevelopment.

Competitive process – a request for applications or similar process by which applications for tax abatements under this chapter are solicited or accepted by DMPED.

DCMR – the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations.

Developer – an individual or entity that is engaged by an owner to design and construct a development.

Development – the buildings or improvements constructed or redeveloped that include housing units on or within a parcel. If a building includes multiple uses, only the portion of the building comprising the housing units and common areas solely serving the housing units, including lobbies, stairwells, elevators, loading docks, and amenity space, shall be considered the development under this chapter.

DMPED – the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development.

Eligible area – the area described in D.C. Official Code § 47-860.01(2)(A), and such other portions of the central business district, described as follows:

The geographic area beginning at the intersection of Florida Avenue, N.W., and 20th Street, N.W.; continuing south along 20th Street, N.W., to Connecticut Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along Connecticut Avenue, N.W., to Dupont Circle, N.W.; continuing clockwise around Dupont Circle, N.W., to Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., to Scott Circle, N.W.; continuing clockwise around Scott Circle, N.W., to Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., to Thomas Circle, N.W.; continuing clockwise around Thomas Circle, N.W., to Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., to Mount Vernon Place, N.W.; continuing east along Allen Y. Lew Place (formerly Mount Vernon Place), N.W., to 7th Street, N.W.; continuing south along 7th Street, N.W., to Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.; continuing southeast along Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., to North Capitol Street; continuing south along North Capitol Street to Louisiana Avenue, N.W.; continuing southwest along Louisiana Avenue, N.W., to Constitution Avenue, N.W.; continuing west along Constitution Avenue, N.W., through the intersection with Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., to 15th Street, N.W.; continuing north along 15th Street, N.W., to H Street, N.W.; continuing west along H Street, N.W., to 17th Street, N.W.; continuing south along 17th Street, N.W., to Constitution Avenue, N.W.; continuing west along Constitution Avenue, N.W., to Virginia Avenue, N.W.; continuing northwest along Virginia Avenue, N.W., to D Street, N.W.; continuing west along D Street, N.W., to 23rd Street, N.W.; continuing north along 23rd Street N.W., to Washington Circle, N.W.; continuing clockwise around Washington Circle, N.W., to Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.; continuing northwest along Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., to 25th Street, N.W.; continuing north along 25th Street, N.W., to N Street, N.W.; continuing east along N Street, N.W., to 22nd Street, N.W.; continuing north along 22nd Street, N.W., to Florida Avenue, N.W.; continue northeast along Florida Avenue, N.W., to 20th Street, N.W. (the starting point).

First Source Agreement – an agreement with the District governing certain obligations of the developer regarding job creation and employment, pursuant to Section 4 of the First Source Employment Agreement Act of 1984, effective June 29, 1984 (D.C. Law 5-93; D.C. Official Code § 2-219.03) and Mayor’s Order 83-265, dated November 9, 1983.

Household – all persons who will occupy an affordable housing unit, which may, subject to occupancy standards contained in Title 14 Chapter 22 of the DCMR, be:

A single family;

One (1) person living alone;

Two (2) or more families living together; or

Any other group of related or unrelated persons who share living arrangements.

Housing unit – any room or group of rooms forming a single unit that is used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, and the preparation and eating of meals, and that is located within a building that is wholly or partially used or intended to be used for living and sleeping by human occupants.

Inclusionary Zoning Program –the provisions of the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations and the Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Amendment Act of 2006, effective March 14, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-275; D. C. Official Code § 6-1041.01 et seq.).

Land records – the land records of the Office of the Recorder of Deeds.

Median family income – the median family income for a household in the Washington Metropolitan Statistical Area as set forth in the periodic calculation provided by United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), adjusted for family size without regard to any adjustments made by HUD for the purposes of the programs it administers.

Non-residential use – a use category defined in 11-B DCMR §200.2 other than residential.

Operations – all property maintenance, resident services, and related functions necessary to operate and maintain a development.

Owner – the owner(s) of the fee simple interest in parcel on or in which a development is constructed or redeveloped.

Parcel - the parcel(s) of land or air lots on or in which a development is constructed and operated.

Real property – the parcel and the improvements comprising the development.

Residential use – the use category as defined in 11-B DCMR §200.2(aa).

Sale – sale as defined in Section 402 of the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act of 1980, effective September 10, 1980 (D.C. Law 3-86; D.C. Official Code § 42-3404.02).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 003248 (March 22, 2024). District of Columbia Municipal Regulations Planning and Development 10-B DCMR § 6699*

### **10-B69** COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

##### **10-B DCMR § 6900** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-b6900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6900}

6900.1 The purpose of the Community Development Program (CDP) established under D.C. Law 1-39, D.C. Code §5-901 et seq. (1988 Repl. Vol.), is to maintain and develop the District as a viable urban community for persons of low and moderate income by doing the following:

(a) Providing decent housing;

(b) Providing a suitable living environment; and

6900.1 The purpose and scope of this chapter is to set forth the process by which the District of Columbia government (the "District"), through the Department of Housing and Community Development ("DHCD"), shall provide grants and other forms of assistance to carry out the Community Development Program (CDP).

6900.2 Grants or other forms of assistance provided under the authority of the CDP from federal, District or other funding sources, shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter, unless otherwise provided for under more specific rules for community development program activity elsewhere in the D.C. Municipal Regulations, or the Code of Federal Regulations, including the Community Development Block Grant Program (24 CRF Part 570).

6900.3 This chapter shall govern agreements for grants or other forms of assistance involving the transfer of money, property or anything of value to persons or other legal entities to carry out a public purpose in accordance with an approved CDP.

6900.4 The Director may enter into written agreements with other agencies of the District for the purposes of fund transfer and implementation of the CDP without regard to the requirements of this chapter.

6900.5 The Director may, for good cause shown in writing, waive any provisions of this chapter, consistent with applicable law. All waivers shall be justified by a determination that undue hardship will result from applying the requirement and where application of the requirement would adversely affect the purpose and objectives of the CDP.

##### **10-B DCMR § 6901** ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM {#sec-10-b6901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6901}

6901.1 The Mayor shall prepare on an annual basis a CDP pursuant to the requirements of the Act, including notice and hearing requirements.

6901.2 Following submission to and approval of the CDP by the Council, DHCD shall implement the program and activities of the approved CDP.

6901.3 Any modifications to the CDP shall be made in a manner consistent with §3 of D.C. Code §5-902.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 5814, 5815 (August 11, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6902** PUBLIC NOTICE AND APPLICATION SUBMISSION PROCESS {#sec-10-b6902 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6902}

6902.1 The Director, or his or her designee, may provide grants or other forms of assistance to person(s) or other legal entities (including community based organizations) requesting assistance consistent with an approved CDP.

6902.2 Grants or other forms of assistance may be made as follows:

(a) In response to a specific solicitation for application to carry out a specific program or activity of the approved CDP;

(b) In response to a general solicitation for applications to carry out activities consistent with the approved CDP; or

6902.3 Solicitations for applications shall be published as follows:

(a) In no less than one (1) newspaper of general circulation in the District of Columbia;

(b) In two (2) or more newspapers serving minority communities in the District of Columbia; and

6902.4 The Director, or his or her designee, shall establish reasonable time periods for the receipt of applications as provided for in §6902.2.

6902.5 All solicitations shall set forth objective selection criteria which may include, without limitation, the following:

(a) Timeliness of response;

(b) Feasibility;

(d) Experience of the proposed grantee in similar activities;

(e) Cost effectiveness;

(f) Consistency with the approved CDP; and

(g) Level of contribution toward achieving the goals of the CDP.

6902.6 All applications shall be in a form prescribed by the Director, or his or her designee, which shall include, but not limited to, the following:

(a) A description of the activity to be funded, the amount of funding requested and a detailed budget for the funds;

(b) A statement showing how the activity meets eligibility criteria for assistance, and the relation of the activity to the approved CDP; and

6902.7 Unsolicited applications submitted consistent with §§6902.2(c) and 6902.4, shall be recorded on a register which is available for public inspection during regular business hours of DHCD.

6902.8 Persons wishing to inspect applications may do so by filing a written request with the official designated in the register of unsolicited applications maintained by DHCD. Information shall be provided consistent with the Freedom of Information Act, D.C. Code §1-1521 et seq. (1987 Repl. Vol.).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 5814, 5815 (August 11, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6903** REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-b6903 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6903}

6903.1 The Director, or his or her designee, shall review each proposal for completeness and compliance with requirements of the solicitation.

6903.2 The Director, or his or her designee, may reject applications which are initially determined incomplete or ineligible, and may, in his or her sole discretion, for good cause grant additional time to enable applicants to correct deficiencies identified during the initial evaluation of the application(s).

6903.3 The Director, or his or her designee, shall also review the application(s) for consistency with the approved CDP, any ranking and selection criteria established in the solicitation, or other applicable requirements for the provision of grants or other forms of assistance.

6903.4 The Director, or his or her designee, consistent with his or her authority, shall make the final decision on application approvals, selecting those applications which best meet the applicable program priorities and selection criteria.

6903.5 The Director, or his or her designee, shall notify all applicants in writing of final decisions regarding approval or disapproval of applications. For unsolicited applications, the final decision shall also be recorded in the register noted in §6902.7. Approvals may be subject to the satisfaction of further conditions set forth in the approval letter.

6903.6 The Director, or his or her designee, may approve grants or other forms of assistance for less than the amount requested.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 5814, 5817 (August 11, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6904** FUNDING AGREEMENTS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-b6904 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6904}

6904.1 All grants or other forms of assistance shall be made pursuant to written agreements and shall be legally binding documents consistent with all requirements of law and regulation prior to the release of any funds by the District.

6904.2 The specific form and content of any agreement for funding shall be at the discretion of the Director, or his or her designee, and may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:

(a) The purpose, amount, terms and conditions attaching to the funds provided;

(b) Time of performance and method of payment;

(d) Provisions for the termination of assistance; and

(e) Any other requirements of law, regulation, operation or enforcement necessary and appropriate to the provision of funds.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 5814, 5815 (August 11, 1989).*

##### **10-B DCMR § 6999** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-b6999 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-B6999}

6999.1 When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed:

Act - the Community Development Act of 1975, D.C. Law 1-39 (D.C. Code §5-901 et seq.) (1988 Repl. Vol.).

CDP - the Community Development Program, as defined by D.C. Law 1-39 (D.C. Code §5-901 et seq.) (1988 Repl. Vol.).

Council - the Council of the District of Columbia.

DHCD - the Department of Housing and Community Development.

Director - the Director of the Department of Housing and Community Development.

District - the government of the District of Columbia.

Mayor - the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 37 DCR 5814, 5815 (August 11, 1989).*

## **10-C** HISTORIC PRESERVATION

### **10-C1** GENERAL PROVISIONS

##### **10-C DCMR § 100** APPLICABILITY AND AUTHORITY {#sec-10-c100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C100}

100.1 These regulations govern implementation of the historic preservation programs of the District of Columbia, including activities conducted pursuant to both District and Federal law.

100.2 These regulations may be cited as the "District of Columbia Historic Preservation Regulations."

100.3 These regulations implement the historic preservation provisions of the following statutes:

(a) The Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 (D.C. Law 2-144, as amended; D.C. Official Code §6-1101 et seq.), also referred to as the "Historic Protection Act" or "the Act";

(b) The Old Georgetown Act of 1950 (D.C. Official Code § 6-1201 et seq.);

(d) The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (80 Stat. 915 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.);

(e) The Abatement and Condemnation of Nuisance Properties Omnibus Amendment Act of 2000 (D.C. Law 13-281; D.C. Official Code § 6-801 et seq. (2002 Supp.)); and

(f) The Housing Act of 2002 (D.C. Law 14-114; D.C. Official Code § 6-802 et seq. (2002 Supp.)).

100.4 The regulations are coordinated and intended to be consistent with the following statutes and regulations:

(a) The Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-501 et seq.);

(b) The Advisory Neighborhood Commission Act, as amended (D.C. Official Code § 1-309), also referred to as the "ANC Act";

(c) The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Civil Infractions Act of 1985 (D.C. Official Code § 2-1801 et seq.);

(d) D.C. Zoning Regulations (DCMR Title 11); and

(e) D.C. Construction Codes (DCMR Title 12).

100.5 If there is a conflict between these and other D.C. regulations, the more restrictive rule shall apply.

100.6 These rules are promulgated jointly by the Director, Office of Planning and the Historic Preservation Review Board.

100.7 Unless otherwise noted, the authority for this chapter is § 10 of the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1109), §§ 2 and 3 of Mayor's Order 79-50, effective March 21, 1979, § 6 of Mayor's Order 83-119, effective May 6, 1983, 30 DCR 3031 (June 17, 1983), § III(B)(8) of the Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1983 (effective March 31, 1983), and § 402(b) of the Fiscal Year 2001 Budget Support Act of 2000 (D.C. Law 13-172, effective October 19, 2000).

100.8 These rules apply to the activities of the Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, Historic Preservation Review Board, and Historic Preservation Office after [the effective date]. Applications and any other pending actions filed before the effective date of these regulations shall be considered under the rules in effect when the applications were filed.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 101** INTENT AND PURPOSES {#sec-10-c101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C101}

101.1 The intent of these regulations is to promote the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of properties of historical, cultural, and aesthetic merit in the interests of the health, prosperity, and welfare of the people of the District of Columbia.

101.2 The intent of the regulations is further to promote the following expressed purposes of the Historic Protection Act:

(a) Effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of historic landmarks and districts which represent distinctive elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political and architectural history;

(b) Safeguard the city's historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage, as embodied and reflected in such landmarks and districts;

(d) Protect and enhance the city's attraction to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy thereby provided; and

(e) Promote the use of landmarks and historic districts for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of the District of Columbia.

101.3 The Historic Protection Act promotes an equitable balance between the rights of property owners and the benefits of preservation conveyed to the general public.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 102** HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGENCIES, OFFICIALS AND PARTICIPANTS {#sec-10-c102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C102}

102.1 District of Columbia historic preservation programs are implemented by the Mayor, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Historic Preservation Review Board. Other District and Federal agencies and officials also perform related or incidental historic preservation functions.

102.2 These agencies and officials work with the owners of historic property to achieve the purposes and benefits of historic preservation.

102.3 These agencies and officials also work with interested members of the public, as individuals or through Advisory Neighborhood Commissions and historic preservation organizations, to achieve the purposes and benefits of historic preservation.

102.4 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Mayor;

(b) Mayor's Agent;

(d) Historic Preservation Review Board;

(e) Historic Preservation Office;

(f) Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs;

(g) Commission of Fine Arts;

(h) Old Georgetown Board;

(i) Advisory Neighborhood Commission; and

(j) Historic preservation organization.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 103** FUNCTIONS OF THE MAYOR {#sec-10-c103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C103}

103.1 The Mayor may designate a Mayor's Agent to carry out any or all of the Mayor's responsibilities pursuant to the Historic Protection Act. This authority notwithstanding, some of the Mayor's functions are reserved to the Mayor by statute, or may be delegated to other agencies or officials, as appropriate.

103.2 The Mayor appoints a State Historic Preservation Officer to carry out the District of Columbia historic preservation programs established under the National Historic Preservation Act, and any other duties authorized under District or Federal law.

103.3 The Mayor may delegate the responsibility for giving notice of applications pursuant to the Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108) to the Permit Processing Division of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, or another appropriate agency.

103.4 The Mayor includes in the budget estimates of the District of Columbia such amounts as may be necessary for the revolving fund established pursuant to the Act.

103.5 The Mayor submits to the Council an annual report on implementation of the Act and on the financial condition and uses of the revolving fund.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 104** FUNCTIONS OF THE MAYOR'S AGENT {#sec-10-c104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C104}

104.1 The Mayor's Agent reviews proposed work affecting historic properties, including demolition, alteration, subdivision, and new construction, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108).

(a) This authority may also be exercised by the person designated as a hearing officer for the Mayor's Agent. Although the Mayor's official designee remains the nominal Mayor's Agent, this hearing officer is titled the Mayor's Agent by custom, and exercises the Mayor's authority to decide cases involving a public hearing under D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108.

(b) The remainder of this authority is exercised by the Historic Preservation Office, acting as the administrative staff to the Mayor's Agent.

104.2 The Mayor's Agent refers applications for this proposed work to the Historic Preservation Review Board and Commission of Fine Arts, as appropriate, for advice pursuant to the Act.

(a) This authority may be exercised by the Historic Preservation Office under the supervision of the Mayor's Agent.

(b) The Mayor's Agent may provide direction to the Permit Processing Division of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs in the processing of these administrative referrals.

104.3 The Mayor's Agent considers this advice and makes preliminary and final findings on the issuance of permits, as provided in the Act.

(a) This authority may be exercised by the Historic Preservation Office, acting under the supervision of the Mayor's Agent and in accordance with these regulations.

(b) If there is a public hearing, this authority may be exercised directly by the Mayor's Agent (Hearing Officer).

104.4 The Mayor's Agent holds mandatory public hearings on applications involving demolition of historic landmarks or contributing building in historic districts, subdivision of historic landmarks, a claim of unreasonable economic hardship or special merit, or an applicant's request after a recommendation of denial from the Historic Preservation Review Board or Commission of Fine Arts. The Mayor's Agent also exercises sole discretion to hold optional public hearings on other applications pursuant to the Act.

(a) This authority may be delegated to the Mayor's Agent (Hearing Officer).

(b) The procedural rules for public hearings in Chapters 4, 30 and 32 refer to the functions of the Mayor's Agent (Hearing Officer) under this delegated authority.

104.5 The Mayor's Agent determines if historic landmarks or contributing buildings in historic districts are threatened by demolition by neglect, and pursues appropriate remedies pursuant to the Act.

(a) This authority may be exercised by the Historic Preservation Office under the supervision of the Mayor's Agent.

(b) The Historic Preservation Office may pursue enforcement remedies with the assistance of the Office of the Corporation Counsel, the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, or other agencies as appropriate.

104.6 The Mayor's Agent issues regulations to carry out the provisions of the Act. These regulations may be issued jointly with the State Historic Preservation Officer and Historic Preservation Review Board.

104.7 The Mayor's Agent may enter into agreements with DCRA to provide for primary or coordinated enforcement of the Historic Protection Act by the HPO staff.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 105** FUNCTIONS OF THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER {#sec-10-c105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C105}

105.1 The State Historic Preservation Officer performs the functions and duties authorized or required by the National Historic Preservation Act and other Federal laws and regulations. These functions and duties include:

(a) Implementing a comprehensive preservation planning process;

(b) Directing and conducting the comprehensive survey of historic properties;

(d) Administering the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) Grant-in-Aid program;

(e) Advising and assisting Federal and District agencies in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities;

(f) Cooperating with Federal and District agencies to ensure that historic properties are taken into consideration at all levels of planning and development;

(g) Reviewing applications for Federal preservation tax credits; and

(h) Providing public information, education, training, and technical assistance related to historic preservation programs.

105.2 The State Historic Preservation Officer also performs any other functions and duties authorized or required by District of Columbia law and regulations. These functions and duties include:

(a) Reviewing zoning and other administrative referrals from the Office of Zoning and other agencies;

(b) Issuing certifications of eligibility for historic preservation tax credits and other administrative relief; and

105.3 The State Historic Preservation Officer may delegate any of these functions and authorities to the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer or to the Historic Preservation Office to the extent allowable under these or other applicable federal regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 106** FUNCTIONS OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD {#sec-10-c106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C106}

106.1 The Board designates and maintains a current inventory of historic landmarks and historic districts, and adopts related procedures (contained in Chapter 2).

106.2 The Board advises the Mayor on the compatibility with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1101) of proposed work affecting historic properties, under D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108.

106.3 The Board performs the functions and duties of a State Review Board as set forth in regulations issued pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act, the Historic Protection Act, and other applicable legislation.

106.4 The Board acts upon referrals from the Foreign Missions Board of Zoning Adjustment relating to the new construction, demolition and alteration of foreign missions, chanceries, and international organizations located in historic districts or historic landmarks, pursuant to the Foreign Missions Act (22 U.S.C. § 4306).

106.5 The Board performs other functions and duties relating to the protection, preservation, enhancement and perpetuation of the historic, architectural, cultural and aesthetic heritage of the District of Columbia as the Mayor may from time to time assign.

106.6 The Board may delegate any of these functions or authorities to the Historic Preservation Office to the extent allowed by law and these regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 107** FUNCTIONS OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE {#sec-10-c107 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C107}

107.1 The Historic Preservation Office serves as the professional staff to the Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Historic Preservation Review Board.

107.2 The HPO performs customary staff functions as well as any functions and duties specifically delegated to it by the Mayor's Agent, SHPO, or HPRB.

107.3 The Historic Preservation Office also performs any other functions assigned in its role as a component of the Office of Planning.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 108** FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS {#sec-10-c108 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C108}

108.1 The Mayor receives recommendations from the Commission of Fine Arts on referrals for review of proposed demolition, alteration, or new construction pursuant to the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104, 6-1105, 6-1107, or 6-1108).

108.2 When applicable, recommendations from the Commission may incorporate the advice of the Old Georgetown Board.

108.3 The Commission makes recommendations in accordance with the Shipstead-Luce Act, Old Georgetown Act, and any implementing regulations, procedures, or policies that it may adopt.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 109** FUNCTIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS {#sec-10-c109 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C109}

109.1 The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) accepts and transmits applications to the Mayor's Agent and CFA for review pursuant to the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108), and issues permits and subdivisions upon approval by the Mayor's Agent.

109.2 DCRA enforces construction codes and other regulations governing work subject to review under the Historic Protection Act, and other health and safety laws and regulations affecting historic property. This function includes condemnation proceedings, civil sanctions, adjudications, and other enforcement action.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 110** PUBLIC PARTICIPATION {#sec-10-c110 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C110}

110.1 The views of property owners and the general public are essential to informed decisionmaking in the historic preservation process established under the Act.

110.2 Advisory Neighborhood Commissions and historic preservation organizations play a crucial role in seeking recognition and protection of the cultural heritage of the District of Columbia, and in facilitating public involvement in the historic preservation process.

110.3 Members of the public as individuals and organizations are encouraged to participate fully and to express their views in the historic preservation process, including as parties in contested case hearings held pursuant to these regulations.

110.4 The officially adopted written views of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions shall be accorded great weight in the historic preservation process as provided in the ANC Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C2** DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND DISTRICTS

##### **10-C DCMR § 200** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C200}

200.1 The Review Board shall maintain the D.C. Inventory of Historic Sites, and shall designate historic landmarks and historic districts for inclusion in the Inventory.

200.2 The Act protects historic landmarks and historic districts differently during the designation process. The Act protects a proposed historic landmark temporarily when an application is officially filed, and permanently upon designation, but the Act does not protect properties within a proposed historic district until after the Board designates the district and the State Historic Preservation Officer nominates or issues a written determination to nominate the district to the National Register of Historic Places.

200.3 The Review Board and SHPO shall comment on Federal agency nominations to the National Register, and on National Historic Landmark designations made by the Secretary of the Interior (see additional procedures in Chapters 13 and 14).

200.4 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) D.C. Inventory of Historic Sites;

(b) National Register of Historic Places;

(d) Historic district; and

(e) National Historic Landmark.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7464-65 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 201** CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION IN THE D.C. INVENTORY {#sec-10-c201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C201}

201.1 Historic and prehistoric buildings, building interiors, structures, monuments, works of art or other similar objects, areas, places, sites, neighborhoods, and cultural landscapes are eligible for designation as historic landmarks or historic districts if they possess one or more of the following values or qualities:

(a) Events: They are the site of events that contributed significantly to the heritage, culture or development of the District of Columbia or the nation;

(b) History: They are associated with historical periods, social movements, groups, institutions, achievements, or patterns of growth and change that contributed significantly to the heritage, culture or development of the District of Columbia or the nation;

(c) Individuals: They are associated with the lives of persons significant to the history of the District of Columbia or the nation;

(d) Architecture and Urbanism: They embody the distinguishing characteristics of architectural styles, building types, or methods of construction, or are expressions of landscape architecture, engineering, or urban planning, siting, or design significant to the appearance and development of the District of Columbia or the nation;

(e) Artistry: They possess high artistic or aesthetic values that contribute significantly to the heritage and appearance of the District of Columbia or the nation;

(f) Creative Masters: They have been identified as notable works of craftsmen, artists, sculptors, architects, landscape architects, urban planners, engineers, builders, or developers whose works have influenced the evolution of their fields of endeavor, or are significant to the development of the District of Columbia or the nation; or

(g) Archaeology: They have yielded or may be likely to yield information significant to an understanding of historic or prehistoric events, cultures, and standards of living, building, and design.

201.2 To qualify for designation, they shall also possess sufficient integrity to convey, represent or contain the values and qualities for which they are judged significant.

201.3 To qualify for designation, sufficient time shall have passed since they achieved significance or were constructed to permit professional evaluation of them in their historical context.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 202** CRITERIA FOR LISTING IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER {#sec-10-c202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C202}

202.1 Properties meeting the criteria for designation in the D.C. Inventory are also considered to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places unless the National Register officially determines otherwise.

202.2 The criteria for listing in the National Register (36 CFR § 60.4) are:

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and:

(a) that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

(b) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

(c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

(d) that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

202.3 Properties designated by the Secretary of the Interior as National Historic Landmarks are automatically listed in the National Register, and are considered to meet the criteria for listing in the D.C. Inventory.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 203** ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS {#sec-10-c203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C203}

203.1 Application for designation of a property as a historic landmark or historic district shall be made only by the owner of the property, the Board, a public agency, governmental unit or department, Advisory Neighborhood Commission, or a historic preservation organization.

203.2 The staff may request a copy of an organization's bylaws or other establishment papers if needed to confirm its eligibility as an applicant.

203.3 A historic preservation organization established for membership or purposes within a specific neighborhood or area of the District of Columbia shall be an eligible applicant only with respect to properties within that neighborhood or area.

203.4 Any eligible applicant may co-sponsor a nomination with any other eligible applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 204** APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION {#sec-10-c204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C204}

204.1 A proposed designation for historic landmark or historic district status shall be initiated by the submission of an application to the Board in the format prescribed by the staff.

204.2 The application shall contain a signed official application form and two complete sets of the following minimum information, preferably submitted with an electronic copy;

(a) The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant;

(b) The name and street address of the property proposed for designation, or the name and location if there is no street address;

(d) The official square and lot or parcel number(s) of the property, or if a historic district application, a list of the squares within the proposed boundaries, indicating specific lots, parcels or public reservations where necessary;

(e) A statement of the prehistoric, historic, architectural and/or cultural significance of the property;

(f) A narrative statement of the history and historical development of the property and its relevant historic context;

(g) If a historic landmark application, a description of the present appearance of the property, and where possible its original appearance if different;

(h) If a historic district application, a description of the general character of the district and the types of buildings it contains, indicating the degree to which characteristic features have been maintained;

(i) If a historic district application, a statement of the district's period of significance (including a separate period of significance for archaeological sites, if appropriate), a list of buildings and structures considered contributing to the significance of the district, and a list of those considered non-contributing;

(j) If an application proposed for archaeological significance, a description of the existing condition of the property, indicating what is known about the type and condition of the archaeological deposits;

(k) A list of bibliographic and other sources used to prepare the application, indicating the repository of any sources not readily available;

(l) A clear and accurate map showing the exact boundaries of the property proposed for designation, and if a historic district application, a narrative description of the proposed boundaries of the district; and

(m) Contemporary, good quality black and white photographs of the property (preferably 8 by 10 inches in size), sufficient to provide a clear and accurate visual representation of the property and its setting, and if a historic district application, showing buildings, streetscapes, and other views representative of the district.

204.3 The application shall contain sufficient information to consider nomination of the property to the National Register, and the application shall be considered a draft National Register nomination even if not submitted on a National Register nomination form.

204.4 A fully completed National Register nomination form shall constitute an acceptable application provided that it includes the minimum information required for filing and is accompanied by any other application form required by the staff.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 205** FILING FEES {#sec-10-c205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C205}

205.1 The application filing fee to designate a historic landmark is as follows:

(a) Up to five buildings $ 100

(b) More than five buildings $ $200

205.2 The application filing fee to designate a historic district is as follows:

(a) Fewer than 100 buildings $ 250

(b) 100-750 buildings $ 500

In addition to the applicable filing fees above, the follow fees shall be charged for transmittal to the following agencies when applicable:

(a) Commission of Fine Arts $ 25

(b) National Capitol Planning Commission

Review of project in the Pennsylvania

Avenue Development Corporation Area $ 25

Except as provided in 203.6, the applicant shall pay the non-refundable filing fee before the assignment of a case number. Payment shall be by check payable to the District of Columbia Treasurer.

Federal and District government agencies, including ANCs, are not required to pay filing fee.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004); as amended by section 2013 of the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Support Act of 2011, effective September 14, 2011 (D.C. Law 19-21), published at 58 DCR 6226, 6247 (July 29, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 206** MULTIPLE PROPERTY DESIGNATIONS {#sec-10-c206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C206}

206.1 The Board may consider multiple or discontiguous properties for designation as historic landmarks or historic districts. Multiple property designations shall be for properties that are historically, physically, thematically, or otherwise related.

206.2 The staff may determine whether a proposed designation of multiple or discontiguous properties should be filed as a historic landmark or historic district application, or as multiple applications, as appropriate.

206.3 The Board may also consider and adopt National Register multiple property registration forms as a framework for the designation of related properties.

(a) The staff shall assign a case number to a multiple property registration form, and shall process the application in the same manner as other designation applications.

(b) There is no filing fee for the multiple property registration form itself, but the fee is required for each historic landmark or historic district application filed with the multiple property form.

(c) If adopted, a multiple property registration form does not by itself constitute the designation of any historic landmark or district. It serves as the Board's acceptance of relevant documentation about a type or group of potential historic properties, and as the Board's endorsement of a basis and methodology for making determinations on the designation of these properties.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 207** DESIGNATION INITIATED BY THE BOARD {#sec-10-c207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C207}

207.1 The Board may initiate a historic landmark or historic district designation by directing the staff to prepare an application, or by adopting an existing National Register nomination, National Historic Landmark nomination, or designation application.

207.2 The Board shall file, give notice, and act upon a Board-initiated application according to the procedures required for any other application, except that the filing fee shall be waived.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 208** OFFICIAL FILING OF AN APPLICATION {#sec-10-c208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C208}

208.1 Within ten (10) days of receipt of an application, the staff shall determine whether it is complete. If the application is complete, and the applicant has paid the applicable filing fee, the staff shall assign a case number, date stamp, and officially file the application.

208.2 When the staff has completed the official filing, the application is considered a pending application, and if the property is a proposed historic landmark, it is protected by the Act.

208.3 The staff may correct errors on an application form at any time during the filing process or before the designation hearing, and shall make a notation of any corrections on the form.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 209** NOTICE AND SCHEDULING OF A FILED APPLICATION {#sec-10-c209 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C209}

209.1 Immediately after an application is officially filed, the staff shall provide written notification to the Permit Processing Division of DCRA.

209.2 Within ten (10) days of an official filing, the staff shall mail notice of the filed application to the applicant, the owner, the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission, and the ANC single member district commissioner(s) for the area within which the property is located, using the address maintained by the Office of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions. If the application is for a historic landmark, the staff shall include a copy of the application with the notice to the owner, unless the owner is the applicant. If the application is for a historic district, the staff shall mail notice to each owner unless there are more than 50 owners, in which case the staff may place notice of the filed application in the D.C. Register instead of giving notice to each owner.

209.3 Within sixty (60) days of an official filing, the staff shall mail notice of the filed application to the public mailing list described in Chapter 32.

209.4 Within ninety (90) days of an official filing, the staff shall schedule a hearing on the application by placing a scheduling or hearing notice in the D.C. Register.

209.5 If a historic landmark application is filed when a permit application subject to review under the Act is pending at DCRA, the ninety (90) day period for a determination on the designation shall be counted from the date the historic landmark application is filed.

209.6 Within five (5) days of receipt of a notice of a filed historic landmark application, the owner of the property shall notify the staff if there is a permit application for the property pending at DCRA.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 210** AMENDMENT OR WITHDRAWAL OF A FILED APPLICATION {#sec-10-c210 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C210}

210.1 An applicant may submit a written amendment of a filed application at any time before notice of the public hearing.

210.2 An applicant may submit a written request to withdraw a filed application at any time. The filing fee is not refundable and the staff shall not return the application materials upon withdrawal.

210.3 Before the staff accepts a withdrawal, the Chairperson of the Board may adopt the application by substituting the Board as the applicant for designation.

210.4 Within ten (10) days of accepting an amendment or withdrawal, the staff shall provide notice of the amendment or withdrawal in the same manner as provided for a newly filed application in § 207.2. If an amendment is to change the boundaries of a proposed historic district, the staff is not required to send notice of the amendment to owners of property outside the area of the amendment.

210.5 If an application is withdrawn, the staff shall not accept another application to designate the same historic landmark or historic district until twelve (12) months after the date of withdrawal. The staff shall determine whether a new application is the same as a withdrawn application.

210.6 Upon receipt of any subsequent request to withdraw the refiled application, the Board shall adopt the application by substituting itself as the applicant, and shall proceed to a hearing as provided in this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 211** NOTICE OF HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION HEARING {#sec-10-c211 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C211}

211.1 At least forty-five (45) but not more than seventy-five (75) days before a designation hearing, the Board shall send notice via first class mail to the owner of the property, the applicant for designation, and the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission.

211.2 At least thirty (30) but not more than seventy-five (75) days before a designation hearing, the Board shall publish notice in the D.C. Register.

211.3 The notice shall state the date, time, place, and nature of the hearing, the name of the applicant, and an accurate description of the property proposed for designation.

211.4 The notice shall also indicate the Board's intent to consider the nomination of the property to the National Register, and shall solicit the submission of written comments on the property's significance before the hearing date. The format and content of the notice shall be approved by the National Register.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 212** NOTICE OF HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION HEARING {#sec-10-c212 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C212}

212.1 For a proposed designation of a historic district where there are 50 or fewer property owners, the Board shall provide the same notice as for a historic landmark designation hearing. The Board shall obtain the list of owners from current District of Columbia land records or tax records.

212.2 For a proposed designation of a historic district where there are more than 50 property owners, the Board shall provide the same notice as for a historic landmark designation hearing, except that instead of notice to each property owner, the Board may require the applicant to publish notice in a local newspaper of general circulation in the area of the proposed designation. The applicant shall publish this notice at least thirty (30) but not more than seventy-five (75) days before the designation hearing.

212.3 If the Board has required the applicant to publish newspaper notice of a proposed historic district designation hearing, the applicant shall also post notice in the proposed historic district at least fifteen (15) days in advance of the hearing, as follows:

(a) A notice shall be posted in a conspicuous location on each side of each block of the proposed historic district. Each notice shall be in plain view of the public.

(b) Notices shall be posted on placards supplied by the Board, and shall show the number of the application, the nature of the application, the name of the applicant, the name of the proposed historic district, the affected ANC, and the location, time, and date of the public hearing.

212.4 Not less than five (5) days before the public hearing, the applicant shall file with the Board a sworn affidavit demonstrating compliance with this posting requirement. A form of affidavit supplied by the Board may be used but is not required.

212.5 The applicant shall attach to the affidavit a photograph of each sign after posting and as viewed by the public, identifying the location of each sign and the date of each photograph.

212.6 The applicant shall make a reasonable effort to maintain the posted notice by checking the signs periodically, and by posting new notices as necessary.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 213** PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD {#sec-10-c213 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C213}

213.1 During the time between public notice and the designation hearing, the Board shall accept written comments from affected property owners and any other interested persons concurring in or objecting to the designation and National Register nomination.

213.2 During the public comment period, the staff shall keep the application and National Register nomination on file and open for public inspection at the Historic Preservation Office. The staff shall mail or email a copy of the application to any person upon request, unless the length of the application makes this impractical.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 214** PRE-HEARING SUBMISSIONS {#sec-10-c214 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C214}

214.1 Each applicant for designation shall file with the Board, at least ten (10) days before the hearing, a list of persons who will speak on the applicant's behalf.

214.2 Each owner of property proposed for historic landmark designation (if not the applicant), shall file with the Board at least seven (7) days before the hearing a list of persons who will speak on the owner's behalf.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 215** REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENT {#sec-10-c215 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C215}

215.1 The applicant for a proposed historic landmark or historic district designation may request postponement of the hearing by submitting a written request to the Board at least 48 hours before a scheduled hearing. The owner of a proposed historic landmark may request postponement of the designation hearing in the same manner.

215.2 Any request for postponement shall indicate which scheduled Board meeting is requested for a hearing date. Any request for postponement shall be accompanied by the owner's written agreement not to object to the timeliness of the Board's action due to this postponement.

215.3 The Chairperson of the Board may accept or deny a request for postponement as deemed appropriate. If there is a postponement, the Board may provide a new hearing notice as provided in this chapter, or may give notice of the postponement at the time and place originally scheduled for the hearing, in which case no further notice of the postponement is required.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 216** STAFF REPORT ON DESIGNATION APPLICATION {#sec-10-c216 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C216}

216.1 Before the designation hearing, the staff shall prepare a written report and recommendation on the designation application.

216.2 The report shall include the staff's determination with respect to the criteria for designation in the D.C. Inventory (§ 201) and the criteria for listing in the National Register (§ 202).

216.3 At least five (5) days before the hearing date, the staff shall file copies of the staff report with the Board, and shall make it available to the applicant, owner, and public.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 217** DESIGNATION HEARING {#sec-10-c217 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C217}

217.1 The Board shall hold a public hearing to receive information and public comments on each application for historic landmark or historic district designation.

217.2 At the designation hearing, the Board shall consider the eligibility of the property for listing in both the D.C. Inventory and the National Register.

217.3 The designation hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the Board's procedures in Chapter 31.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 218** CLOSURE OF THE HEARING RECORD AND DELIBERATIONS {#sec-10-c218 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C218}

218.1 The record shall be closed at the end of the public hearing except when directed by the Chairperson to stay open for a specified period of time for the receipt of additional information or public comment. If the hearing is to be continued, the Chairperson shall announce the time and place it will be resumed, and no additional public notice shall be required.

218.2 The Board may reopen the record at any time before the issuance of a final decision. The Board shall provide notice of a reopening in the same manner as for the initial hearing.

218.3 After closure of the hearing record, the Board shall consider the application and shall hold its deliberations immediately or in a continuation of the public hearing. The Board shall give great weight to any written recommendations of the affected ANC that are adopted as required by the ANC Act and that are germane to the issues that fall within the Board's authority.

218.4 The Board may vote to designate the property, deny or defer the designation, or designate the property with reduced boundaries. If the Board wishes to expand the boundaries of a designation, a new notice and hearing is required. The Board may base its designation on any of its criteria, including designation criteria that may not be referred to in the application.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 219** POST-HEARING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-c219 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C219}

219.1 The Board shall issue a written decision with respect to the proposed historic landmark or historic district designation. Each designation decision shall identify the property, describe its general characteristics and significance, specify its boundaries, state the reasons for designation, and indicate whether it is also recommended for nomination to the National Register.

219.2 Each designation of a historic district shall state a period of significance for the historic district pursuant to National Register criteria. Subsequent to each designation of a historic district, the SHPO shall prepare an official list of contributing and non-contributing buildings pursuant to National Register criteria, and shall forward that list with the nomination to the National Register.

219.3 In any case in which the affected ANC has submitted a duly adopted written recommendation, the designation decision shall be accompanied by a written statement acknowledging the ANC recommendation and indicating the Board's response.

219.4 Within ten (10) days of a designation, the Board shall mail a copy of the official designation order signed by the Chairperson as follows:

(a) For a historic landmark, to the applicant, property owner, and affected ANC;

(b) For a historic district, to the applicant and affected ANC.

219.5 Within ninety (90) days of a designation, the Board shall publish notice of the designation in the D.C. Register.

219.6 If the Board has recommended the nomination of a property to the National Register, the SHPO shall prepare and forward the nomination to the National Register in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 13.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 220** EFFECTIVE DATE OF DESIGNATION {#sec-10-c220 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C220}

220.1 The Board's determination whether to list a property as a historic landmark, as provided in D.C. Official Code § 6-1102(6)(B), is made when the Board votes to designate or deny designation of the property. This date is the official designation date. A historic landmark designation is final when the copy of the official designation order is mailed to the property owner. For the purposes of D.C. Official Code § 6 - 1102(6)(B), the application for designation is considered pending until the designation is final.

220.2 A historic district designation shall become effective thirty (30) days after the SHPO publishes in the D.C. Register a notice of nomination or determination to nominate the property to the National Register.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 221** AMENDMENT OR REVOCATION OF DESIGNATION {#sec-10-c221 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C221}

221.1 Listings in the D.C. Inventory may be amended or revoked.

221.2 Any applicant eligible to file a designation application may apply to amend or revoke a designation.

221.3 An application to amend a designation shall include the same information required for a new designation, except that description of the property and statement of significance may address only the features and characteristics that are the subject of the amendment.

221.4 The procedures for amendment of a designation are the same as the procedures for designation, except that the Board may amend a historic district designation to augment or amend documentation, specify a period of significance, or identify contributing and non-contributing buildings without publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation or posting notice in the historic district. When an application proposes to amend the boundaries of a historic district, the requirement for notice to owners and affected ANCs applies only to those properties within the area of amended boundaries.

221.5 An application to revoke a designation shall include the same information required for a new designation, except that the application shall state the reasons that the property does not possess significance or meet the criteria for designation.

221.6 Properties may be removed from the D.C. Inventory only if they no longer meet the criteria for designation. The procedures for removal of a property from the Inventory are the same as the procedures for designation.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C3** HPRB AND CFA REVIEW OF WORK AFFECTING HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS

##### **10-C DCMR § 300** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C300}

300.1 The Historic Preservation Review Board and Commission of Fine Arts review and provide recommendations to the Mayor's Agent on proposed work affecting historic landmarks and districts (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1107). The Board also conducts preliminary review (D.C. Official Code § 6-1108) and conceptual design review of projects before application for building permits.

300.2 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Conceptual Design Review;

(b) Preliminary Review;

(d) Alteration;

(e) Replacement in kind;

(f) Demolition;

(g) Permit Processing Division;

(h) Surveyor.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 301** CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW {#sec-10-c301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C301}

301.1 Conceptual design review is not required before application for a permit, but is strongly encouraged for new construction, substantial alteration, or any other work requiring a significant financial outlay for the preparation of permit plans.

301.2 The purpose of conceptual design review is to allow applicants to benefit from the guidance of the Review Board and Commission of Fine Arts, or both, in advance of a permit application, and to allow the Board and CFA to review and take action at an early stage of design. Once completed, the process further enables the delegation of final permit review to the staff when appropriate.

301.3 An application for conceptual design review does not constitute a permit application. An application for conceptual design review is not subject to review by the Mayor's Agent, or to the review periods set out in D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7477 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 302** PRELIMINARY REVIEW {#sec-10-c302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C302}

302.1 Preliminary review is not required before application for a permit, but may be appropriate in occasional circumstances. Conceptual review is recommended as the preferred method of obtaining guidance on whether a proposal is consistent with the purposes of the Act.

302.2 The purpose of preliminary review is to allow applicants to obtain an official preliminary finding of compliance from the Mayor's Agent in advance of a permit application. Before making this finding, the Mayor's Agent shall obtain the recommendations of the Board or CFA in accordance with D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108 and the procedures in this chapter.

302.3 Since a preliminary finding of compliance can only be made on the basis of plans meeting D.C. zoning requirements, zoning approval is required before an application for preliminary review is submitted to the Mayor's Agent for consideration.

302.4 An application for preliminary review does not constitute a permit application, but is subject to the required review period in D.C. Official Code § 6-1108.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7477 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 303** PERMIT REQUIREMENTS: GENERAL {#sec-10-c303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C303}

303.1 Permits are required for work affecting historic landmarks and historic districts, including demolition, alteration, subdivision, and new construction as described in D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1107. The requirements for a construction permit are governed by the D.C. Construction Codes (12 DCMR Chapter 1).

303.2 Historic preservation review shall be part of the sequence of zoning and code reviews conducted before issuance of construction permits and subdivision plats by the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. The HPO shall coordinate with DCRA in determining the sequence of review for applications.

303.3 A separate historic preservation permit or certificate of appropriateness is not required.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 304** PERMIT REQUIREMENTS: ALTERATION {#sec-10-c304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C304}

304.1 Work considered an alteration under the Act shall include, but is not limited to, any of the following, regardless of whether or not the work is visible from public space:

(a) Any alteration as defined in Chapter 99;

(b) Any addition to the building envelope;

(c) Any alteration or repair that does not involve replacement in kind of an architectural feature, including removal of an architectural feature such as ornamentation or historic signage;

(d) Construction of a projection into public space;

(e) Installation or replacement of a window, door, siding, roofing, or other exterior building finish;

(f) A change in the exterior appearance of a window due to work for which a permit is required;

(g) Installation of an awning, sign, or other advertising device;

(h) Construction or replacement of a retaining wall, fence, deck, patio, garden storage shed, swimming pool, or other site feature;

(i) Installation of air conditioning, mechanical, plumbing, or other equipment;

(j) Erection of a flagpole, antenna, satellite dish, or telecommunication tower;

(k) Sandblasting and similar types of abrasive cleaning; and

(l) Paint stripping where a permit is required.

304.2 Pursuant to § 107 of the D.C. Construction Code, a permit is required for various minor repairs to historic landmarks or properties within historic districts, even though a permit is not required for the same work on non-historic properties. Under this provision, the Mayor's Agent shall review permits for the following categories of work:

(a) Brick pointing;

(b) Replacement of windows and doors;

(d) Replacement of siding; and

(e) Replacement of retaining walls regardless of height.

304.3 Alteration to a designated interior historic landmark shall not include changes in furnishings.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 305** PERMIT REQUIREMENTS: DEMOLITION {#sec-10-c305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C305}

305.1 Work considered demolition under the Act shall include, but is not limited to, any of the following, as determined by the Mayor's Agent:

(a) The removal or destruction of any facade;

(b) The removal or destruction of all or a substantial portion of the structural components of the building, such as structural walls, floor assemblies, and roofs;

(c) The removal or destruction of all or a substantial portion of the roof along with all or substantially all of one or more exterior walls;

(d) The removal or destruction of all or substantially all of an entire wing or appendage of the building, such as a rear ell, unless the wing lacks physical or historic integrity, or is not a character-defining feature;

(e) The removal or destruction of a substantial portion that includes character-defining features of the building or structure;

(f) The removal or destruction of all or a substantial portion of a designated interior landmark, unless the elements to be removed lack physical or historic integrity, or are not character-defining features; or

(g) Any removal or destruction requiring a partial demolition or raze permit under the D.C. Construction Code, including any demolition of non-bearing walls, interior finishes, or other interior non-bearing elements within a building where an interior space has been designated as a historic landmark.

305.2 In general, the determination whether a proposal involves destruction of a building "in significant part" shall depend on the extent to which character-defining historic features, historic or structural integrity, historic materials, or ability to convey historic significance would be lost. This decision shall depend on all the facts and circumstances of the case.

305.3 The filing of an application for a demolition permit shall be considered to incorporate a request for determination whether the property contributes to the character of a historic landmark or district pursuant to § 704 of this title.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 306** SUBMISSION OF APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-c306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C306}

306.1 All applications including applications for conceptual or preliminary review shall be submitted to the Surveyor or the Permit Processing Division of DCRA, as appropriate.

306.2 No application substantially the same as an application denied by the Mayor's Agent shall be accepted for review under the Act within one year after the denial, except in the instance of an application denied for lack of information.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 307** APPLICATION MATERIALS: FORMS AND FEES {#sec-10-c307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C307}

307.1 Each application shall include a completed official application form, signed by the owner or authorized agent, together with any related filing documents required by DCRA or the staff. An application for demolition, alteration, or preliminary review shall be made by completing the appropriate D.C. construction permit application form.

307.2 An application for Board review shall include the appropriate transmittal form issued by DCRA, indicating the case number assigned for Board review and assigned for CFA review, if applicable.

307.3 The application shall include payment of the applicable filing fee as provided in Chapter 33.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 308** APPLICATION MATERIALS: CERTIFICATIONS AND CLEARANCES {#sec-10-c308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C308}

308.1 The application shall describe any outstanding permit violations for the property or any other historic properties under the applicant's ownership or direct control. If requested, the applicant shall submit a copy of any notice of violation or stop work order in effect. The nature of outstanding permit violations and any proposed cure shall be considered vital information relevant to the review of the application.

308.2 An application for preliminary review, alteration, new construction, or subdivision shall include approval by the Zoning Administrator.

308.3 The application shall disclose the nature of any zoning variance, special exception, or code relief known to be required for the proposed work. If there is a Zoning Commission or Board of Zoning Adjustment order in effect for the property, the applicant shall submit a copy with the application. If requested, the applicant shall submit a copy of any pending application to the Zoning Commission or BZA.

308.4 If there is a conservation easement or preservation covenant in effect for the property, the applicant shall submit the easement or covenant holder's written consent to the application or to the project.

308.5 If the applicant intends to request approval of a transfer of development rights pursuant to the Zoning Regulations, the application shall so indicate.

308.6 If requested, the applicant shall submit documentation to verify any claim that adjacent property owners or the affected ANC have been notified of the proposed work.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 309** APPLICATION MATERIALS: PHOTOGRAPHS {#sec-10-c309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C309}

309.1 The application shall include comprehensive exterior photographs of the building, structure or site in question.

309.2 If the building, structure or site is in a historic district, the application shall also include photographs of the adjacent buildings and immediate neighborhood.

309.3 All photographs shall be of good quality, clearly showing the area to be affected by the proposed work.

309.4 When appropriate, annotated photographs showing proposed rehabilitation or repair work may be submitted instead of architectural plans.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 310** APPLICATION MATERIALS: ARCHITECTURAL PLANS {#sec-10-c310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C310}

310.1 An application for conceptual review shall include architectural plans or model photographs sufficient to indicate the general exterior massing, composition or design of the proposed work within its surroundings.

310.2 An application for preliminary review shall include architectural plans sufficient to indicate the exterior design of the proposed work within its surroundings.

310.3 A permit application for alteration or new construction shall include architectural plans of sufficient completeness to indicate the complete exterior design of the proposed work within its surroundings.

310.4 Architectural plans shall clearly show the character of the work to be performed. Plans shall be drawn to scale, fully dimensioned for critical measurements including overall width, length, and height. A progressively higher level of specificity with regard to the exterior design and dimensions shall be required for conceptual, preliminary, and construction permit applications.

310.5 Architectural plans shall be drawn and annotated in a manner that defines without ambiguity the nature and extent of proposed work.

310.6 Architectural plans for conceptual review, additions, new construction, and other substantial work shall normally include a site plan, existing conditions plans, floor plans, sections, and elevations showing adjacent structures.

310.7 Architectural specifications, materials samples, zoning envelope diagrams, shop drawings, or site mock-ups may be required if necessary for review.

310.8 The application shall clearly show the extent to which the existing building or structure is to be preserved, altered, or demolished.

310.9 An application for demolition shall include architectural plans or diagrams clearly showing the extent of proposed demolition.

310.10 An application involving an interior historic landmark shall include architectural plans sufficient to indicate the nature and design of proposed interior work. Plans may be in the form of or include annotated photographs.

310.11 An application for subdivision shall include a proposed plat of subdivision prepared by the Surveyor. An application for conceptual review of a subdivision shall include a proposed plat or a site plan clearly showing the proposed reconfiguration of the property.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 311** APPLICATION MATERIALS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION {#sec-10-c311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C311}

311.1 An application for new construction or substantial addition, including conceptual and preliminary review, shall include a brief written project description indicating the general nature of the project. This description shall state the program of uses, estimated gross floor area by use, number of residential units, scope of preservation work, and any other pertinent features of the project.

311.2 An application for construction of a project of special merit shall include a statement of the proposed grounds upon which the applicant intends to support this claim. The application shall also include a general description of the information the applicant intends to submit as evidence of ability to complete the project.

311.3 The applicant shall also submit any other information as may be necessary to understand and evaluate the project for consistency with the purposes of the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 312** APPLICATION MATERIALS: ACCURACY AND ADEQUACY OF INFORMATION {#sec-10-c312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C312}

312.1 All application materials shall accurately represent the existing conditions of the property and the nature of the work proposed. The entire scope of the proposed project shall be accurately represented in the application, except when the application is for a supplemental permit or permit for a portion of a phased project. The signature of the owner or the owner's agent on the application is considered to attest to its completeness and accuracy.

312.2 The Board may request any additional information as may be reasonably necessary for a decision or recommendation.

312.3 If an applicant does not supply sufficient information, the Board may defer the case until sufficient information is provided. If the applicant does not supply the information within a reasonable time period specified by the staff, the Board may return the application to the Mayor's Agent, and the Mayor's Agent may deny the issuance of the permit.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 313** FILING DEADLINES {#sec-10-c313 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C313}

313.1 The Board may establish filing deadlines to allow sufficient time for staff review of applications before the Board meeting. The staff may defer to the next Board meeting any application not submitted in complete form, with all required information and documents, by the filing deadline.

313.2 The filing of an application by the filing deadline does not guarantee that the application will be heard at the next Board meeting. The Board or staff may defer applications to allow sufficient time for review, if additional information is needed, if warranted by the volume of cases, or for any other legitimate reason. If an application is deferred due to the volume of cases, the staff shall give it priority over new cases at the next meeting.

313.3 The staff may establish additional deadlines and requirements for the receipt of supplemental materials to be provided to the Board before its meeting. If an applicant fails to provide supplemental materials as required by the deadline, the staff may defer the case to the next meeting.

313.4 The following rules pertain to applications returning to the Board for additional review:

(a) Refiling of the application and assignment of a new case number is not required unless the revision represents a substantially different project, the ownership has changed, more than two years has elapsed since the previous Board review, or the staff otherwise deems it appropriate.

(b) The Board or staff may require the submission of revised plans or other information, and further staff review and consultation if necessary, before returning to the Board.

(c) Submission deadlines shall be the same as for new cases, but the staff may exercise discretion in allowing late submission of revised or supplemental material.

(d) An applicant directed to return to the Board is not guaranteed consideration at the next Board meeting, even if revised materials are submitted by the filing deadline. The staff may schedule the case as appropriate to allow sufficient time for review.

(e) The staff may defer a case to the next meeting if revised plans or other information is not provided in sufficient time for review, if further revision or review is needed, or for any other legitimate reason.

313.5 The Commission of Fine Arts may establish filing deadlines at its own discretion.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 314** NOTICE OF FILED APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-c314 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C314}

314.1 Notice of filed applications for demolition, alteration, subdivision, and new construction shall be placed in the D.C. Register as required by D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104(a), 6-1105(a), 6-1106(a), and 6-1107(a), and Mayor's Order 79-50, as amended, or any subsequent Mayor's Order.

314.2 HPO may assist DCRA in fulfilling DCRA's responsibility to provide this notice in accordance with Mayor's Order 79-50, as amended.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 315** TRANSMITTAL OF APPLICATIONS TO THE MAYOR'S AGENT AND CFA {#sec-10-c315 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C315}

315.1 DCRA transmits applications to the Mayor's Agent and CFA in accordance with Mayor's Order 79-50, as amended, and implementing procedures it may adopt.

315.2 The Mayor's Agent receives all applications transmitted by DCRA for review under the Act.

315.3 The Commission of Fine Arts also receives applications transmitted by DCRA for review under the Shipstead-Luce Act or the Old Georgetown Act.

315.4 If an application is subject to review by both the Mayor's Agent and CFA under the Act, the applicant shall submit a simultaneous application for review by each.

315.5 Each application received for Board review, except those to be reviewed by the staff under a delegation of authority, shall have an assigned case number. If the staff declines to review a case under delegation of authority from the Board, it shall be returned to DCRA for transmittal with a case number.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 316** REFERRAL OF APPLICATIONS BY THE MAYOR'S AGENT {#sec-10-c316 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C316}

316.1 The Mayor's Agent shall refer to the Board all applications not referred to the Commission of Fine Arts.

316.2 The Mayor's Agent may refer to the Board any application referred to the CFA. The following considerations shall apply in these cases:

(a) The Mayor's Agent may act upon the advice of the SHPO, Board, or staff in determining whether to refer an application to the Board.

(b) The Mayor's Agent may refer an application to the Board to obtain review under the standards in the Historic Protection Act and these regulations, in addition to the standards for CFA review under the Shipstead-Luce Act.

(c) An applicant, directly affected person, or Advisory Neighborhood Commission may submit a written request to the Mayor's Agent for review by the Board, stating the reasons for the request.

(d) An Advisory Neighborhood Commission may submit a duly authorized written request to the Mayor's Agent for review by the Board, stating the specific reasons for the request for duplicate review.

(e) Upon receipt of a request for duplicate review, the Mayor's Agent shall decide whether to refer the application to the Board, or shall refer the matter to the Board for its decision on whether a duplicate review would be appropriate.

(f) If the CFA declines to review an application for preliminary review, or does not accept this type of application, the Mayor's Agent shall refer the application to the Board for its recommendation.

316.3 The Mayor's Agent shall refer to the Office of Planning a copy of any application for which the owner intends to demonstrate special merit.

316.4 The Mayor's Agent may refer any application to any other District department or agency for review.

316.5 The Mayor's Agent may request any other person that the Mayor's Agent deems appropriate to provide information and assistance.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 317** REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS {#sec-10-c317 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C317}

317.1 The Commission of Fine Arts and the Old Georgetown Board review applications in accordance with procedures they adopt.

317.2 The HPO may evaluate applications referred to the CFA, and may coordinate with the CFA and its staff in reviewing applications. The HPO staff may participate and provide public comment on behalf of the Board or SHPO in any review of a case by the Commission or the Old Georgetown Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 318** REVIEW BY THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND OTHER AGENCIES {#sec-10-c318 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C318}

318.1 The staff shall coordinate with the Office of Planning in reviewing any application for which the owner intends to demonstrate special merit.

318.2 The staff may coordinate with any other department or agency to which the Mayor's Agent has referred an application, and may also seek the advice or assistance of any agency or other appropriate person in reviewing applications.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 319** EXPEDITED REVIEW UNDER DELEGATION TO THE STAFF {#sec-10-c319 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C319}

319.1 The Board may delegate to the staff its authority to review certain applications for minor work not likely to have a significant effect upon the historic character of designated properties. These applications shall not require individual referral to the Board.

319.2 The purpose of this delegation shall be to expedite the processing of applications for routine, minor, and compatible work so as to promote efficient administration of the Historic Protection Act in the general public interest.

319.3 Applicants shall qualify for expedited review only upon submission of sufficient information to support a determination that the proposed work is compatible with the character of the affected historic landmark or historic district. An applicant seeking expedited review shall submit all pertinent application materials required in §§ 304 through 310. The staff may reject for expedited consideration any application lacking proper documentation.

319.4 The staff shall review applications by applying written criteria adopted by the Board. These criteria shall include the design and construction standards in Chapters 20 through 29, as well as any design guidelines adopted by the Board in accordance with § 2003. The staff shall ensure that the Board's standards and guidelines are readily available to the public.

319.5 The staff shall maintain a public record of all approvals granted under this delegation of authority, indicating the address and type of work approved. The staff may provide regular notice of the cases approved under delegated review, either by mail or electronic mail to the public mailing list described in Chapter 32.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 320** CATEGORIES OF WORK DELEGATED TO THE STAFF {#sec-10-c320 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C320}

320.1 The staff is delegated authority to review the following types of work:

(a) Construction of insignificant or clearly compatible minor additions or alterations;

(b) Removal of insignificant or incompatible minor additions or alterations;

(c) Demolition of buildings the Board has previously determined not to contribute, or that clearly do not contribute to the significance of a historic district;

(d) Window and door replacement;

(e) Addition or closure of window or door openings in a manner consistent with the Board's standards and guidelines;

(f) Rear decks and roof decks not visible or obtrusive from a public street;

(g) Fences up to 42 inches high in front yards and up to 7 feet high in rear yards;

(h) Retaining walls, patios, garden storage sheds, swimming pools, and similar site features;

(i) Appropriate siding materials;

(j) Replacement of roofing, coping, gutters and downspouts;

(k) Skylights not visible or obtrusive from a public street;

(l) Installation, modification, or removal of exterior lighting fixtures;

(m) Antennas and satellite dishes;

(n) Air conditioning equipment, if suitably screened or unobtrusive;

(o) Plumbing and exhaust vents, if suitably screened or unobtrusive;

(p) Utility meter boxes;

(q) Awnings, canopies, and signs consistent with the Board's standards and guidelines;

(r) Unenclosed sidewalk cafes consisting of movable components;

(s) In-kind repair or replacement of woodwork, metalwork, and other trim;

(t) Brick pointing and cleaning of building exteriors, except by sandblasting or other damaging methods;

(u) Excavation, sheeting and shoring, grading, blasting, and other ground disturbance activity;

(v) Waterproofing and dampproofing; and

(w) Other routine, minor, and compatible work consistent with the above.

320.2 The staff is delegated authority to review applications for the following types of permits subject to review under the Act or upon referral by DCRA:

(a) Projection permits for projections consistent with work approved by the Board or delegated to the staff;

(b) Public space permits for occupation of public space for dumpsters, barricades, and other construction activities, and permits for after-hours work;

(c) Permits for temporary work, including temporary signs, observation stands, scaffolding, and other construction activities;

(d) Renewal or revision permits for items consistent with work approved by the Board or delegated to the staff;

(e) Supplemental plumbing, gas, mechanical, and electrical, and other specialty permits; and

(f) Supplemental raze applications for non-contributing buildings or other structures pursuant to an approval by the Board or Mayor's Agent.

320.3 The staff is also delegated authority to review applications for the following types of subdivision, except in the case of historic landmarks or theoretical building sites as provided in D.C. Zoning Regulations:

(a) Minor or insignificant lot changes compatible with the character of the property or its setting;

(b) Conversion of assessment and taxation lots to record lots; and

320.4 The applicant for subdivision of a property subject to a conservation easement shall submit written consent of the easement holder when requesting staff review.

320.5 The staff may decline to review any application under delegated authority if it deems appropriate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 321** PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS UNDER DELEGATED REVIEW {#sec-10-c321 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C321}

321.1 Upon receipt of an application, the staff shall determine whether delegated review is appropriate. If at any time during the consideration of an application, the staff determines that it is not appropriate for delegated review, the staff shall require that it be filed for review by the Board.

321.2 If an application is appropriate for delegated review, the staff shall evaluate it for completeness. The staff may request additional information or documentation as may be reasonably necessary for its review.

321.3 Upon receipt of a complete application, the staff shall review it for conformance with the Board's standards and any applicable design guidelines adopted by the Board.

321.4 During the course of review, the staff may consult with affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners, historic preservation organizations, or potentially interested persons before taking an action on the application.

321.5 If the staff determines that the applicable standards or guidelines have been met, it shall be authorized to approve the application on behalf of the Board, and to use its delegated approval as a basis for final action by the Mayor's Agent.

321.6 Even if the applicable standards or guidelines appear to have been met, the staff in its sole discretion, or at the request of the Board, may nonetheless refer any matter to the Board either as a Consent Calendar or Agenda item.

321.7 If the staff determines that the applicable standards or guidelines have not been met, the staff shall allow the applicant to amend the application by submitting revised or supplemental materials to show conformance. If the applicant is still unable to show conformance, the staff shall inform the applicant of the specific reason for denial and shall submit the case to the Board on the Agenda or Denial Calendar.

321.8 Prior to referral to the Board, the applicant may request a meeting with the SHPO or the staff person designated by the SHPO to discuss the application of the standards or guidelines.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 322** REVIEW BY THE BOARD {#sec-10-c322 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C322}

322.1 The Board shall hold regular public meetings for the purpose of reviewing applications for work affecting historic landmarks or historic districts. All Board reviews shall occur at a public meeting.

322.2 The Board shall review applications scheduled on its Agenda, Consent Calendar, or Denial Calendar. Cases on the Agenda will be heard by the Board in open session with the opportunity for public comment. Cases on the Consent Calendar or Denial Calendar will be acted upon based on submitted materials and staff reports without further public comment.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 323** NOTICE OF BOARD MEETING {#sec-10-c323 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C323}

323.1 Not less than fifteen (15) days before a public meeting, the Board shall give notice of the meeting by first class mail to all those listed on the public mailing list described in Chapter 32, and shall give fifteen (15) day notice by electronic mail to all persons requesting electronic mail as an alternative or supplement to mailed notice. The Board may supplement this notice with announcements by facsimile or posting on the HPO website.

323.2 Notice of the meeting shall state the time, date, and location of the meeting, and shall include a list of cases to be considered, indicating the street address and nature of the application for each case.

323.3 Applicants shall be notified of the meeting by telephone, email, or other direct contact by the staff, or by a meeting schedule posted in the office where applications are filed for review.

323.4 The public notice shall be considered a list of potential cases for consideration, and not a guarantee that the Board will consider each case noticed for the meeting. The staff may approve some noticed cases under delegated authority before the meeting. The staff may defer other noticed cases for further consultation before Board review. The staff may also defer cases to a supplemental continuation meeting or to the next regularly scheduled meeting if necessary due to the volume of cases or other circumstances.

323.5 The Board shall release the proposed Agenda, Consent and Denial Calendars, and staff reports to the public not later than five (5) days before the meeting.

323.6 The scheduling of cases on the Agenda, Consent, and Denial Calendars shall be at the sole discretion of the Board and staff, and nothing shall preclude the Board from amending the scheduling at a public meeting.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 324** STAFF REVIEW BEFORE THE BOARD MEETING {#sec-10-c324 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C324}

324.1 Before consideration by the Board, the staff shall review each case and consult with the applicant as necessary. The staff shall assist the applicant in understanding the Board's procedures and in meeting the Board's standards and guidelines. The applicant should take full advantage of the staff's availability and expertise.

324.2 The staff shall advise the applicant of any changes in project plans that may be appropriate in order to meet the Board's standards and guidelines. In response, the applicant may submit revised plans for further review. Revisions may be submitted without the requirement for a new application. If the applicant is unable to submit revised plans in sufficient time for staff review before the Board meeting, the staff may defer the case to the next Board meeting.

324.3 If the staff is unable to reach an applicant at the telephone number provided on the application, the staff may either process the application for Board review, or return it to DCRA with written notification to the applicant.

324.4 The applicant is encouraged to work directly with ANCs, historic preservation organizations, neighbors, and other interested groups or persons to identify and resolve any public concerns about a project before the Board meeting. The applicant is responsible for presenting project plans to interested groups or persons as appropriate. Resolution of concerns is not required prior to Board review, but applicants are advised of the great weight accorded to ANC views.

324.5 The staff may also consult with ANCs, historic preservation organizations, adjacent property owners, or any other persons so as to gather information, assess public interest, or identify the nature of public views on an application. The staff may facilitate public reviews as it deems appropriate.

324.6 ANCs and historic preservation organizations are encouraged to establish a schedule of regular meetings to facilitate their review of cases pending before the Board. Applicants are encouraged but not obligated to attend these meetings.

324.7 ANCs and historic preservation organizations wishing to participate on a regular basis in the Board's meetings are encouraged to establish a means of periodic contact with the staff in order to facilitate the review of cases before each Board meeting. Organizations may appoint a monitor familiar with the Board's standards, guidelines, and procedures as a means of facilitating a full and orderly involvement in the review process.

324.8 The staff shall prepare a written report and recommendation on each case the Board will review. Each staff report shall indicate whether the application is to be considered on the Agenda, Consent Calendar, or Denial Calendar. Each report shall evaluate the project for consistency with the purposes of the Act and with the Board's standards and guidelines, and shall recommend any modifications needed to achieve consistency.

324.9 Staff reports shall be submitted to the Board and released to the applicant and public at least five (5) days before the meeting.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 325** REQUESTS FOR WITHDRAWAL OR DEFERRAL {#sec-10-c325 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C325}

325.1 An applicant may withdraw an application or may request a deferral of Board review by notifying the staff, in writing or otherwise, at any time.

325.2 If work has already been completed without the necessary permit, the staff may schedule the application for Board review regardless of a request for withdrawal. If scheduled for Board review, the staff shall inform the applicant of the time and place of the review in accordance with the procedures in this chapter.

325.3 An affected ANC may request a deferral of Board review of a case involving matters of significance to neighborhood planning and development, if the ANC has not received the requisite notice under the ANC Act (D.C. Official Code § 1-309.10). The ANC shall make this request by notifying the staff in writing or by electronic mail, at least 48 hours before the scheduled Board meeting. The request shall state that the ANC has not had sufficient opportunity to hold a duly noticed public meeting to consider the application. Upon receipt of a written ANC request, the staff shall defer the case for a sufficient time to ensure that the ANC has received notice of forty-five (45) days.

325.4 A person or group directly affected by a case may request a one-month deferral of Board review for good cause, but shall bear the burden of demonstrating the need for a delay in view of the applicant's right to prompt consideration by the Board. The staff may require that this request be made in writing. The staff shall determine whether to defer the case, and may consult with the Chairperson of the Board in making this determination.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 326** BOARD MEETING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-c326 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C326}

326.1 The Board shall hold its public meetings in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 31.

326.2 The Board shall conduct public review of cases in accordance with a proposed Agenda released to the public before the Board meeting. The Board shall dispose of other cases by adoption of a Consent Calendar and Denial Calendar, as appropriate. The Board may amend the Agenda, Consent, and Denial Calendars at the public meeting as it may deem appropriate.

326.3 After considering each application and hearing public comments, the Board shall deliberate in public and vote on the case. In order to ensure that neighborhood views as expressed through the ANC receive specific attention in its deliberations, the Board shall give great weight to any properly adopted written recommendations of the affected ANC that are germane to the issues that fall within the Board's authority.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 327** CONSENT CALENDAR {#sec-10-c327 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C327}

327.1 An application may be placed on the Consent Calendar if the applicant and staff agree that the proposed work is consistent with the purposes of the Act, and there is no known objection by an affected ANC, historic preservation organization, or affected person. Any relevant terms or modifications agreed upon by the applicant and staff may be included as conditions of the approval.

327.2 At the request of any Board member, the Chairperson may remove any case from the Consent Calendar and place it on the Agenda for individual consideration by the Board at the meeting. A request from any other group or person to remove a case from the Consent Calendar should be made to the staff in advance of the hearing and shall be considered as a preliminary matter at the hearing.

327.3 The Chairperson may also remove any case from a duly noticed Agenda and place it on the Consent Calendar, provided there is no objection from the applicant, any Board member, or any affected group or person present and wishing to comment on the case.

327.4 The Board may approve the Consent Calendar on a voice vote.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 328** DENIAL CALENDAR {#sec-10-c328 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C328}

328.1 An application which has been denied by the staff pursuant to the Board's delegation of authority may be placed on the Denial Calendar.

328.2 Before submitting a case to the Board on the Denial Calendar, the staff shall inform the applicant of the reason for denial, and shall notify the applicant of the opportunity to present brief written materials to the Board for consideration along with the staff report. The applicant shall be afforded at least seven (7) days to submit these materials.

328.3 The staff report shall clearly state the reason for denial, indicating the specific standard or guideline violated.

328.4 At the request of any Board member, the Chairperson of the Board may remove any case from the Denial Calendar and place it on the Agenda for consideration by the Board at the meeting.

328.5 The Board shall consider both the staff report and the applicant's written materials in reaching a decision based solely on the written record. By adopting the Denial Calendar, the Board shall confirm the staff's recommendation of denial.

328.6 The Board may adopt the Denial Calendar on a voice vote.

328.7 If the Board recommends denial, the applicant may request a public hearing before the Mayor's Agent.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 329** POST-MEETING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-c329 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C329}

329.1 Subsequent to each meeting, the Board shall make available for public inspection the minutes and any written transcript that has been made of the proceedings. The transcript shall serve as the official record of the Board's decisions at the meeting.

329.2 The staff may prepare a written summary of the Board's actions from meeting minutes and the transcript. The staff may also send written confirmation of the Board's action on an application.

329.3 If the Board recommends approval of the application, and the Mayor's Agent acts on that basis, the staff shall return the application to DCRA with the Board's recommendation and the appropriate notations on the application and accompanying plans. If the Board has conditioned its approval on specific modifications, the staff shall include those modifications as specific conditions on the application or plans, or shall require the applicant to submit revised plans, whichever the staff deems appropriate.

329.4 If the Board recommends denial of the application, the staff shall send written notice to the applicant within ten (10) days, stating the reasons for the Board's recommendation, and informing the applicant of the right to request a public hearing by the Mayor's Agent.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 330** REPORT OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE MAYOR'S AGENT {#sec-10-c330 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C330}

330.1 After reviewing an application under D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108, the Board shall report its recommendations to the Mayor's Agent. This recommendation is in addition to any recommendation the Mayor's Agent may receive from the CFA.

330.2 The Board is not required to report a recommendation to the Mayor's Agent on an application for conceptual design review.

330.3 When demolition is involved, the Board's recommendation shall indicate whether or not the building or structure contributes to the character of a historic landmark or historic district.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 331** FINAL REVIEWS DELEGATED TO THE STAFF {#sec-10-c331 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C331}

331.1 Upon completion of conceptual review, the Board may delegate final review to the staff, with any conditions or directions the Board deems appropriate.

331.2 If the Board approves a conceptual design and delegates final review to the staff, the applicant shall continue to develop the design in consultation with the staff. The applicant shall inform the staff of significant revisions and refinements of the design as they are incorporated into the project plans. If the project is large or complex, the applicant shall meet with the staff to ensure that the development of the design remains consistent with the Board's direction.

331.3 Upon the completion of the final design, the applicant shall submit the permit application and plans for staff review. An official transmittal with an assigned case number is not required for this submission unless the staff determines that the case should be returned to the Board for further review.

331.4 The staff may approve the permit application if the plans are consistent with the Board's conceptual review. If the plans are not consistent with the conceptual review, the staff shall consult with the applicant to resolve any discrepancies. If unable to reach a resolution, the staff shall require the applicant to file the case for further Board review.

331.5 The staff shall review final applications as expeditiously as possible. If the project is large or complex, the staff shall review final applications within fifteen (15) days of receipt.

331.6 The staff may place conditions on a final approval by annotating on the plans or by noting written conditions on the application form. The staff shall submit all final design plans and any annotations and written conditions to DCRA for inclusion in official permit files.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 332** CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL {#sec-10-c332 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C332}

332.1 The Board's recommendations on an application, including an application for conceptual design review and preliminary review, remains in effect for a period of two years from the date of the Board's action granting conceptual approval. Upon expiration of this period, the applicant may return to the Board with a request for an extension of one additional period of two years for good cause shown. The Board is not required to reopen the review of the application, and shall not unreasonably withhold its approval of an extension. Upon expiration of the extension, or if the extension is denied, a new application shall be required for any further review of the project by the Board.

332.2 The Board's delegation of final review authority to the staff at the conclusion of conceptual review shall also remain effect for a period of two years from the date of the Board's action. After the delegation has expired, the applicant shall be required to return to the Board to request an additional two years on the basis of good cause shown. The Board shall not unreasonably withhold its approval of an extension. Upon expiration of this extension, or if the extension is denied, the staff shall return the application to the Board for final review.

332.3 The Mayor's Agent shall recognize any time limitations or any other conditions the CFA may place on its approvals.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 333** SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO APPROVED PLANS {#sec-10-c333 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C333}

333.1 The applicants shall notify the staff of any change made to approved plans, either before or after permit issuance. A change includes any modification in the design, massing, proportions, dimensions, design, details, materials, finishes, or other aspect of the design that significantly or materially differs from the approved design, or affects the compatibility of the plans with the affected historic property.

333.2 The staff shall review a change to determine whether it is consistent with the approved plans and any conditions of the approval by the Board and Mayor's Agent.

(a) If the changes are consistent with the approval, the staff shall indicate its approval by means of a stamp or notation on the approved plans.

(b) If the changes are not consistent with the approval, the staff shall consult with the applicant to ensure that the changes are revised to be consistent with the approved plans. If the staff and applicant are not able to reach agreement, the staff shall refer the matter to the Review Board for resolution.

333.3 Applicants shall obtain any construction permit or permit revision required as a result of a substantial change in project plans.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C4** MAYOR'S AGENT REVIEW OF WORK AFFECTING HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS

##### **10-C DCMR § 400** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c400 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C400}

400.1 The Mayor's Agent shall make the final determination on the approval or denial of applications for demolition, alteration, new construction, and subdivision subject to the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104(e), 6-1105(f), 6-1106(e), and 6-1107(f)), and shall make preliminary determinations of compliance with the Act pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 6-1108.

400.2 The Mayor's Agent shall make these findings after having received and duly considered the recommendations from either the Review Board or the Commission of Fine Arts, or both, as appropriate.

400.3 The Mayor's Agent may make a preliminary or final determination without a public hearing, if not required by law. Any determination shall be made in accordance with this chapter.

400.4 If a public hearing is required by law, or the Mayor's Agent deems it appropriate to hold a public hearing, it shall be held in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and Chapter 30. As provided in § 104, the Mayor's Agent (Hearing Officer) may assume the duties of the Mayor's Agent for this purpose.

400.5 The Mayor's Agent shall take no action on applications for conceptual design review.

400.6 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Necessary in the public interest;

(b) Consistent with the purposes of the Act;

(d) Unreasonable economic hardship;

(e) Low-income owner;

(f) Design.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 401** STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL AND DENIAL {#sec-10-c401 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C401}

401.1 In making a finding on demolition, alteration, or subdivision, the Mayor's Agent shall apply the standard that no permit shall be issued and no subdivision shall be admitted to record unless:

(a) Issuance of the permit or admission of the subdivision to record is necessary in the public interest, or

(b) Failure to issue a permit or admit the subdivision to record will result in unreasonable economic hardship to the owner.

401.2 In making a finding on new construction, the Mayor's Agent shall apply the standard that the permit shall be issued unless:

(a) After due consideration of the zoning laws and regulations of the District of Columbia, the Mayor's Agent finds that the design of the building and the character of the historic district or historic landmark are incompatible;

(b) Provided, that in any case in which an application is made for the construction of an additional building or structure on a lot upon which there is presently a building or structure, the Mayor's Agent may deny a construction permit entirely upon finding that any additional construction will be incompatible with the character of the historic district or historic landmark.

401.3 In making any determination, the Mayor's Agent shall consider the recommendations of the Review Board and Commission of Fine Arts, as applicable, giving due regard to their statutory role as advisors to the Mayor on the consistency of proposed work with the purposes of the Act.

401.4 In making a determination that work is necessary in the public interest because it is consistent with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act, the Mayor's Agent shall apply the criteria in D.C. Official Code § 6-1101(b), also stated in § 2002. The Mayor's Agent shall consider all applicable criteria in making a determination, and shall find that all applicable criteria have been met for a determination of consistency.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 402** APPROVAL WITHOUT A PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-c402 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C402}

402.1 Upon receipt of a recommendation of approval from the Review Board or CFA, the Mayor's Agent may take any of the following actions without a public hearing, and without further public notice:

(a) When the application is for alteration or subdivision, or demolition of a non-contributing building or structure, if the Mayor's Agent finds the proposal consistent with the purposes of the Act, the Mayor's Agent shall approve the application and return it to DCRA with the approval indicated.

(b) When the application is for new construction, if the Mayor's Agent finds that the design of the building and the character of the historic landmark or historic district are not incompatible, the Mayor's Agent shall approve the application and return it to DCRA with the approval indicated.

(c) When the application is for preliminary review, if the Mayor's Agent finds it appropriate to issue a preliminary finding of compliance with the Act, the Mayor's Agent shall notify the applicant of this finding in writing.

402.2 If the Mayor's Agent has made a preliminary finding of compliance with the Act, upon receipt of a final permit application from DCRA, the Mayor's Agent shall find either:

(a) That the final application is consistent with the approved preliminary application, in which case the Mayor's Agent shall approve the application and return it to DCRA with the approval indicated; or

(b) That the final application is not consistent with the approved preliminary application, in which case the Mayor's Agent shall refer the application to the Board or CFA as appropriate for further review.

402.3 The Mayor's Agent may delegate to the staff the authority to approve applications consistent with the recommendations of the Board or the CFA.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 403** NOTIFICATION OF THE INTENT TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-c403 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C403}

403.1 Upon receipt of a recommendation from the Review Board or CFA, unless the applicant withdraws the application, the Mayor's Agent shall notify the applicant of the requirement to hold a public hearing if any of the following is involved:

(a) Demolition of a building or structure that contributes to a historic landmark or historic district;

(b) Subdivision of a historic landmark; or

403.2 Upon receipt of a recommendation from the Review Board or CFA, the Mayor's Agent shall notify the applicant of the intent to hold a public hearing, if deemed appropriate for any other reason.

403.3 The notice shall inform the applicant of any applicable fees for the hearing as provided in Chapter 33.

403.4 When the application is for demolition, alteration, or subdivision, the notice shall require the applicant to submit a written response within ten (10) days of receipt, stating one or more of the following as the applicant's claim:

(a) That the issuance of the permit or admission of the subdivision to record is necessary in the public interest because it is consistent with the purposes of the Act as set forth in D.C. Official Code § 6-1101(b).

(b) That the issuance of the permit or admission of the subdivision to record is necessary in the public interest because it is necessary to construct a project of special merit; or

(c) That denial of the permit or failure to admit the subdivision to record will result in unreasonable economic hardship to the owner.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 404** NOTIFICATION OF THE RIGHT TO REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-c404 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C404}

404.1 Upon receipt of a recommendation from the Review Board or CFA, the Mayor's Agent shall notify the applicant of the right to request a public hearing if either of the following applies:

(a) If the Review Board or CFA has recommended that a proposed demolition, alteration, subdivision, or preliminary application is not consistent with the purposes of the Act; or

(b) When the application is for new construction, if the Review Board or CFA has recommended that the design of the building and the character of the historic landmark or historic district are not compatible.

404.2 The notice shall inform the applicant of any applicable fees for the hearing as provided in Chapter 33.

404.3 The notice shall require the applicant to request a hearing in writing within ten (10) days of the date of the notice, and to state one or more of the reasons in § 403.4 as the nature of the applicant's claim.

404.4 If the applicant fails to request a hearing, the Mayor's Agent may deny the issuance of the permit or admission of the subdivision to record without a hearing.

404.5 If the Mayor's Agent denies the issuance of the permit or the admission of the subdivision to record, the HPO shall notify the applicant in writing and return the application to DCRA with the denial indicated.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 405** SCHEDULING OF A PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-c405 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C405}

405.1 Upon receiving a response to the hearing notice and statement of the nature of the applicant's claim, the Mayor's Agent shall schedule the hearing to occur within ninety (90) days.

405.2 If the applicant does not comply with the requirement to notify the Mayor's Agent of the nature of the applicant's claim, the Mayor's Agent may nonetheless schedule the hearing, and any delay caused by the applicant's failure to provide any information required by these regulations shall toll the running of the one hundred twenty (120) day period provided by the Act.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 406** NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING {#sec-10-c406 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C406}

406.1 The Mayor's Agent shall give notice of a public hearing not less than thirty (30) days before the hearing, as follows:

(a) By first class mail to the applicant, the owners of all property abutting the property involved in the application, and the affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission; or

(b) By first class mail to all persons listed on the public mailing list described in Chapter 32.

406.2 Notice of the public hearing shall state the following:

(a) The time, date, and location of the hearing;

(b) The name of the applicant;

(d) The street address of the property involved;

(e) The lot and square number of the property involved;

(f) The nature of the applicant's claim;

(g) The number of the affected ANC; and

(h) The filing requirements for participation as a party.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 407** SUPPLEMENTAL PRE-HEARING FILINGS {#sec-10-c407 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C407}

407.1 In all cases, the applicant shall file the following information with the Mayor's Agent at least twenty (20) days before the public hearing:

(a) A written statement setting forth the grounds upon which the applicant bases the claim of consistency, special merit, or economic hardship;

(b) Architectural drawings of sufficient completeness to indicate the proposed exterior design of the building, structure, or alteration within its historic context;

(d) A list of witnesses who are prepared to testify on behalf of the applicant; and

(e) Any additional information, reports, or other materials that the Mayor's Agent specified when scheduling the public hearing.

407.2 When the applicant intends to make a claim of unreasonable economic hardship, the applicant shall file the following information, by affidavit, with the Mayor's Agent at least twenty (20) days before the hearing:

(a) The amount paid for the property; the date of purchase, and the name of the seller, including a statement of the relationship, if any, between the owner and the seller;

(b) The assessed value of the land and improvements on the land according to the two most recent assessments;

(d) The amount of annual debt service, if any, for the previous two years;

(e) All appraisals obtained within the previous two years by the owner or applicant in connection with his or her purchase, financing, or ownership of the property;

(f) Any listing of the property for sale or rent, the price asked, and offers received, if any;

(g) Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the property;

(h) For income-producing property, the amount of annual gross income from the property for the previous two years, itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous two years, and annual cash flow for the previous two years; and

(i) For a low-income owner, a statement of present household income and the number of persons in the household.

407.3 The Mayor's Agent may require that an applicant furnish additional information that may be relevant to a determination of unreasonable economic hardship. The Mayor's Agent may provide in appropriate instances that this additional information be furnished under seal.

407.4 When the applicant seeks a bench decision, the applicant is encouraged to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the Mayor's Agent at least twenty (20) days before the hearing.

407.5 If any required information is not reasonably available to the applicant and cannot be obtained by the applicant, the applicant shall file with the affidavit a statement of the missing information and the reasons it cannot be obtained.

407.6 Unless furnished under seal, the staff shall make the applicant's supplemental filing information available for public inspection.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 408** REQUEST FOR PARTY STATUS {#sec-10-c408 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C408}

408.1 Any affected person or group other than the applicant wishing to participate as a party in a public hearing shall file the following information with the Mayor's Agent not less than fifteen (15) days before the hearing:

(a) The requesting party's name and address;

(b) Whether the party will appear as a proponent or opponent of the application;

(d) A written statement setting forth the manner in which the party may be affected or aggrieved by action upon the application, and the grounds upon which the party supports or opposes the application.

408.2 The Mayor's Agent shall determine whether the person or group qualifies as a party as provided in Chapter 30.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 409** PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE {#sec-10-c409 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C409}

409.1 The Mayor's Agent shall hold the public hearing in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 30.

409.2 The Mayor's Agent shall hold the public hearing within one hundred twenty (120) days of receipt of an application, but any failure to conclude the hearing within this time period does not constitute an entitlement to approval of the application.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 410** ISSUANCE OF FINAL ORDER {#sec-10-c410 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C410}

410.1 Upon closure of the hearing record, the Mayor's Agent shall issue a final written order, including findings of fact and conclusions of law. The final order shall be filed with the record of the case.

410.2 The final order shall be based only upon the exclusive record of the hearing or any lesser portions of the exclusive record that may be agreed upon by the parties at the hearing.

410.3 The Mayor's Agent shall give notice to each party participating in the hearing, by serving the party with a copy of the final order.

410.4 The final order shall be issued as expeditiously as possible after closure of the hearing record.

410.5 The final order shall be effective fifteen (15) days after service.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 411** CONDITIONS OF FINAL ORDER {#sec-10-c411 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C411}

411.1 The Mayor's Agent may include any conditions or restrictions deemed appropriate as terms of the approval.

411.2 As a condition of the issuance of a final order, the Mayor's Agent may require the execution of a signed memorandum describing the conditions of any negotiated settlement or consensus agreement among interested parties.

411.3 The Mayor's Agent may require that a project return to the Board or CFA for further review and refinement after approval, particularly when the project is described only in concept.

411.4 When approving a project of special merit, the Mayor's Agent may specify any documents or assurances the applicant must submit in order to demonstrate the ability to complete the project, as required for permit issuance.

411.5 The Mayor's Agent may impose a performance schedule as a condition of any order, and may impose a time limit on the validity of any order. If no time limit is specified, an order shall be considered valid for a period of five (5) years.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C5** ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

##### **10-C DCMR § 500** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C500}

500.1 Both the D.C. Inventory and National Register provide for the designation of historic and prehistoric archaeological sites, and both include properties in the District of Columbia designated for their archaeological significance. In addition, some properties designated largely for reasons of architectural or historical significance also possess archaeological significance. However, for the majority of designated properties, including historic districts, the potential for significant archaeological remains has not been fully evaluated.

500.2 In reviewing proposed work under the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108), the Mayor's Agent and Review Board shall consider impacts on designated archaeological sites that may be affected by ground disturbance.

500.3 The Board and staff may also consider potential archaeological sites during the conceptual or preliminary design review processes. The goal of this review is to identify, protect, and when appropriate allow for the recovery of information on archaeological heritage of the District of Columbia that may be adversely affected by construction or development.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 501** HISTORIC PROPERTIES DESIGNATED FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE {#sec-10-c501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C501}

501.1 For properties designated solely or in part for their archaeological significance, the Board and staff shall determine the effect of the proposed work on the designated archaeological features, and shall recommend an appropriate treatment consistent with the Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in the District of Columbia ("Archaeological Guidelines"), as prepared by the staff.

501.2 Upon receipt of a permit or conceptual review application affecting a property designated for archaeological significance, the staff shall determine in consultation with the applicant if the proposed work is likely to affect any archaeological site on the property. The staff shall consult with the applicant with the objective of reaching agreement on an appropriate treatment for the affected archaeological site, consistent with the Archaeological Guidelines.

501.3 Dependent on the circumstances, appropriate treatments may include avoiding disturbance of the site, archaeological testing, or excavation and recovery of artifacts and data. If the staff and applicant reach agreement, the staff may approve work covered by the delegation of authority in Chapter 3.

501.4 The staff shall determine whether review by the Board is appropriate, depending on the significance of the property and the circumstances of the case. If the staff and applicant are unable to reach agreement on a scope of work, the staff shall refer the case to the Board for consideration in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 3.

501.5 The Board may recommend that an archaeological site not be disturbed, or if disturbance is unavoidable, may recommend that the Mayor's Agent require the applicant to undertake investigation of the features in a manner consistent with the Archaeological Guidelines.

501.6 The Mayor's Agent may impose specific conditions or requirements for archaeological investigation as appropriate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 502** HISTORIC PROPERTIES WITH POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE {#sec-10-c502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C502}

502.1 Upon receipt of a permit or conceptual review application affecting a property likely to possess archaeological significance, the staff may consult with the applicant to consider the potential for archaeological investigation. The staff shall conduct preliminary archival research, or have this research conducted by others, to establish whether there is sufficient evidence to anticipate the presence of archaeological resources that might warrant further investigation.

502.2 If the staff determines in consultation with the applicant that significant archaeological potential exists in a project area, the staff may recommend to the Board that archaeological testing, and excavation if appropriate, be conducted before ground disturbance. The Board shall consider these recommendations in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 3. These investigations shall not normally be expected of homeowners or small businesses, unless the applicant agrees after consultation with the staff.

502.3 If an applicant agrees to undertake archaeological investigation, the staff shall assist in identifying archaeological consultants meeting National Park Service professional standards as described in 36 CFR 61, in preparing a scope of services consistent with the Archaeological Guidelines, and in any other manner deemed appropriate. The Board shall resolve any failure to agree on the scope of an investigation.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 503** PROJECTS INVOLVING A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE MAYOR'S AGENT {#sec-10-c503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C503}

503.1 In cases referred to the Mayor's Agent for approval after a public hearing, the Board may recommend that specific actions be taken to avoid disturbance of known or potential archaeological resources. The Board may also recommend to the Mayor's Agent that specific levels of archaeological investigation be undertaken before disturbance of known or potential archaeological resources.

503.2 In making recommendations for archaeological investigation, the Board shall consider the overall scope and extent of a proposed project and the financial capacity of the applicant. Specifically, the Board may recommend that the Mayor's Agent require archaeological investigation to be undertaken in cases involving demolition of historic structures, substantial impacts on historic landmarks or districts, or a substantial amount of new construction. The Board shall not normally expect homeowners and small businesses to incur the cost of undertaking archaeological investigation.

503.3 The Mayor's Agent may impose specific conditions or requirements for archaeological investigation as appropriate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C7** CERTIFICATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES

##### **10-C DCMR § 700** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c700 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C700}

700.1 The Board shall determine whether buildings or structures contribute to historic districts or landmarks for the purposes of the demolition provisions of the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1104(c)). This determination shall be based upon the standards for contributing and non-contributing buildings established by the National Register of Historic Places.

700.2 The SHPO shall certify whether buildings or structures contribute to historic districts or landmarks for the purposes of D.C. Zoning Regulations (DCMR Title 11), the Targeted Historic Housing Tax Credit (D.C. Official Code § 47-1806.08), and other purposes as appropriate.

700.3 The SHPO may seek the advice and/or consent of the Board on any determination with respect to certification.

700.4 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Contributing building, structure, or site;

(b) Non-Contributing building, structure or site;

(d) Integrity; and

(e) Location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 701** METHOD OF EVALUATION {#sec-10-c701 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C701}

701.1 Historic districts and landmarks are identifiable entities that possess and convey historic significance as a whole. To meet the integrity requirement for designation, the preponderance of buildings and structures comprising a district or landmark shall contribute to its historic significance. Most districts nonetheless contain some buildings or structures that do not contribute to the significance of the district. Some landmark sites may also include buildings or structures that do not contribute to the significance of the landmark.

701.2 A building or structure shall be evaluated by comparison with the established historic significance and physical attributes of the overall district or landmark. The determination of whether a building or structure contributes to historic significance shall be based on information such as date of construction, function, associations, and physical characteristics. The determination for an archaeological site shall be based on an analysis of the information potential of the component element.

701.3 An addition to a historic building, particularly an addition that is largely self-contained, may be evaluated separately for a determination of significance. An integral element of a building or structure shall not be evaluated separately for this purpose.

701.4 A contributing or non-contributing determination made at the time of a historic district or historic landmark designation shall be presumed to retain validity unless a re-evaluation is warranted due to physical change, the availability of new information, or the passage of time since the designation was made.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 702** CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND SITES {#sec-10-c702 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C702}

702.1 The following considerations apply when determining whether a property meets the definition of a contributing building, structure, or site:

(a) A building or structure adds to a district's sense of time and place and historical development by virtue of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association;

(b) A building or structure adds to the historic associations or historic architectural qualities for which a district is significant because it dates from the period of significance, relates to the documented significance of the district, and possesses historic integrity; and

(c) An archaeological site adds to the archaeological values for which a property is significant because it was present during the period of significance and is capable of yielding information about the period.

702.2 A building, structure, or site may also be determined contributing if it independently meets the criteria for listing in the D.C. Inventory or National Register.

702.3 For some historic districts, contributing buildings have been specifically identified at the time of designation. However, the district may include buildings, structures, or sites that have achieved significance since the time of the district's designation. A building constructed in accordance with an approval under the Act may be compatible with a district, but is not a contributing building unless the Board has determined that it meets the criteria in this section.

702.4 The same criteria may be applied to historic landmarks.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 703** NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND SITES {#sec-10-c703 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C703}

703.1 The following considerations apply when determining whether a property meets the definition of a non-contributing building, structure, or site:

(a) A building or structure does not add to a district's sense of time and place and historical development if its qualities of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association have been so altered or are so deteriorated that the integrity of the property is irretrievably lost.

(b) A building or structure does not share the historic associations or historic architectural qualities for which a district is significant if it does not date from the district's period of significance, does not relate to its documented significance, or no longer possesses historic integrity due to changes since the period of the significance.

(c) An archaeological site does not contribute to the archaeological values for which a district is significant if it postdates the district's period of significance, does not relate to its documented significance, or is no longer capable of yielding important information about the period due to disturbance or other changes.

703.2 For districts with a specified period of significance, some buildings or structures may be judged to have achieved significance based on re-evaluation or the passage of time since the district's designation. For districts lacking a specified period of significance, non-contributing buildings shall be identified on a case-by-case basis.

703.3 Ordinarily, when considering eligibility for the National Register, buildings that date from the past 50 years do not contribute to the significance of a district unless a strong justification concerning their historical or architectural merit is given, or the documented historical attributes of the district are less than 50 years old.

703.4 The same criteria may be applied to historic landmarks.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 704** APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION {#sec-10-c704 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C704}

704.1 An application for certification of a property as contributing to the character of a historic district or landmark shall be made only by the owner of the property or the owner's authorized agent.

704.2 A request for certification shall be initiated by the filing of an application in the form and number as the staff may prescribe. The application shall at a minimum state the address of the property and the purpose for which the request is made, and shall include a photograph or photographs clearly showing the current condition of the property and its setting. The staff may request additional information as may be reasonably necessary for making a determination.

704.3 The filing of an application for a demolition permit shall be considered to incorporate a request for a determination whether the property contributes to the character of a historic landmark or district.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 705** CERTIFICATION OF BUILDINGS PROPOSED FOR DEMOLITION {#sec-10-c705 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C705}

705.1 Upon receipt of an application to demolish a building or structure that the Board determined to be non-contributing when it designated the historic district, the staff may certify the building as non-contributing on behalf of the Board and may process the demolition permit accordingly.

705.2 Upon receipt of an application to demolish a building or structure that the Board determined to be contributing when it designated the historic district, or the staff has determined to be contributing by applying the criteria in this chapter, or in any other case the staff deems appropriate, the staff shall refer the case to the Board with a recommendation for the Board's final determination in conjunction with the demolition permit application.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C20** DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

##### **10-C DCMR § 2000** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c2000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2000}

2000.1 The Board shall establish standards and guidelines to assist it and the staff in making determinations whether proposed work is compatible with the character of historic properties. The standards and guidelines shall enunciate the Board's policy with respect to various types of work, and shall indicate what types of work are considered to constitute appropriate treatments or adaptations of historic properties.

2000.2 Work undertaken in conformity with the Board's standards and guidelines shall be considered consistent with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act.

2000.3 Standards and guidelines shall be developed through a process that provides an opportunity for public review and comment. Any standards shall be promulgated as part of these regulations.

2000.4 In addition to its own specific standards and guidelines, the Board shall apply commonly accepted standards of historic preservation practice.

2000.5 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Standards or Board's standards;

(b) Guidelines or Board's guidelines;

(d) Compatible;

(e) Incompatible;

(f) Rehabilitation; and

(g) Restoration.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2001** PURPOSE AND USE {#sec-10-c2001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2001}

2001.1 The Board's design and construction standards are intended to promote the clear understanding and use of responsible historic preservation methods and practices. They are not intended as rigid and unyielding rules for all situations, but rather as a general means of promoting equity of treatment among applicants and consistency to the directions given by the Board and staff.

2001.2 The Board's standards shall be used with discretion, considering the context in which they are applied. Their application shall involve a careful assessment of the characteristics of affected historic properties, the nature of the proposed project, and other practical considerations.

(a) Pertinent considerations about the historic property include its relative importance, nature of significance, condition, and degree of material integrity.

(b) Pertinent conditions about the project include the extent of its impact, its degree of reversibility, allowable development rights, and related practical or regulatory constraints.

(c) Pertinent considerations about the relationship of a project to a historic district include its compatibility with its immediate context and not merely its consistency with conditions found elsewhere in the historic district.

2001.3 The burden shall be on an applicant to show that an exception to the normal rule in the Board's standards is appropriate.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2002** COMPATIBILITY AND CONSISTENCY WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE HISTORIC PROTECTION ACT {#sec-10-c2002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2002}

2002.1 The Board shall review an application for demolition, alteration, or subdivision to advise the Mayor's Agent whether the work is compatible with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act.

2002.2 The Mayor's Agent may approve an application as necessary in the public interest because it is consistent with the purposes of the Act.

2002.3 The purposes of the Act are, with respect to historic landmarks:

(a) To retain and enhance historic landmarks and to encourage their adaptation for current use; and

(b) To encourage the restoration of historic landmarks.

2002.4 The purposes of the Historic Protection Act are, with respect to historic districts:

(a) To retain and enhance those properties which contribute to the character of the historic district and to encourage their adaptation for current use;

(b) To assure that alterations of existing structures are compatible with the character of the historic district; and

(c) To assure that new construction and subdivision of lots in an historic district are compatible with the character of the historic district.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2003** SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION {#sec-10-c2003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2003}

2003.1 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation are the most commonly accepted national standards of good preservation practice. They are used by all federal agencies and SHPOs, and have been adopted by historic district and planning commissions across the country.

2003.2 The Board, the SHPO, and the staff apply the Secretary's Standards in all project reviews under the federal preservation program, including Section 106 cases and projects seeking certified rehabilitation status for federal tax purposes.

2003.3 The Board and the staff may also apply the Secretary's Standards in the review of projects under the Historic Protection Act. Rehabilitation that meets the Secretary's Standards shall be considered compatible with the character of a historic landmark or historic district. Although conformity is encouraged, rehabilitation is not required to meet the Secretary's Standards to be considered compatible or consistent with the purposes of the Act.

2003.4 The Secretary's Standards are:

(a) Standard 1: A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.

(b) Standard 2: The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.

(c) Standard 3: Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.

(d) Standard 4: Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

(e) Standard 5: Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.

(f) Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

(g) Standard 7: Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic material shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

(h) Standard 8: Significant archaeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.

(i) Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

(j) Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

2003.5 The Secretary's Standards are accompanied by Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, which are intended to assist in applying the Standards to projects generally. The Standards and Guidelines are published by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, and are available from the U.S. Government Printing Office. The HPO shall also make copies available for review by the public at the HPO office.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2004** HISTORIC PRESERVATION GUIDELINES {#sec-10-c2004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2004}

2004.1 To promote the clarity and understanding of design and construction standards, the Board and HPO may prepare design guidelines for use in conjunction with the standards. The Board's design guidelines shall augment the standards and provide examples of treatments that are recommended or not recommended.

2004.2 Before the implementation of any design guidelines, the HPO shall submit the proposed guidelines to the Board for its review and acceptance. The Board shall adopt design guidelines only after distribution of the proposed guidelines to the public for review and comment, and a duly noticed public hearing at which the public may participate.

2004.3 The HPO may make minor changes to adopted guidelines without a public hearing by the Board.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C23** STANDARDS FOR WINDOW REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT (WINDOW STANDARDS)

##### **10-C DCMR § 2300** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c2300 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2300}

2300.1 Windows are an important and integral part of the design of most buildings. They typically comprise thirty to forty percent of the surface area of the building's principal facade. In making a determination on proposed changes to windows, the Board and staff evaluate the effect of the proposal on the aesthetic values and the historical and architectural significance of the affected historic building. Factors in this evaluation include the architectural style and integrity of the historic building, and the design, material, color, and general appearance of the proposed work.

2300.2 These window standards are based on the following principles:

(a) The historic character of a property and its distinguishing qualities shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of distinctive architectural features should be avoided.

(b) Deteriorated architectural features should be repaired rather than replaced.

(c) In the event that replacement is necessary, the new feature should match the historic in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities, and, where possible, materials.

2300.3 To the maximum extent possible, these standards shall be applied so as to minimize harm to National Historic Landmarks and National Historic Landmark Districts.

2300.4 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Facade;

(b) Principal facade;

(d) Character-defining feature.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2301** WINDOW TYPES {#sec-10-c2301 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2301}

2301.1 An "existing window" means a windows existing at the time of designation, if supported by documentary evidence, or a window that has been changed subsequent to designation pursuant to a valid permit reviewed by the Board.

2301.2 A "historic window" means:

(a) A window that appears to date from the construction of the historic building, as determined with a reasonable degree of certainty by professional evaluation;

(b) A window that is of a type characteristic of the building when constructed, as supported by documentary evidence which may include typologies of similar buildings in similar periods and styles; or

(c) A window that was incorporated into the building by a major alteration undertaken within the period of significance of the historic landmark or district, as supported by documentary evidence.

2301.3 A "special window" means a window that creates a special architectural effect, or is a custom design, not typically found in a manufacturer's catalogue. These windows may or may not be repetitive, and usually involve one or more of the following attributes:

(a) Non-rectilinear frame or sash;

(b) Transom or side light configuration;

(d) Curved glass;

(e) Stained, leaded, or artistically crafted glazing;

(f) Decorated, carved, or embellished sash, frame, or surround; or

(g) Projecting bay or oriel.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2302** WINDOW COMPONENTS AND ATTRIBUTES {#sec-10-c2302 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2302}

2302.1 "Configuration" means the number, shape, organization and relationship of panes or lights of glass, as defined by sash, frame, muntins, or tracery

2302.2 "Dimensions" means the size and measurements of both stationary and moveable portions of a window and its applied moldings.

2302.3 "Fenestration" means the way in which windows are arranged in a facade, including configuration, profile, material, and finish.

2302.4 "Finish" means the visual characteristics, including color, texture and reflectivity of all exterior materials. A replacement window does not match the finish of a wood window if it is clad with metal or vinyl.

2302.5 "Frame" means the stationary portion of a window unit, which is affixed to the facade and which holds the sash or other operable portions of the window.

2302.6 "Glazing" means the glass or other material forming the transparent portion of the window, often in a configuration of separate pieces referred to as panes or lights.

2302.7 "Match" means a closely approximate, but not necessarily an exact, replication. Tolerances permitted in determining the acceptable level of approximation shall in general be in fractions of inches. In making this determination, the staff considers overall sizes of window openings and proportions of elements making up the window. In all cases, there shall be minimum variation in the distance between the plane of glass and the plane of adjacent exterior surfaces (muntins, sash and frame).

2302.8 "Meeting rail" means the horizontal portion of sash in a double hung window designed to interlock with the other sash member, usually at the middle of the window.

2302.9 "Method of operation" means the manner in which a window opens, closes, locks, or functions. If non-operable, a window or window element, such as a sidelight, is identified as "fixed."

2302.10 "Molding" means a trim piece which introduces varieties of outline or contour in edges or surfaces of window elements such as jambs and heads. Moldings are generally rectilinear, curved, or a composite of curves.

2302.11 "Mullion" means a vertical primary framing member which separates paired or multiple windows within a single opening.

2302.12 "Muntin" means a tertiary framing member which subdivides window sash into individual panes, lights or panels. For the purposes of these standards, the term includes lead cames associated with stained glass windows. False muntins or "grids" placed between two sheets of glass are not considered muntins.

2302.13 "Panning" (also known as "capping" or "wrapping") means a material, usually metal or vinyl, applied to cover the exterior surface of an existing window frame or mullion.

2302.14 "Profile" means the three-dimensional appearance of a window, particularly as perceived under the conditions of sunlight and shadow. Profile is established by the contours of frame and sash elements, and by the successive depth of recess of the window within the opening, the sash within the frame, and the glass within the sash.

2302.15 "Sash" means the secondary part of a window, either operable or fixed, which holds the glazing in place. Sash is usually constructed of horizontal rails and vertical stiles, and it may be subdivided with muntins.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2303** WINDOW MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR {#sec-10-c2303 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2303}

2303.1 Proper maintenance and repair of historic windows is the most appropriate historic preservation approach, since it promotes the long-term preservation of the physical fabric, historic integrity, and appearance of historic buildings and districts. Historic windows should be repaired where possible.

2303.2 A permit is not required to undertake the following maintenance work:

(a) Replacement of broken glass, together with associated replacement of glazing compound and, if necessary, of damaged moldings and muntins with material of matching characteristics.

(b) Scraping, priming and repainting of window sash or frames.

(d) Repair and replacement of window hardware, including pulley chains.

(e) Installation of weather-stripping.

(f) Rebuilding portions of sills, sash, molding, and other window members, using the same material and to the same configuration, size, shape, and profile.

(g) Consolidating wood members with epoxy or other wood fillers.

2303.3 A permit is required for repair work that involves any change in configuration, shape, size or profile of any component of the total window assembly, or any change in the type of material used for replacement work, or in wholesale replacement of any window element.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2304** STORM WINDOWS {#sec-10-c2304 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2304}

2304.1 The use of secondary windows or storm windows, either exterior or interior, is encouraged as a means of preserving historic windows. Under the D.C. Construction Code (12 DCMR § 111), a permit is required for the installation of storm windows in historic landmarks or in historic districts.

2304.2 Interior Storm Windows

(a) Storm panels should have no intermediate dividing members (mullions or muntins), except on large windows, where any necessary dividing members should align with major divisions of the historic window.

(b) Frames should be narrow and not visible or minimally visible when viewed from the exterior of the building.

2304.3 Exterior Storm Windows

(a) Sash should fit tightly within window openings without the need for a subframe or panning around the perimeter.

(b) Sash should have no intermediate dividing members (mullions or muntins), except on large windows, where any necessary dividing members should align with major divisions of the historic window.

(c) Meeting rails should be used only in conjunction with double-hung windows and should be in the same relative location as in the primary sash.

(d) The color of the frame members should approximate the color of the primary window frame.

(e) Glazing should be only of clear glass.

(f) The plane of glass in the secondary (storm) sash shall be no more than two (2) inches further forward (towards the exterior) from the plane of the glass in the primary window unless unusual conditions make this infeasible.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2305** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c2305 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2305}

2305.1 Replacement of historic windows should be considered only if the preferred option of preserving historic windows is not feasible, given the facts and circumstances of each particular case.

2305.2 Under the D.C. Construction Code (12 DCMR § 107), a permit is required for the replacement of windows in historic landmarks or buildings within an historic district.

2305.3 The requirement for a permit applies equally to the removal or replacement of sash in existing frames, and to the removal or replacement of both sash and frames. If repair or rehabilitation of frames is proposed, that work shall also be indicated on the permit application.

2305.4 Replacement sash and frames shall match the historic sash and frames in all respects-configuration , method of operation, profile, dimensions, material, finish, and any other salient character-defining features, except as provided below.

2305.5 Panning, capping, or wrapping of window piers, mullions, frames, and sills is generally discouraged.

2305.6 Replacement windows may be double-glazed, but they shall have either "true-divided" lights, or "simulated-divided" lights (integrally applied external and internal muntins), with configuration and profiles matching the historic window. False muntins or "grids" located between two panes of glass, and "snap-ins" applied either internally or externally are not considered acceptable muntins.

2305.7 Glazing in replacement windows shall be clear, non-reflective glass unless otherwise historically appropriate or determined compatible by the staff. Replacement of stained or specialty glass shall match the historic glass or be historically appropriate or compatible.

2305.8 Permanent exterior full screens covering the entire window opening detract from the historic appearance of windows and are discouraged. Half screens or internal screens are preferred.

2305.9 The standards for window replacement reflect a hierarchy of building importance, as delineated in the following sections. The strictest standard shall be applied to National Historic Landmarks, historic landmarks and major buildings in historic districts, a more flexible standard shall be applied to contributing buildings in historic districts (with additional flexibility applied to larger buildings), and the most flexible standard shall be applied to non-contributing buildings and new construction.

2305.10 If the existing windows in an historic building are not historic windows, replacement windows should be consistent with the historic window design if known, or should be consistent with the period of the building and compatible with its general historic character.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2306** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: HISTORIC LANDMARKS {#sec-10-c2306 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2306}

2306.1 Principal Facades

(a) If historic windows cannot reasonably be restored, replacement windows shall be approved if they match the historic windows in all respects—configuration, method of operation, profile, dimensions, material, finish, and any other salient character-defining features. A stricter standard of reasonableness shall be applied to special windows.

(b) Variations in profile shall be permitted if these variations do not significantly affect visual characteristics of the historic window. In evaluating "significant" effect, factors to be considered shall be the age of the building, its architectural quality, and the extent of diminution in the total glazed area of the sash. Exact replication of profiles may be required if warranted by the significance of the historic building,

(c) The color of replacement windows shall match or approximate the historic color of the historic windows, if this can be determined. Otherwise, the color shall be historically appropriate.

(d) With respect to matching of materials, it shall be understood that a wood historic window shall be replaced in wood, but not necessarily of the same species. A metal historic window shall be replaced with metal but not necessarily of the same metal. Exact replication of materials may be required if warranted by the significance of the historic building.

(e) Replacement of windows in a different material shall require approval by the Board.

(f) Alteration of window openings shall generally require approval by the Board. For basement openings not visible from a street or public open space, or only marginally visible, the staff may approve alterations that do not compromise historic or architectural characteristics.

2306.2 Secondary Elevations

(a) If existing windows are visible from a street or public open space, a permit shall be issued if replacement windows match the historic windows in terms of configuration, method of operation, profile, dimensions, and finish, and provided that they do not replace special windows. Matching the material is encouraged but not required.

(b) If existing windows are not visible from a street or public open space, a permit shall be issued if replacement windows reasonably match the historic windows in terms of configuration, method of operation and dimensions, and provided that they do not replace special windows.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2307** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS (MAJOR BUILDINGS) {#sec-10-c2307 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2307}

2307.1 For the purposes of these standards, a "major building" in a historic district is a contributing building that is individually distinguished by characteristics like symbolic value, visual prominence, substantial size, architectural elaboration, or historical association. These buildings often meet the criteria for historic landmark designation, and typically include public and institutional buildings, schools, mansions, and places of worship or public assembly.

2307.2 Major buildings in historic districts shall be treated on a case-by-case basis, usually according to the same standards applicable to historic landmarks.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2308** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS (SMALL BUILDINGS) {#sec-10-c2308 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2308}

2308.1 For the purposes of these standards, a "small building" in a historic district shall be defined as a building of four stories or less, unless the building has a street frontage of one hundred (100) feet or more on any single street.

2308.2 Principal Facades

(a) If historic windows cannot reasonably be restored, replacement windows shall be approved if they reasonably match the historic windows in all respects-configuration, method of operation, profile, dimensions, material, and finish. A stricter standard of reasonableness shall be applied to special windows.

(c) With respect to matching of materials, it shall be understood that a wood historic window shall be replaced in wood, but not necessarily of the same species. A metal historic window shall be replaced with metal but not necessarily of the same metal. Exact replication of materials may be required if warranted by the significance of the building.

(d) The color of replacement windows should be historically appropriate or compatible with the character of the building.

(e) In buildings other than one- or two-family dwellings, where the historic windows are simple one-over-one, straight-headed, double hung sash with non-contoured and unornamented frames, flexibility may be applied to allow replacement in a different material.

2308.3 Secondary Elevations

(a) If existing windows are visible from a street or public open space, a permit shall be issued if replacement windows reasonably match the historic windows in terms of configuration, method of operation, profile, and dimensions, and provided that they do not replace special windows. Matching the material and finish is encouraged but not required.

(b) If existing windows are not visible from a street or public open space, a permit shall be issued if replacement windows reasonably match the historic windows in terms of method of operation and dimensions, and provided that they do not replace special windows. Flexibility is allowed in the choice of configuration, profile, material, and finish.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2309** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS (LARGE BUILDINGS) {#sec-10-c2309 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2309}

2309.1 For the purposes of these standards, a "large building" in a historic district shall be defined as a building of five (5) or more stories in height, or a building of less than five (5) stories with a street frontage of one hundred (100) feet or more on any single frontage.

2309.2 Principal Facades

(a) Replacement windows shall be approved if they match the historic windows in terms of configuration, operation, profile, dimensions, and finish. However, matching the material is encouraged and may be required if deemed appropriate by the staff.

(b) Where the historic windows possess special architectural value, including special windows, replacement windows shall match the material of the historic windows. Special architectural value often applies to large buildings with ground floor or lower floor windows that are distinctively different from the typical upper floor windows. In these cases, the staff may deem it appropriate to require matching the material on the lower windows (or to require retention of the original lower windows), while allowing replacement in a different material for the upper windows.

(c) Alteration of window openings shall generally require approval by the Board. For basement openings not visible from a street or public open space, or only marginally visible, the staff may approve alterations that do not compromise historic or architectural characteristics.

2309.3 Secondary Elevations

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2310** WINDOW REPLACEMENT: NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS {#sec-10-c2310 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2310}

2310.1 For replacement windows in a non-contributing building within an historic district, a permit shall be issued if the windows are appropriate for the building and compatible with the historic district.

2310.2 This guidance is intended to promote design compatibility with historic districts, rather than to discourage good contemporary design or creative architectural expression.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2311** WINDOWS IN NEW ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS {#sec-10-c2311 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2311}

2311.1 Windows in additions to historic buildings should be appropriate for the new addition and in most cases consistent in overall character with the windows found on the historic building. This is generally most important for windows in close proximity to a primary historic facade.

2311.2 Windows in rear additions to historic buildings should generally reflect the less formal design that is characteristic at the rear of most historic structures. Alternatively, windows in an addition distinguished by deliberate contrast should be compatible in scale and character with the historic building overall.

2311.3 Windows should generally be made of the same material as the building's historic windows, particularly in additions to historic landmarks, major buildings in historic districts, and small buildings in historic districts. Alternatively, use of a different window material should serve to support the design integrity of an addition distinguished by contrast.

2311.4 This guidance is intended to promote design compatibility with historic buildings and districts, rather than to discourage good contemporary design or creative architectural expression.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2312** WINDOWS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS {#sec-10-c2312 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2312}

2312.1 Windows in new construction within an historic district should be appropriate for the building and in most cases generally consistent in character with the windows found in the historic district.

2312.2 Windows should generally be made of the materials characteristic of similar building types within the historic district.

2312.3 This guidance is intended to promote design compatibility with historic buildings and districts, rather than to discourage good contemporary design or creative architectural expression.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2313** SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR WINDOW PERMIT APPLICATIONS {#sec-10-c2313 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2313}

2313.1 Permit applications for window work shall include close-up photographs of existing windows in the building or other materials adequate to document the condition of existing windows.

2313.2 For applications to replace windows, supplemental materials shall include documentation sufficient to indicate the design and construction of the proposed new windows, such as drawings from the manufacturer's catalogue or other drawings with comparative dimensions, details of construction, configuration, color and finish.

2313.3 If necessary, the staff may request material samples or an on-site mock-up.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C25** STANDARDS FOR SIGNS, AWNINGS, CANOPIES AND MARQUEES

##### **10-C DCMR § 2500** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c2500 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2500}

GENERAL PROVISIONS

This chapter addresses historic preservation requirements for signage and related building features, including awnings, canopies, and marquees, which typically serve as locations for signage.

Signs, awnings, canopies, and marquees on historic property shall comply with the requirements of this chapter and the applicable provisions of the D.C. Building Code.

Signage and related building features subject to review under the Shipstead-Luce Act or the Old Georgetown Act shall be submitted to the Commission of Fine Arts for review before a permit is issued, and shall comply with applicable sections of the D.C. Building Code, including the specific limitations pertinent to those review areas.

The Historic Preservation Review Board and Historic Preservation Office may also review signage and related building features subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission of Fine Arts.

Signage and related building features in the Chinatown Overlay District are subject to review by the Chinatown Steering Committee pursuant to 10 DCMR B, Chapter 24.

Signage and related building features located in or projecting into public space are subject to review by the Public Space Committee of the District Department of Transportation pursuant to 24 DCMR, Chapters 1 and 2.

2500.7 As provided in 10 DCMR C § 9900, terms specific to this chapter are defined in § 2599. Other terms used throughout subtitle C of title 10 DCMR are defined in Chapter 99.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2501** PERMIT REQUIREMENTS {#sec-10-c2501 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2501}

PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

2501.1 Notwithstanding the limitations and exemptions stated in the D.C. Building Code, a permit is required for the erection, painting, repainting, placement, replacement, hanging, rehanging, alteration, repair, or change of a sign larger than one square foot (1 sq. ft.) in size on the exterior of a building on historic property or located within the first eighteen inches (18 in.) inside a glazed opening of a building on historic property.

Signs on historic property that are not subject to regulation under the D.C. Building Code or required to meet the permit requirements stated in the D.C. Building Code shall be issued permits based on their compliance with the requirements of this chapter.

Notwithstanding the other requirements of this chapter, signs bearing non-commercial statements of fact, belief, or personal or political opinion that are posted on privately owned historic property shall be issued permits if the proposed method of installation would not destroy or irreparably damage the historic property and would not prevent the maintenance of the property in good repair as provided in § 10b of the Act. Such signs shall remain subject to the requirements and prohibitions applicable to dangerous and obstructive signs in 12 DCMR A § 3107.13 and 3107.14.

A permit is required for the erection, placement, replacement, hanging, rehanging, alteration, refacing, repair, or change of an awning, canopy, or marquee on historic property.

A permit is required for a permanent sign on historic property relating to the sale, rental, lease, or management of the premises.

2501.6 A permit is not required for a temporary real estate sign on historic property six square feet (6 sq. ft.) in area or less, or any sign on historic property that is one square foot (1 sq. ft.) in area or less.

A permit application for a sign, awning, canopy, or marquee on historic property shall comply with the application requirements of the D.C. Building Code and §§ 306 through 313 of this subtitle, and shall include the following:

A completed D.C. Application for Construction Permit on Private Property and D.C. Application for Public Space (if applicable), signed by the applicant or building owner;

Good quality photographs of the building or site, showing the entire façade and close-ups of the area where work is proposed, adequate to document the building or site’s existing appearance;

A scaled or dimensioned drawing of the proposed sign, awning, canopy, or marquee accurately indicating dimensions, materials, colors, graphics, copy, type of illumination, and method of attachment;

Scaled or dimensioned plans, photo illustrations, or elevation drawings as necessary to show the proposed work as it would appear on the building or site;

A section drawing, if the application is for an awning, canopy, or marquee; and

If requested, a sample of the finish material(s).

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2282 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11085 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2502** PERMIT APPLICATION PROCEDURES {#sec-10-c2502 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2502}

PERMIT APPLICATION PROCEDURES

An applicant shall submit permit application materials to the Permit Processing Division of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) for transmittal to the Mayor’s Agent pursuant to the Act as further described in Chapter 3.

Upon receipt of the permit application and the results of any required review by the Commission of Fine Arts, the HPO shall review the application under the authority delegated in § 321, and take action as appropriate.

If the application does not meet the requirements of this chapter, and the HPO is not able to resolve the deficiencies directly with the applicant, the HPO shall prepare the case for review by the Board as provided in Chapter 3.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2283 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2503** GENERAL PRINCIPLES FOR SIGNAGE {#sec-10-c2503 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2503}

GENERAL PRINCIPLES FOR SIGNAGE

Signs are a prominent visual element of many historic properties, serving an important role in identifying or advertising businesses, institutions, building occupants, or other entities. The location and design of signage also influences the perception of historic buildings and districts. Well-designed and well-maintained signs add interest and variety to historic building facades and streetscapes and can enhance the image and attractiveness of a historic district. Oversized, poorly designed, or poorly maintained signs can result in visual clutter and detract from the overall appearance of historic property.

Different historic buildings impose different constraints and may require varied signage solutions. Signage needs also vary by use. For instance, the requirements for a large department store, a small neighborhood retailer, a church, and a home occupation will differ, and signs for each should be tailored to the specific character of each building and entity.

Different historic districts and neighborhoods have specific characteristics and qualities that may require varied signage solutions. For instance, Chinatown, Downtown, 18th Street in Adams Morgan, Georgetown, U Street, and many of the neighborhood commercial strips throughout the city have their own historical traditions and distinctive current characteristics that should be recognized and respected.

Special considerations apply to residential and institutional signage. Signs are not typically a prominent visual element on historic residential buildings, and commercial signage is strictly limited by the D.C. Building Code within residential and special purpose zoning districts. Commercial signage is also unsuited to historic institutional buildings, which express their function primarily through architectural imagery and symbolism.

Signs are an incidental element on buildings and in the landscape, and total signage on a property should maintain a deferential balance with historic architecture. Historic buildings were often designed to limit signage to specific areas defined by an architectural frame. Much less common, signage was designed as a prominent façade element on some mid-20th century commercial buildings, but those signs typically relied on superb graphics and design flair to convey a stylish image.

Vintage and historic signs contribute to the character and significance of historic buildings and districts. Many were integrally designed with historic facades. Historic signage that has survived for many decades is often the only visual reminder of long-forgotten businesses and modes of commercial advertising.

Sign types developed for suburban highway-oriented environments are not compatible with urban historic districts. Billboards, rooftop signs, pole-mounted gas station signs, and other overscaled advertising designed to be viewed at high speed or from a great distance are generally not appropriate on historic properties or in historic streetscapes.

The visual impact of strong color, intense lighting, supergraphics, and other branding elements can be crucial in judging whether signage is appropriate for historic property. Standardized corporate branding, typically developed without regard to local character and context, is often not appropriate for historic buildings and districts and may need to be substantially modified to be compatible with a specific building or district.

Signs are an opportunity for stylistic imagination and graphic excellence. High artistic quality is strongly encouraged.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2283 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11085 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2504** GENERAL STANDARDS FOR SIGNAGE {#sec-10-c2504 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2504}

GENERAL STANDARDS FOR SIGNAGE

Signage shall be appropriate to the building, site, or historic district it will affect. Signage shall relate to, take advantage of, and be compatible with the building’s particular composition, scale, design features, and architectural character. It shall be designed with sensitivity to adjacent historic properties, the landscape of historic sites, and the streetscape of historic districts, especially when placed in public space.

Signage shall be appropriate to the identified or advertised use. Its scale and design character shall be commensurate with the size and nature of the entity and its location.

Signs on historic property shall be primarily oriented toward and promote the pedestrian environment.

Redundant or repetitive signs which clutter, overwhelm, or visually detract from a building façade, storefront, or site are not permitted.

Signs shall be lightweight in feeling and appearance. Signage or signage elements like raceways that are boxy, bulky, or out of scale with historic buildings and districts are not permitted.

Signs that graphically or symbolically express a business or institution, or that express creativity, diversity, or individuality are encouraged.

Branding, color branding, or overpowering visual effects that detract from or overwhelm the architecture or historic character of a building or district are not permitted.

Signs should be well designed and fabricated of high quality materials. Professional design and fabrication are strongly encouraged.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2283 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2505** APPROPRIATE SIGN TYPES {#sec-10-c2505 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2505}

APPROPRIATE SIGN TYPES

Signage shall be of a type appropriate to the affected historic building, site, or district. The specific characteristics of the historic building, site, or district shall determine what sign types are appropriate in each instance.

The following sign types, when properly designed and installed, may be appropriate for a historic property, depending on its design, setting, and characteristics:

Banner signs;

Blade signs;

Channel letter signs;

Halo lit signs;

Hanging signs;

Painted signs;

Panel signs;

Pin-mounted signs;

Plaques, markers, and medallions that are commemorative, interpretive, or informational in nature;

Projecting signs;

Raceway signs;

Reverse channel signs;

Routed signs;

Signs on the valance of an awning or canopy;

Three-dimensional signs; and

Window signs.

The following sign types are typically not appropriate for historic buildings and districts:

Internally-illuminated, plastic-faced box or cabinet signs;

Electronic signs, flashing signs, and other signs with moving text or images;

Moving or rotating signs;

Pole-mounted signs more than ten feet (10 ft.) in height; and

Prohibited signs, as defined in § 2506.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2285 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11085 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2506** PROHIBITED SIGN TYPES {#sec-10-c2506 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2506}

PROHIBITED SIGN TYPES

Billboards and special signs as defined in § 2599 are not permitted on historic property.

Roof signs and revolving signs are not permitted on historic property, except for vintage, historic, or replica signs as provided in § 2513.

Televisions and video monitors are not permitted as signage on historic property.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2286 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2507** DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS OF APPROPRIATE SIGNS {#sec-10-c2507 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2507}

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS OF APPROPRIATE SIGNS

In reviewing an application for signage, the HPO and Board shall evaluate the architecture and design of the building and site, and determine whether the proposed sign is compatible with respect to type, placement, size, material, copy, illumination, and installation. The HPO shall assist applicants in evaluating historic properties for appropriate signage.

Sign placement shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

A sign may be placed only on a portion of the building occupied by the person, business, or entity to which it relates;

A sign band, fascia, or other storefront or building area designed to accommodate signage is the preferred location for sign placement;

In the absence of a sign band or fascia, a flat continuous wall surface, unbroken by decorative detailing and windows, is an appropriate location for signage;

A storefront or show window may be an appropriate location for a sign provided it does not visually overwhelm the storefront or obscure its transparency;

A sign shall not conceal or cover over a character-defining architectural feature, such as a window or door surround, cornice, pilaster, or other decorative or ornamental feature;

A sign shall not conceal or cover over a window or transom. A window sign within a transom or a channel letter sign on top of a show window may be appropriate provided it does not substantially cover the transom;

A sign shall not conceal or cover over a significant site or landscape feature. Sign placement shall avoid known or likely archaeological features; and

A sign shall not project more than forty-two inches (42 in.) beyond the building line or building restriction line. A projecting, hanging, blade, or banner sign shall maintain a minimum clearance of eight feet (8 ft.) above grade.

2507.3 Sign size shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

A sign shall be sized appropriately for its location on a building or site. Signage in a historic district should be generally consistent with the prevailing size of comparable signage in the district;

The maximum size and area limitations established by the D.C. Building Code apply to signs on historic property. Further limitations on size and area may be necessary to achieve compatibility with a historic property or district;

The appropriate size of a sign on historic property shall be determined by and tailored to the specific characteristics of the building or site, the location of the sign on the building or site, and if applicable, the character of the surrounding historic district;

A sign installed on a sign band, fascia, or show window shall fit within the area specifically designed for its installation; and

The aggregate area of all window signs within a storefront or show window shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the surface area of that element.

2507.4 Sign material shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

Signage shall be constructed of durable, exterior-grade materials that will retain a high quality appearance;

Painted wood or metal, and other sign materials and finishes that are consistent in character with materials and finishes on the affected building, district, or site are encouraged; and

Shiny plastic and other sign materials and finishes that are not found on or are out of character with the affected building, district, or site are prohibited unless unusual circumstances make them clearly acceptable at the specific building or location.

2507.5 Sign copy shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

Sign copy shall not detract from the visual character of the historic building or district. Generally, copy should be kept simple and the number of words or symbols should be limited to keep the sign easily legible, graphically clear, and free of clutter;

Sign copy should be legible but not out of scale for the historic building or district. Lettering shall be no more than eighteen inches (18 in.) in height unless a variation is dictated by the specific characteristics of the building and the placement of the sign;

A sign listing services, goods, websites, phone numbers, or other detailed information shall be no larger than three square feet (3 sq. ft.) in size; and

Signage using Chinese characters and design elements is encouraged in the Chinatown Overlay District.

2507.6 Sign illumination shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

Sign illumination shall not detract from a historic building or district. At a minimum, illumination of a sign on historic property shall comply with the applicable provisions of the D.C. Building Code;

Low-level illumination for signage is encouraged as a general principle. Intense or overpowering illumination can render an otherwise compatible sign inappropriate for historic property;

Sign illumination shall be appropriate for the location, setting and character of the specific building and site. Certain types of facilities, such as theaters and public buildings, may warrant greater levels of illumination;

The large internally illuminated surface areas of box signs are generally not appropriate for signs on historic property. Internally illuminated channel letter signs are more appropriate and are encouraged as an alternative;

Signs with a diffused source of illumination, such as halo-lit channel letter signs, are encouraged;

Any exterior source of illumination shall direct the light onto the sign, and shall be appropriately shielded to prevent light and glare from shining in the eyes of pedestrians;

Spot lights, hanging lamps, and decorative fixtures may be acceptable methods of external illumination, if the light source is appropriately shielded and of low intensity;

Sodium vapor, mercury vapor, or other metal halide light sources are generally too bright for illuminating signs on historic property and are not permitted;

Neon signs may be permitted if appropriate for the building or district. The use of neon or continuous light-emitting diode (LED) strips as decorative trim or as a building outlining element is not permitted except in the Chinatown area of the Downtown Historic District; and

Sign illumination shall be by steady light only. Pulsing, blinking, or flashing lights are not permitted.

2507.7 Sign installation shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

Signage shall be installed in a manner that minimizes permanent damage to a building. On masonry buildings, signage shall be attached through mortar joints, rather than through masonry units, whenever possible;

Signage shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner;

Electrical conduit, transformers, and other electrical equipment for lighting of exterior signs shall be concealed. Raceways shall be as compact as practicable and painted or finished to blend with the wall color behind; and

Ground-mounted signs shall be installed to avoid damage to known or likely archaeological features.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2286 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11086 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2508** SIGNS FOR HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES {#sec-10-c2508 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2508}

SIGNS FOR HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES

Signs are not typically a prominent visual element on historic residential buildings. In order to preserve the character and setting of historic residential buildings, signage on these buildings and in historic residential areas shall not be visually intrusive, overwhelming, or incompatible with the significant historic characteristics of the particular building, site, and context.

Commercial advertising on historic property in residential and special purpose zoning districts shall comply at a minimum with the pertinent limitations in the D.C. Building Code. The Board may impose further limitations in size or other characteristics if necessary to achieve compatibility with a historic landmark or district.

Signage for a historic apartment building or an apartment building in a portion of a historic district zoned for residential use shall be limited to the name and address of the building.

The preferred location for apartment building signage is at the building entrance, either on a canopy, marquee, or adjacent flat wall surface. A small ground-mounted building identification sign may be permitted for a historic apartment building, an apartment building within a historic district, or historic property within a special purpose zoning district.

A permanent sign on historic property relating to the sale, rental, lease, or management of the premises is limited to two square feet (2 sq. ft.) in size.

Illuminated signage is discouraged in portions of a historic district zoned for residential use. Illumination may be permitted if it is determined acceptable for the specific building and setting. Any permitted illumination shall consist of soft, steady white light only.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2289 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11089 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2509** SIGNS FOR HISTORIC INSTITUTIONAL PROPERTIES {#sec-10-c2509 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2509}

SIGNS FOR HISTORIC INSTITUTIONAL PROPERTIES

Historic civic, institutional, religious, and educational properties generally have a very different character from historic commercial properties. Government offices, courts, churches, synagogues, schools, colleges, libraries, and other institutional or quasi-institutional structures like banks and corporate offices were typically designed to express their function primarily through the imagery and symbolism of their architecture. Signage on a historic institutional property shall be consistent with and respectful of the image and architecture of the property.

The preferred solution for signage on historic institutional properties is to retain any existing historic signs or to add signage of the same or a similar type if needed.

The preferred design for bulletin sign boards for historic institutional properties is the traditional style consisting of permanent identification and non-illuminated or front-lit changeable letters set behind glass against a solid background.

Ground-mounted identification and bulletin signs may also be permitted for historic institutional properties.

2509.5 Signs for historic institutional properties shall be subject to the following provisions:

Traditional institutional building signage shall be placed at an architecturally appropriate location like a frieze or wall surface next to or above an entrance. The determination of an appropriate location is dependent on the architecture of the specific historic building;

Ground-mounted institutional signs shall be located where they do not obscure public views of the building, its entrance, or other significant architectural or site features. Ground-mounted signs shall not be raised on masonry piers;

Institutional signage shall be sized appropriately to its location on the historic building or site. A bulletin sign should not exceed twenty square feet (20 sq. ft.) in area, calculated to include any architectural supports such as piers, bases, and frames;

Institutional signs shall be constructed of materials appropriate for the building, site, or district. Signs of metal, wood, stone and other materials compatible with the building or district are encouraged. Signs of synthetic materials, such as shiny plastic, that are not compatible with the building or district are not permitted; and

Institutional signs shall be illuminated in a manner consistent with and appropriate for their setting. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited unless unusual circumstances make them clearly compatible with the specific building or location.

Signs on historic institutional properties that are within or adjacent to historic districts shall be designed in a manner that minimizes the impact of institutional signage, such as the level of illumination, on adjacent historic properties.

Signs for properties within a historic complex or campus should be coordinated to convey that the properties are or were historically related. Owners of these campuses and complexes are encouraged to develop a master plan for signage, pursuant to § 2511.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2290 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11089 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2510** SIGNS FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS AND SITES {#sec-10-c2510 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2510}

SIGNS FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS AND SITES

Signage on non-contributing buildings and sites can materially affect the streetscape of historic districts. These signs should be appropriate for the building or site where they are located and shall not detract from the character of historic districts, landmarks, or sites.

Signage on a non-contributing building shall be generally consistent with the character of the historic district, landmark, or site.

2510.3 New pole-mounted signs on gas stations or other facilities are not permitted to exceed ten feet (10 ft.) in height. Removal of existing pole- mounted signs and replacement with ground-mounted signs or other appropriate signage is encouraged.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2291 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11090 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2511** MASTER PLANS FOR SIGNAGE {#sec-10-c2511 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2511}

MASTER PLANS FOR SIGNAGE

The development of a coordinated master plan for signs is encouraged where a building, complex, or institution houses multiple tenants or activities requiring several signs, or where signs will be installed on multiple properties that were historically or architecturally related.

A master plan for signage shall be submitted to the Board for review according to the provisions for concept design review outlined in Chapter 3.

If the Board approves a sign master sign to be in effect for a specific period, the HPO shall adhere to the provisions of the plan in delegated approvals for the duration of the plan.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2291 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11090 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2512** TEMPORARY SIGNS {#sec-10-c2512 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2512}

TEMPORARY SIGNS

Temporary signage serves a legitimate practical purpose and has little or no lasting impact on the character of historic property. HPO shall apply the criteria in this section when reviewing temporary signs under the authority delegated in § 320 of this subtitle.

HPO shall routinely approve temporary signage to be installed for less than ninety (90) days or that is less than twenty square feet (20 sq. ft.) in size, provided it is installed in a manner that does not cause permanent damage to historic property.

HPO shall review a temporary sign to be installed for more than ninety (90) days or that is more than twenty square feet (20 sq. ft.) in size according to the standards and criteria for permanent signs. HPO may grant greater flexibility in terms of size, placement, type, shape, material, and copy, provided that the sign is installed in a manner that does not cause permanent damage to historic property.

A temporary sign may be denied if it is plainly and unnecessarily incompatible with the architecture and characteristics of the building, site, or district, or if its installation is likely to cause permanent damage to historic property.

The permit application for a temporary sign shall indicate the period of time during which the sign is to be displayed. The permit for a temporary sign is not valid beyond its stated duration.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2292 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11090 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2513** VINTAGE AND HISTORIC SIGNS {#sec-10-c2513 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2513}

VINTAGE AND HISTORIC SIGNS

Vintage and historic signs express distinctive characteristics or aesthetics of an earlier period and provide character to historic property. The Board and HPO shall evaluate vintage and historic signage for its significance and for preservation when it may be affected by proposed construction work.

A vintage sign should be considered for preservation or reuse where feasible.

A historic sign that is integral to the design of historic property, such as a sign that is carved or etched into masonry or included as part of the design of a parapet or cornice, shall be retained.

A historic sign that is not integral to the design of historic property, such as the ghost of a painted sign, shall be retained where feasible.

Replication or installation of a close copy of a documented historic sign is considered an appropriate preservation treatment unless it clearly conflicts with the D.C. Building Code or the Board’s design standards. Documentation of the historical appropriateness of a proposed sign may consist of early photographs, original drawings, or similar sources.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2292 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2514** AWNINGS: GENERAL PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-c2514 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2514}

AWNINGS: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Awnings provide weather protection and may also identify or decorate buildings. Awnings shade windows and storefronts and can shelter pedestrians, but as a secondary function, they also provide an area for identifying the name or trade of an occupant.

Awnings and their associated signage can significantly affect the appearance and architectural character of a historic building or district. Improper awning installation can also cause permanent damage to the materials and ornamentation of historic facades.

Awnings are not signs and should not be used as substitutes for effective signage or solely as branding elements.

The appropriateness of a specific awning depends in part upon the historic district, building type, or business type involved. Awning design should reflect the specific character of the affected landmark, building or district.

Historically, the retractable shed awning was the type used almost exclusively on Washington buildings. Barrel-vaulted awnings were less commonly used for arched openings, and more intricate and fancier quarter-round awnings were infrequently used.

Replication of a documented historic awning or pattern of awnings is considered an appropriate preservation treatment unless it clearly conflicts with the D.C. Building Code or the Board’s design standards. Documentation of the historical appropriateness of a proposed awning or awnings may consist of early photographs, original drawings, or similar sources.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2293 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2515** AWNINGS: SPECIFIC CRITERIA {#sec-10-c2515 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2515}

AWNINGS: SPECIFIC CRITERIA

Awning design, placement, and type shall respect, take advantage of, and be compatible with the particular composition, design features, and architectural style of the historic property where it is installed.

An awning shall be compatible in shape, size, scale, material, illumination, and method of installation with the character of the historic property to which it is attached.

Any signage characteristics of an awning shall be compatible with the character of the affected historic property and district.

Awning location and configuration shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An awning shall be placed only on a portion of the building occupied by the person, business, or entity to which it relates;

An awning shall relate to a single architectural feature, whether a storefront, window opening, or door opening. An awning shall not be designed as a continuous element that spans multiple storefronts, window openings, or door openings;

An awning shall relate to and fit within the masonry opening or frame of the storefront, window, or door where it is located;

An awning shall not cover or obscure or cover over an ornamental or character-defining feature of a historic property; and

Excessive use of awnings is inappropriate and can make commercial advertising detract from a historic property. Repetitive awnings used as signage or branding on upper floor windows are not appropriate.

2515.5 Awning type and shape shall be consistent with the following criteria:

A shed-style awning is generally the most appropriate form for a flat-topped opening. A barrel-vaulted awning is usually appropriate only for an arched opening. A quarter-round awning is typically appropriate only for an architecturally elaborate façade or storefront;

An awning shall not have a compound shape, such as a shed awning with a barrel-vaulted midsection;

An awning should not be bulky or boxy in appearance. An open-sided configuration is encouraged in order to make the awning appear lightweight and to increase visibility of the window;

Operable and retractable awnings are preferred because this reinforces their accessory nature and allows greater visibility of the building when they are raised;

An awning should be consistent with the prevailing proportions of other awnings in the streetscape. Its angle of slope should be moderate, and neither so steep that the top of the awning looks like a billboard, nor so shallow that the awning looks like a shelf or marquee; and

The underside of an awning shall not be enclosed or boxed in with fabric or other material, unless justified by the specific circumstances of the building or awning installation.

2515.6 Awning dimensions shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An awning shall be appropriate in size and scale for the historic building to which it is attached;

An awning shall be sized to fit the opening where it is installed;

The projection of an awning shall be appropriate for the building to which it is attached. No awning shall project more than sixty inches (60 in.) beyond the building line or building restriction line; and

An awning shall maintain a minimum clearance of eight feet (8 ft.) above the ground.

Awning materials shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An awning shall be covered only with canvas, woven acrylic or similar fabric materials. Metal and shiny or glossy materials like vinyl and plastic are not permitted; and

A single solid color material is preferred for awnings. Striped or patterned awnings are discouraged and are not permitted if they would visually detract from the character of the historic building or district.

2515.8 Awning signage characteristics shall be consistent with the following criteria:

The valance of an awning is an appropriate location for signage. Signage shall generally be limited to lettering no taller than twelve inches (12 in.);

A discreet logo may be allowed on the slope of an awning if also permitted by the building code official; and

An awning shall not be used as an oversized sign. An awning or pattern of awnings shall not be used to create supergraphics or branding that is overpowering or detracts from the historic character of the building or district.

2515.9 Awning illumination shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An awning shall not be lighted except as part of general storefront illumination. Translucent backlit awnings and under-mounted lighting of an awning are not permitted;

A sign on the valance of an awning shall not be illuminated; and

Unobtrusive storefront lighting fixtures may be attached to the underside of an awning.

Awning installation shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An awning shall be attached to a building in a manner that causes the minimum permanent damage. Typically, an awning should be attached to a window frame or storefront surround; and

Attachment of awning frames through masonry is prohibited except in unusual circumstances where it is unavoidable due to specific characteristics of the building.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2293 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11091 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2516** CANOPIES: GENERAL PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-c2516 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2516}

CANOPIES: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Canopies historically provided shelter and weather protection for the entrance to a building. Canopies also shaded show windows and sidewalks in a manner no longer permitted by construction codes.

A canopy is appropriate where weather protection is a primary consideration. A canopy should not be used primarily as an enlarged sign background or to extend commercial signage across a sidewalk.

A canopy at the entrance to a large historic apartment or hotel building can enhance the sense of arrival and welcome created by the architectural treatment of the building entrance. A canopy in a historic commercial streetscape can detract from its character by obstructing views of building facades and adding excess clutter and signage.

The appropriateness of a specific canopy depends in part upon the specific characteristics of the historic district, building type, or business type involved.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2295 (March 19, 2010).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2517** CANOPIES: SPECIFIC CRITERIA {#sec-10-c2517 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2517}

CANOPIES: SPECIFIC CRITERIA

Canopy design, placement, and type shall respect, take advantage of, and be compatible with the particular composition, design features, and architectural style of the historic property where it is installed.

A canopy shall be compatible in shape, size, scale, material, illumination, and method of installation with the character of the historic property to which it is attached.

A canopy shall be consistent with the following criteria:

An entrance, storefront, or sidewalk café may be an appropriate location for a canopy;

A canopy shall relate to and fit within the masonry opening or frame of a door or storefront. A barrel-vaulted canopy is only appropriate for an arched opening;

A canopy shall not conceal or cover over a door surround or other significant architectural feature of a building;

A shed style canopy should have open sides to increase visibility of the building or its entrance;

The projection of a canopy shall be proportional to the building and appropriate to the streetscape where it is located;

A canopy shall maintain a minimum clearance of eight feet (8 ft.) above grade;

A canopy shall be finished with canvas, woven acrylic or a similar fabric material. Vinyl, plastic, and other shiny or glossy finish materials are not permitted;

Translucent backlit canopies are not permitted. Under-mounted downlighting may be permitted on opaque canopies; and

A canopy shall be attached to a building in a manner that does not cause permanent damage. Typically, a canopy should be attached to a door frame or storefront fascia. Attachment of canopy framing through masonry is prohibited unless justified by the specific characteristics of the building.

Signage on a canopy shall be consistent with the following criteria and considerations:

An entrance canopy is an appropriate location for building or occupant identification and the property’s address;

Commercial signage is not permitted on the side of a canopy facing the direction of pedestrian travel along a sidewalk; and

Signage on a canopy shall not be illuminated.

Entrance canopies that extend to the public sidewalk or curb are generally not appropriate unless associated with a large-scale commercial establishment, hotel or apartment building. Entrance canopies in other circumstances may be allowed if justified as appropriate given the specific characteristics of the building.

Replication of an original or historic canopy is considered an appropriate preservation treatment. Documentation of the historical appropriateness of a proposed canopy may consist of early photographs, original drawings, or similar sources.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2296 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11093 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2518** MARQUEES: GENERAL PRINCIPLES {#sec-10-c2518 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2518}

MARQUEES: GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Marquees are permanent architectural elements traditionally associated with and only appropriate for larger buildings of a public or semi-public nature, such as apartment houses, hotels, department stores, theaters, and office buildings. Marquees provide shelter, weather protection, and architectural embellishment, and can also include identifying signage at the building entrance.

Unlike an awning or canopy, a marquee is a more permanent architectural element applied to a building. Adding a marquee to a historic building is usually not appropriate if one never existed, but a marquee is often appropriate for large-scale new construction in a historic district. A marquee may be appropriate for a larger building but is generally not appropriate for a smaller building or single-family house.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2297 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11094 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2519** MARQUEES: SPECIFIC CRITERIA {#sec-10-c2519 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2519}

MARQUEES: SPECIFIC CRITERIA

A marquee shall be compatible with the character of the historic property or district where it is installed. A marquee attached to a historic building shall respect, take advantage of, and be compatible with the building’s particular composition, design features, and architectural style.

A marquee shall be compatible in size, scale, shape, type, material, and illumination with the character of the historic property to which it is attached.

A marquee shall be placed at a height appropriate to its function as shelter. Typically, the suitable location for a marquee is directly above entrance doors and below the level of transoms. A marquee shall not be placed high above a building entrance to create a grandiose effect.

2519.4 A marquee is an appropriate location to identify a building, occupant, or address. Signage on a marquee shall be consistent with the following criteria:

Signage on a marquee shall be commensurate with the nature of the establishment it identifies;

Signage for an apartment building or public institution should be restrained and usually not illuminated; and

Signage for a commercial building or theater may be more prominent and brightly illuminated.

A marquee shall not conceal or cover over important decorative elements of a door surround or other significant character-defining features of a historic building.

A marquee shall be attached in a manner that limits permanent alteration to the affected building as much as possible. A marquee shall be designed to fit around, rather than penetrate, decorative door surrounds or other character-defining elements.

A marquee that is original, architecturally distinctive, or historically significant shall be retained.

Replication of a missing original or historic marquee is encouraged. Documentation of a historic marquee may consist of early photographs, original drawings, or similar sources.

A marquee shall be professionally designed and fabricated of durable, high quality materials.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2297 (March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11094 (December 23, 2011).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 2599** DEFINITIONS {#sec-10-c2599 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C2599}

DEFINITIONS

As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed below:

Advertisement: The use of any image, text, logo, symbol, color, or other form of public announcement to encourage a commercial transaction or to market a business, entity, or commodity.

Awning: An architectural projection that provides weather protection, identity or decoration and is wholly supported by the building to which it is attached. An awning is comprised of a lightweight, rigid skeleton structure over which a covering is attached.

Banner: A hanging sign, typically of fabric, which may be hung perpendicular or parallel to the face of a building.

Billboard: A permanent signboard or structure on which lettering or images can be attached or posted, as further defined in the D.C. Building Code.

Blade sign: A vertically-oriented, double-faced projecting sign that hangs perpendicular to the façade of a building, allowing copy on both sign faces.

Box sign: A plastic- or acrylic-faced sign mounted on a box or cabinet that houses a source of internal illumination; also called a “cabinet sign.”

Branding: The use of signs, logos, symbols, figures, shapes, colors, or other elements individually or collectively, to market a business or identify it as part of a larger corporate entity.

Bulletin sign: A free-standing or wall-mounted sign box, usually constructed of metal with a hinged glass face, housing a letterboard for changeable copy.

Cabinet sign: A plastic- or acrylic-faced metal sign mounted on a box or cabinet housing a source of internal illumination; also called a “box sign.”

Canopy: An architectural projection that provides weather protection, identity or decoration and is supported by the building to which it is attached and at the outer end by at least one stanchion. A canopy is comprised of a rigid structure over which a covering is attached.

Channel letter sign: A sign consisting of individually formed letters, which may include illumination within each letter or many be mounted on a continuous raceway.

Color branding: The use of a color or colors associated with a business or entity as a means to convey its identity.

Copy: The use, amount, and size of lettering, numbers, or imagery on a sign.

Fascia: A plain, flat horizontal band, typically part of a storefront cornice, intended for sign placement; also called a “frieze” or “sign band.”

Flag sign: A fabric panel with signage displayed or configured as a flag.

Frieze: The portion of the façade that is typically just above or at the top of a storefront which provides an area for signage; also called a “fascia” or “sign band.”

Ground-mounted sign: A free-standing sign that is located within the public space, yard, or landscape of a property; also called a “monument sign.”

Halo lit sign: A sign of an opaque material illuminated from behind to form a “halo” of light around the silhouetted letters or symbols.

Hanging sign: A double-faced sign that projects perpendicular from the face of a building, allowing copy on both sign faces, and which typically hangs from an overhead bracket.

Historic sign: A sign that is original to a building, historically significant, or at least fifty (50) years old and which has features, qualities, or associations that may warrant preservation.

Marquee: A permanent roofed structure attached to and supported by the building to which it is attached and that projects into the public right-of-way.

Monument sign: A free-standing, ground-mounted sign.

Moving sign: A sign that displays three-dimensional, moving, rotating, flashing, animated, or changing images or text, and is propelled by wind, solar or electric power.

Painted sign: A sign painted directly onto the face or other element of a building.

Panel sign: A one-sided sign mounted on a flat wall surface.

Pin-mounted sign: A sign composed of individual letters or other components attached to a panel or building by pins or screws.

Pole-mounted sign: A free-standing sign mounted on a single tall pole or pylon, typically located within the site or landscape of a property, and frequently used to advertise auto-related businesses.

Projecting sign: A double-faced sign that projects perpendicular from the face of a building, allowing copy on both sign faces.

Raceway sign: A sign consisting of individual channel letters mounted on a horizontal or vertical structural raceway element that houses electrical conduit for illumination.

Real estate sign: A sign announcing the sale, rent, or lease of land or premises.

Reverse channel sign: A sign where individual letters or images are cut in to an opaque panel allowing the letters or images to be illuminated when back lit.

Roof sign: A sign that is mounted on the roof of a building, as defined further in the D.C. Building Code.

Routed sign: A sign, typically of wood, into which letters or images are carved or routed.

Sign or Signage: A physical medium or display, including its structure and component parts, used to advertise, identify a person, object, or entity, or to provide information, consisting of words, letters, figures, designs, symbols, numbers, illumination, or projected images.

Sign band: A plain, flat horizontal band at the top of a storefront intended for sign placement; also called a “fascia” or “frieze.”

Special sign: A sign that is erected, hung, placed, posted, painted, displayed or maintained on an outside, exterior wall or surface of a building pursuant to a Special Sign permit issued pursuant to the D.C. Building Code, and as further defined in the D.C. Building Code.

Symbol: A recognizable image, icon, logo or other graphic representation for a business, service, institution or other object or entity.

Temporary sign: A sign erected for a limited and defined period of time.

Three-dimensional sign: A sign, symbol, icon, object, or logo that is sculptural or three-dimensional in form.

Vintage sign: A sign less than fifty (50) years old which may have distinctive characteristics or aesthetic qualities that lend character to a building or district.

Window sign: A sign that is hung, etched, painted, or mounted inside a glass storefront, door, window, or transom.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCMR 2281, 2298 (March 19, 2010).*

### **10-C30** MAYOR'S AGENT PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES

##### **10-C DCMR § 3000** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c3000 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3000}

3000.1 Public hearings by the Mayor's Agent shall be conducted according to the contested case procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-509).

3000.2 The following terms specifically applicable to this chapter are defined in Chapter 99:

(a) Applicant;

(b) Party;

(d) Affected person; and

(e) Affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3001** APPEARANCE AND REPRESENTATION {#sec-10-c3001 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3001}

3001.1 In any proceeding before the Mayor's Agent, the following shall apply:

(a) Any person or party may appear personally or through counsel;

(b) A partner of a partnership may represent the partnership;

(c) An officer or official of a corporation or association may represent the corporation or association if properly authorized to do so by the articles of incorporation, bylaws, or board of directors of the corporation or association;

(d) The Chairperson, counsel, or an authorized member of the Historic Preservation Review Board may represent the Board;

(e) An officer or employee of a public agency or government unit or department may represent that agency, unit, or department; and

(f) One or more duly authorized members or staff persons of an Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) may represent the ANC.

3001.2 Any person or party appearing before the Mayor's Agent other than on his or her own behalf shall establish his or her authority to act in that capacity.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3002** STATUS OF PARTIES AND PERSONS {#sec-10-c3002 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3002}

3002.1 The Mayor's Agent shall determine who will be recognized as a party at a public hearing.

3002.2 Any individual or organization not recognized as a party to a public hearing may participate as a person under these rules.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3003** DUTIES OF THE MAYOR'S AGENT {#sec-10-c3003 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3003}

3003.1 The Mayor's Agent shall be the presiding officer at the public hearing.

3003.2 As presiding officer, the Mayor's Agent shall have authority to perform the following duties:

(a) Regulate the course of the hearing;

(b) Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters, including motions to amend, to order proceedings reopened, or to consolidate applications for review;

(c) Request any party or person at any time during the hearing to state his or her respective position concerning any issues in the proceeding and theory in support of that position;

(d) Rule upon offers of proof and receive relevant evidence;

(e) Assign exhibit numbers for all written documentary and other tangible matter offered in evidence;

(f) Call, examine, and cross-examine witnesses and introduce into the record documentary or other evidence;

(g) Rule upon the qualifications of witnesses offered as experts;

(h) Establish reasonable time limits for witnesses and fairly allocate time among the parties and others;

(i) Exclude unduly repetitious or irrelevant testimony and permit a witness to adopt the prior testimony of another witness;

(j) Adjourn a hearing and establish the date when the hearing will be continued;

(k) Close a hearing;

(l) Require the parties to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusion of law; and

(m) Take any other action authorized or necessary under this chapter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3004** ORDER OF PROCEDURE {#sec-10-c3004 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3004}

3004.1 The order of procedure for the public hearing shall be as follows, unless the Mayor's Agent determines otherwise for good cause:

(a) Introductory statement by the presiding officer;

(b) Consideration of pending motions and procedural matters;

(d) Presentation of the applicant's case;

(e) Officially adopted reports or statements by the Historic Preservation Review Board;

(f) Reports or statements by public agency representatives;

(g) Statements by affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission(s);

(h) Statements by parties in support of the application;

(i) Statements by persons in support of the application;

(j) Statements by parties in opposition to the application;

(k) Statements by persons in opposition to the application;

(l) Rebuttal by the applicant;

(m) Rebuttal by parties in support of the application; and

(n) Surrebuttal by parties in opposition to the application.

3004.2 The public hearing may be adjourned from time to time. If the time and place of the resumption is publicly announced when the adjournment occurs, further notice of the adjourned hearing is not required.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3005** WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE {#sec-10-c3005 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3005}

3005.1 Any party or person may appear as a witness and offer evidence at the public hearing.

3005.2 Witnesses shall testify orally under oath or affirmation.

3005.3 Witnesses may be cross-examined by any other party.

3005.4 Evidence shall be taken in conformity with the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-509 (b)).

3005.5 Exhibits may be offered in evidence at the public hearing. Exhibits may be in the form of photographs, models, architectural plans, graphs, or the like.

3005.6 Copies of exhibits shall be submitted for the record, either at the hearing or before closure of the record. If models are used at the hearing, photographs of the models not exceeding letter size shall be supplied.

3005.7 No material shall be submitted for the record which exceeds standard letter size of 81/2 by 11 inches, or cannot be folded to letter size.

3005.8 The provisions of the Historic Protection Act and these regulations are considered part of every proceeding before the Mayor's Agent and it is not necessary for any party or person to move their introduction into evidence.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3006** CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING {#sec-10-c3006 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3006}

3006.1 The applicant and any party may submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law within the time directed by the Mayor's Agent, and the Mayor's Agent may request the parties to submit proposed findings and conclusions.

3006.2 Copies of proposed findings and conclusions shall be served by each party upon all other parties.

3006.3 The record shall be closed following the public hearing, unless the Mayor's Agent directs that the record be kept open for a stated period for the receipt of specific exhibits, information, or legal briefs.

3006.4 If warranted by the nature of the case, the Mayor's Agent may issue a bench decision at the conclusion of the public hearing, based on the written record and the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing. The Mayor's Agent may also issue an immediate written order based on proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by the applicant.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3007** SERVICE OF PAPERS {#sec-10-c3007 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3007}

3007.1 Any paper required to be served upon a party shall be served upon the party or upon the representative designated by the party or by law to receive service of papers. When a party has appeared by attorney or other representative, service shall be made upon the attorney or representative of record.

3007.2 Service may be made by personal or overnight delivery, U.S. mail, facsimile, electronic mail, or as otherwise authorized by law. Where there are numerous parties to a proceeding, the Mayor's Agent may make special provisions at the proceeding regarding the service of papers.

3007.3 Service by personal delivery upon a party is complete on handing the paper to the person, or leaving it at the person's office with a clerk or other person in charge, or if there is no one in charge, leaving it in a conspicuous place in that office. If the office is closed or the person to be served has no office, service is complete by leaving the paper at the person's usual place of residence with a resident or employee of suitable age and discretion.

3007.4 Service by mail upon a party is complete on deposit in the United States mail, properly stamped and addressed.

3007.5 Service by overnight delivery is complete on deposit with the delivery company, properly addressed and with the charges prepaid.

3007.6 Service by facsimile is complete when telecopied with the proper telephone number of the intended recipient's telecopier.

3007.7 Service by electronic mail is complete when transmitted electronically, properly addressed to the attention of the intended recipient, with proper e-mail address.

3007.8 Proof of service, stating the name and address of the person on whom served and the manner and date of service, shall be shown for each document filed, and may be made by any of the following ways:

(a) Written acknowledgement of the party served or the party's attorney of record;

(b) The certificate of the attorney of record if the attorney has made the service; or

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3008** EX PARTE COMMUNICATION {#sec-10-c3008 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3008}

3008.1 In any contested case proceeding by the Mayor's Agent, all parties shall be prohibited from receiving or participating in any ex parte communication with the Mayor's Agent relevant to the merits of the proceeding. This shall include any oral or written communication not in the public hearing record with respect to which reasonable prior notice is not given to all parties to the proceeding.

3008.2 This prohibition shall begin upon the referral of the application to the Mayor's Agent and shall not terminate until the final disposition of the case.

3008.3 This prohibition shall not extend to communication between the Mayor's Agent and the staff concerning matters relating to administration of the hearing or matters of record.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C31** HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD MEETING AND HEARING PROCEDURES

##### **10-C DCMR § 3100** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c3100 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3100}

3100.1 The Board's hearings and meetings are rulemaking proceedings and shall be conducted in accordance with D.C. Official Code § 2-505.

3100.2 The Board shall hold a regularly scheduled monthly meeting, except that the Board may decide not to schedule a hearing in August or for other good cause. In addition to the regularly scheduled monthly meeting, the Chairperson may call additional meetings or hearings as needed for the conduct of business.

3100.3 The proposed agenda and staff reports for each meeting or hearing shall be posted in the Historic Preservation Office and made available to the public at least five (5) days before the meeting or hearing.

3100.4 Copies of the agenda shall be available to the public at the meeting or hearing. Notwithstanding the prepared agenda, the Board is not precluded from amending or reordering the agenda at the meeting or hearing to promote the public interest or efficient administration of the Historic Protection Act.

3100.5 Board proceedings may be adjourned from time to time. If the time and place of resumption is publicly announced when the adjournment is ordered, no further notice shall be required.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3101** APPEARANCE AND REPRESENTATION {#sec-10-c3101 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3101}

3101.1 Any applicant, government representative, or person may appear and offer statements and exhibits in any proceeding before the Board, or may submit written materials for consideration by the Board.

3101.2 An individual may appear on his or her own behalf or on behalf of any other person, when authorized by that person.

3101.3 An individual need not be a member of the bar of any court to appear before the Board in a representative capacity.

3101.4 Any individual appearing before the Board other than on his or her own behalf shall establish his or her authority to act in a representative capacity.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3102** DUTIES OF THE CHAIRPERSON {#sec-10-c3102 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3102}

3102.1 The Chairperson of the Board shall be the presiding officer at all hearings and meetings. The presiding officer shall have authority to do the following:

(a) Regulate the course of the proceedings;

(b) Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters;

(d) Call, qualify, and question persons at a hearing, receive relevant information, and introduce into the record documentary or other material;

(e) Request any applicant or person at any time during a proceeding to state his or her respective position concerning any issues in the proceeding and theory in support thereof;

(f) Adjourn a proceeding and establish the date when it will be continued;

(g) Close a proceeding;

(h) Establish reasonable time limits for comments and fairly allocate time among the applicant, interested persons, and others;

(i) Exclude unduly repetitious or irrelevant comments or presentations, and permit a person to adopt the prior statement of another person; and

(j) Take any other action authorized by these rules or necessary under these rules for the proper, expeditious, and fair conduct of the hearing or meeting.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3103** ORDER OF PROCEEDING {#sec-10-c3103 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3103}

3103.1 The order of proceeding at a historic landmark or historic district designation hearing shall be as follows, unless the Chairperson determines otherwise for good cause:

(a) Introductory statement by the Chairperson;

(b) Statement by the applicant;

(d) Statement by the owner, if not the applicant (when a historic landmark is proposed);

(e) Reports or statements by public agencies;

(f) Statements by affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions;

(g) Statements by persons in support of the application;

(h) Statements by persons in opposition;

(i) Response by the owner, if any (when a historic landmark is proposed); and

(j) Discussion and determination by the Board.

3103.2 The order of proceeding at a meeting to consider permit and other applications shall be as follows, subject to the Chairperson's discretion:

(a) Staff presentation;

(b) Applicant's presentation;

(d) Statements by affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions;

(e) Statements by persons in support of the application;

(f) Statements by persons in opposition; and;

(g) Discussion and determination by the Board.

3103.3 The Board may ask questions of any person or seek clarification of any statement at any time during a proceeding.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3104** QUORUM AND VOTING PROCEDURES {#sec-10-c3104 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3104}

3104.1 A majority of the duly constituted Board shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting business at a public hearing or meeting pursuant to these regulations.

3104.2 If the Board loses a quorum during the course of a meeting, unless otherwise prohibited, the Board may at its own discretion proceed to conduct business without a quorum on a case-by-case basis, provided that there is no objection from the applicant or any person interested in the matter under consideration by the Board.

3104.3 Actions of the Board shall be taken in public by a majority vote among the members present and voting, and the vote of each member shall be recorded and noted for inclusion in the transcript or minutes of the meeting.

3104.4 A member may participate and vote on a case even though that member may not have attended prior proceedings in the case, provided that the member has reviewed the complete record in the case.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3105** DUTIES OF BOARD MEMBERS {#sec-10-c3105 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3105}

3105.1 Each Board member shall become knowledgeable regarding the statutes, regulations, standards, and other policies relating to the Board's responsibility and authority.

3105.2 A members shall not participate in making a decision of the Board without becoming familiar with the case pending before the Board, including previous discussions and decisions associated with the matter.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3106** CONFLICT OF INTEREST {#sec-10-c3106 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3106}

3106.1 Board members shall comply with all applicable D.C. rules and regulations on conflict of interest.

3106.2 Any member of the Board shall recuse himself or herself from voting and all other proceedings on any case for which the member has a real or apparent conflict of interest. Upon recusal, the Board member shall leave the meeting or hearing room during the Board's consideration of the case.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C32** GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

##### **10-C DCMR § 3200** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c3200 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3200}

3200.1 All proceedings of the Mayor's Agent and Board shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-501 et seq.) and other applicable laws and regulations.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3201** PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MEETINGS {#sec-10-c3201 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3201}

3201.1 Public hearings and meetings conducted by the Mayor's Agent and Review Board shall be open to the public. All interested persons are invited to participate.

3201.2 At a public hearing or meeting, the Mayor's Agent and Review Board shall accord "great weight" to the properly adopted written recommendations of affected Advisory Neighborhood Commissions in all matters under their consideration and subject to ANC purview.

3201.3 Decorum and good order shall be maintained at all times. No person or group shall willfully and knowingly utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in any disorderly or disruptive conduct within any building or part of any building owned or under the control of the District of Columbia with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of a public meeting or hearing pursuant to these regulations, or enter or remain in, during the course of any public meeting or hearing pursuant to this chapter, any area set aside for use by persons other than the general public.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3202** PUBLIC MAILING LIST {#sec-10-c3202 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3202}

3202.1 The Board shall maintain a general public mailing list for notice of public meetings, .hearings, and other matters. The mailing list shall include the members of the Council of the District of Columbia, all Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, and any historic preservation organization, civic group, or interested person upon request.

3202.2 At least every two years, the HPO may purge the mailing list of organizations and persons listed by request, after giving notice indicating the manner in which they should state their desire to remain on the list. The HPO may also routinely purge the mailing list of any addressees upon receipt of mail returned by the U.S. Postal Service as undeliverable. Anyone purged from the list may request reinstatement at any time.

3202.3 The Board may supplement the general public mailing list with an electronic mailing list maintained for the same purposes.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3203** ANNUAL NOTICES {#sec-10-c3203 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3203}

3203.1 Near the end of each calendar year, the Board shall publish in the D.C. Register a notice of its meeting dates for the upcoming year, also indicating the deadline dates by which applications must be filed before each meeting. The notice may also include supplemental meeting dates as the need arises. This notice shall be available in the HPO office and shall be posted on the HPO website throughout the year.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3204** MINUTES AND TRANSCRIPTS {#sec-10-c3204 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3204}

3204.1 Any proceeding before the Mayor's Agent or Board shall be reported under the supervision of the presiding officer, stenographically or by recording or other means, by an official reporter who may be designated for this purpose from time to time.

3204.2 The transcript prepared by the reporter shall be the sole official transcript of the hearing.

3204.3 Minutes of Review Board proceedings may also be prepared by the staff. Minutes shall be summary in nature and shall include the vote and nature of the action taken on each case.

3204.4 Transcripts and minutes are a matter of public record, and shall be open for inspection at the Historic Preservation Office. Copies of the transcript shall be available to any interested person from the official reporter on payment of any applicable copying charge.

3204.5 If the transcript and minutes conflict, the wording of the transcript shall prevail.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3205** LEGAL ADVICE AND REPRESENTATION {#sec-10-c3205 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3205}

3205.1 The Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Review Board may request and receive legal advice from the Office of the Corporation Counsel at any time.

3205.2 The Review Board may request and obtain representation by the Office of the Corporation Counsel at any proceeding before the Mayor's Agent.

3205.3 The Review Board may request legal assistance from the Office of the Corporation Counsel in any enforcement action or other matter pursuant to these regulations.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3206** COMPUTATION OF TIME {#sec-10-c3206 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3206}

3206.1 In computing any period of time specified in this chapter, calendar days shall be counted unless otherwise indicated.

3206.2 In computing any period of time specified in this chapter, the day of the act, event, or default after which the designated period of time begins to run is not included. The last day of the period so computed is included unless the period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, in which case the period runs until the end of the next business day.

3206.3 The one hundred twenty (120) day period provided by the Act during which the Mayor must act on an application, shall be computed from the date the Review Board receives the referral of a complete application from DCRA, or for applications subject to review under the Old Georgetown Act or the Shipstead-Luce Act, from the date the CFA receives the referral.

3206.4 The provision of a forty-five (45) day notice to Advisory Neighborhood Commissions is intended to address the statutory requirement for a notice period of thirty (30) working days. If there is a discrepancy, the calculation by working days shall control.

3206.5 Except as otherwise provided by law, whenever an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time, the time fixed or the period of time prescribed may for good cause be extended or shortened by the Mayor's Agent, SHPO or Board, as the case may be.

3206.6 Except as otherwise provided by law, failure to take action within a time period specified in these rules shall not invalidate an otherwise proper action pursuant to the rules.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3207** AMENDMENT AND WAIVER OF RULES {#sec-10-c3207 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3207}

3207.1 At any time, the Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, or Review Board may amend provisions of these rules pertinent to their respective authorities. Any amendments shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (D.C. Official Code § 2-505).

3207.2 If the duties of an agency or official cited in these rules change pursuant to a governmental reorganization, any affected authorities or responsibilities under these rules shall automatically transfer to the agency or official assuming these duties, without the need for amendment.

3207.3 The Mayor's Agent, SHPO, and Review Board may, for good cause shown, waive any of the provisions of these rules pertaining to their respective authorities, if in their judgment the waiver will not prejudice the rights of any person and is not otherwise prohibited by law.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 3208** SEVERABILITY {#sec-10-c3208 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C3208}

3208.1 If any section or provision of this subtitle is determined invalid after judicial review, that decision shall not affect the validity of the regulations as a whole, or any part of the regulations other than the part determined to be invalid.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

### **10-C99** DEFINITIONS

##### **10-C DCMR § 9900** GENERAL PROVISIONS {#sec-10-c9900 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C9900}

9900.1 The definitions in this chapter apply throughout this subtitle.

9900.2 Definitions applicable to separate chapters appear in those chapters.

9900.3 A word used in this subtitle but not specifically defined in this section, or specifically defined for the purposes of a chapter, has the meaning given in the current edition of Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.

9900.4 The following rules of interpretation apply throughout this subtitle:

(a) Words in the present tense include the past and future tense, and variations thereof;

(b) Gender-specific words apply to either gender;

(d) The word "shall" is mandatory and not discretionary.

9900.5 The Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Historic Preservation Review Board shall decide any disagreement over interpretation of the definitions applicable to their respective areas of responsibility.

**History**
- *Authority: D.C. Code §§ 6-1101 et seq., Mayor's Orders 79-50, 83-119, 2002-155.*
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004).*

##### **10-C DCMR § 9901** DEFINED TERMS {#sec-10-c9901 omnilex-key=us-dc-regs-official--title-10--10-C9901}

Act: The Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act as defined in this chapter.

Adapt or Adaptation: The process of altering a property to accommodate an intended use, and can involve one or a combination of methods including repair, rehabilitation, restoration, and new construction.

Advisory Neighborhood Commission or ANC: One of the elected citizen advisory bodies established pursuant to the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions Act of 1975, as amended (D.C. Official Code § 1-207.38 et seq.).

Affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission: The ANC for the area within which a subject property is located, or in the case of a property located in close proximity to an ANC boundary, either ANC sharing the boundary.

Affected person: In the context of a public hearing by the Mayor's Agent, either of the following:

(a) Any adjacent or immediately proximate owner or resident who is directly affected by the proposed action, through the possibility of physical damage to historic property, alteration to the character of historic property, or the introduction of visual or environmental elements out of character with historic property.

(b) Any affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission or historic preservation organization.

Alter or Alteration: A change in the exterior appearance of a building or structure or its site, not covered by the definition of demolition, for which a permit is required; except that alter or alteration also means a change in any interior space which has been specifically designated as a historic landmark (D.C. Official Code § 6-1102(1)). See also § 301.

Applicant: The person, entity or authorized representative responsible for submission of an application, in any of the following circumstances, as appropriate:

(a) An applicant for historic landmark or historic district designation pursuant to D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1103;

(b) An applicant for an alteration, demolition, or new construction permit, or for a subdivision, or for preliminary review pursuant to D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 1108;

(d) An applicant for the receipt of grant assistance pursuant to these regulations; or

(e) An applicant for any other certification or official action pursuant to these regulations.

Association: The link of a historic property with a historic event, activity, or person. Also, the quality of integrity through which a historic property is linked to a particular past time and place.

Board: The Historic Preservation Review Board as defined in this chapter.

Board's standards: The design and construction standards described in Chapters 20 through 29.

Board's guidelines: Any design guidelines accompanying the Secretary's Standards, or adopted by the Board in accordance with § 2004.

Building: A roofed structure for the shelter, support, or enclosure of persons, chattels, or movable property of any kind. As applied to historic buildings, the term may apply to the portion of a structure that historically constituted a separate building.

Building code or D.C. Building Code: subtitle A of title 12 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, also known as the Building Code Supplement.

Building code official or building official: The person authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of the building code and the construction code.

Character-Defining Feature: The form and detailing of those architectural materials and features that are important in defining a building's historic character and whose retention will preserve that character.

(a) The character of a historic building may be defined by exterior features such as facades, roofs, porches, and windows, and exterior materials such as masonry, wood, and metal;

(b) The character of a historic building may be defined by its structural features such as bearing walls, floor framing, and roof framing, and structural materials such as brick, steel, and wood;

(c) The character of a historic interior may be defined by features such as room configurations, spatial relationships, stairs, trim, and decoration, and by materials such as partitions, woodwork, plaster and finishes;

(d) The site and setting of a historic property may be defined by features such as views to and from the property, landscaping, walls, and fencing, and materials such as stone and vegetation.

Commission of Fine Arts or CFA: The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, established pursuant to the Act of May 17, 1910 (36 Stat. 371; 40 U.S.C. 104).

Compatible: Possessing characteristics that allow for a harmonious relationship. Compatibility does not require matching or copying of attributes, and may involve the relation of dissimilar things that are juxtaposed to produce an agreeable effect.

Conceptual Design Review or Conceptual Review: The process that allows an applicant to obtain informal guidance and a finding of general consistency with the purposes of the Act from the Board on a project without the necessity of preparing a finished architectural design or obtaining prior approval from the Zoning Administrator.

Consistent with the purposes of the Act: Consistent with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act as stated in D.C. Official Code § 6-1101(b).

Construction code or D.C. Construction Codes: Titles 12 and 13 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations.

Contributing building, structure, or site: A building, structure, or site located within a historic district that adds to the district's sense of time and place and historical development (see also § 702).

Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs or DCRA: The agency responsible for receiving applications, providing notice of filed applications, and issuing permits and subdivisions pursuant to the Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 1108), for administering the D.C. Zoning Regulations and Building Codes, and for enforcing public health and safety regulations related to buildings and construction.

Demolish or Demolition: The razing or destruction entirely or in significant part, of a building or structure, and includes the removal or destruction of any facade of a building or structure (D.C. Official Code § 6-1102(3)). See also § 302.

Demolition by neglect: Neglect in maintaining, repairing, or securing a historic landmark or a building or structure in a historic district that results in deterioration of an exterior feature of the building or structure or the loss of the structural integrity of the building or structure (D.C. Official Code § 6-1102(3A) (2002 Supp.)).

Design: Either of the following, depending upon the context:

(a) The sum of elements that create the physical form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property (when used as a quality of integrity); or

(b) Exterior architectural features including height, appearance, texture, color, and nature of materials (when used in the context of the review of new construction pursuant to the Historic Protection Act, D.C. Official Code § 6-1107).

District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites or D.C. Inventory: The inventory of officially designated historic properties subject to the Historic Protection Act, and maintained by the Board in accordance with the Act.

Elevation: The exterior wall of a building or structure (see also "secondary elevation").

Facade: A building elevation that possesses significant architectural composition or features (see also "principal facade").

Feeling: The quality of integrity through which a historic property evokes the aesthetic or historic sense of past time and place.

Guidelines or Board's guidelines: Any design guidelines accompanying the Secretary's Standards, or adopted by the Board in accordance with § 2004.

Historic building: A historic landmark listed in the D.C. Inventory of Historic Sites, or a contributing building within an historic district listed in the D.C. Inventory of Historic Sites.

Historic district: An area listed as an historic district in the D.C. Inventory, or which the State Historic Preservation Officer has nominated or issued a written determination to nominate to the National Register after a public hearing before the Historic Preservation Review Board.

Historic landmark: A building, structure, object or feature, and its site, or a site:

(a) Listed in the D.C. Inventory, or

(b) For which an application for listing is pending with the Historic Preservation Review Board (provided the statutory time period for consideration of the application has not expired).

Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act or Historic Protection Act: The Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 (D.C. Law 2-144, as amended; D.C. Official Code §6-1101 et seq.).

Historic Preservation Office or HPO: The administrative staff of the Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Historic Preservation Review Board.

Historic preservation organization: A membership organization that includes among its purposes the promotion of historic preservation in the District of Columbia, as expressed in the organization's articles of incorporation, articles of association, charter, or bylaws.

Historic Preservation Review Board, HPRB, Review Board or Board: The District of Columbia Historic Preservation Review Board designated pursuant to the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1103) and pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior under the National Historic Preservation Act.

Historic property: A historic landmark (and its site), historic district, or a building or structure (and its site) that contributes to the character of a historic district.

Incompatible: Characterized by clashing or conflicting qualities that lead to an incongruous, discordant, or disagreeable relationship. Diversity, variety, or contrast of qualities does not necessarily imply incompatibility as long as harmonious relationships are maintained.

Integrity: Authenticity of a property's historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property's period of significance.

List of Deteriorated Historic Buildings: The list of historic buildings that the SHPO has determined to be substantially non-compliant with the property maintenance standards in the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1104.01(a) (2002 Supp.)).

List of Vacant Historic Buildings: The list of vacant historic buildings maintained by the SHPO in accordance with D.C. Official Code §§ 42-3131.01 et seq. (2002 Supp.).

Location: A quality of integrity retained by a property that exists in the same place as it did during its period of significance.

Low-income owner: An owner whose household income is 80% or less of the median household income for the Washington Metropolitan Area as established from time to time by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (when used in the context of an application for demolition, alteration, or subdivision of a building or site that serves as the owner's principal place of residence, and is subject to the Act).

Materials: As a quality of integrity, the physical elements that were combined or deposited in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property; also see § 2302.

Mayor: The Mayor of the District of Columbia, or his or her designated agent (the "Mayor's Agent") as defined in the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code § 6-1102 (8)).

Mayor's Agent: The person officially designated by a Mayor's Order to carry out specified functions pursuant to the Historic Protection Act (D.C. Official Code §§ 6-1104 through 6-1108), or the hearing officer to whom the officially designated Mayor's Agent has delegated the authority to hold public hearings pursuant to the Act (see explanatory comments in § 103).

National Historic Landmark or NHL: A district, site, building, structure, or object that possesses exceptional value and quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States, as designated by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (16 U.S.C. §461-467) and the National Historic Preservation Act.

National Historic Preservation Act: The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (80 Stat. 915 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq).

National Register of Historic Places or National Register: The official national record of districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture, as maintained by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to § 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Necessary in the public interest: Consistent with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act as set forth in D.C. Official Code § 6-1101 (b) (see also § 2001), or necessary to allow the construction of a project of special merit.

Non-contributing building, structure, or site: A building, structure, or site located within a historic district that does not add to the district's sense of time and place and historical development (see also § 703).

Notice of infraction: An official written notice issued by a historic preservation inspector or other code enforcement official, for unlawful work subject to a civil fine established under the Civil Infractions Act or other appropriate legislation, and directing corrective action to be taken in accordance with the notice.

Notice of violation: An official written notice of unlawful work issued by a historic preservation inspector or other code enforcement official, directing corrective action to be taken in accordance with the notice.

Old Georgetown Act: The Old Georgetown Act of 1950 (D.C. Official Code § 6-1201 et seq.).

Old Georgetown Board or OGB: The committee of three architects appointed by the Commission of Fine Arts to serve as a board of review to advise the Commission regarding permit applications referred to it pursuant to the Old Georgetown Act.

Party: In the context of a public hearing held by the Mayor's Agent, the applicant, property owner, and any affected person or organization accepted as a party by the Mayor's Agent.

Period of significance: The span of time in which a historic property attained the significance for which it meets the criteria for historic designation.

Permit Processing Division: The office within the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs responsible for the processing of District of Columbia building permits, or its successor.

Person: In the context of a public hearing by the Mayor's Agent, any participant (including any individual, partnership, association, organization, corporation, public agency, board, or government unit or department) who is not a party.

Preliminary Review: The process that allows an applicant to obtain a preliminary finding from the Mayor's Agent on whether a project is consistent with the purposes of the Historic Protection Act, pursuant to D.C. Official Code § 6-1108.

Principal Facade: A building elevation that faces a street or public open space, or any other major building elevation that possesses significant architectural composition or features.

(a) Generally, a mid-block rowhouse has a single principal facade (the front), while a corner rowhouse has two principal facades (the front and side);

(b) An elevation facing an alley or service access is not usually a principal facade, except for an alley building, where the alley facade is usually the principal facade; and

Raze or Razing: The destruction or removal of a structure in its entirety down to the ground. See also "demolition."

Rehabilitate or Rehabilitation: The process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values.

Replacement in kind: Replacement of an architectural feature with a feature of like material that replicates the existing feature in proportion, appearance, texture, design, detail, and dimensions.

Restore or Restoration: The act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period.

Review Board: The Historic Preservation Review Board as defined in this chapter.

Secondary Elevation: A wall of a building that does not face a street or public open space, and that does not possess significant architectural composition or features.

(a) Typically, the rear or alley side of a rowhouse is considered a secondary elevation.

(b) The sides and rear of a detached building may or may not be considered secondary elevations, dependent on the circumstances.

Secretary's Standards: The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR § 67.7, as amended).

Setting: As a quality of integrity, the physical environment of a historic property.

Shipstead-Luce Act: The Shipstead-Luce Act of 1930 (D.C. Official Code § 6-611.01).

Special merit: A plan or building having significant benefits to the District or to the community by virtue of exemplary architecture, specific features of land planning, or social or other benefits having a high priority for community services.

Staff: The Historic Preservation Office, serving as the administrative staff to the Mayor's Agent, State Historic Preservation Officer, or Historic Preservation Review Board.

Standards or Board's standards: The design and construction standards described in Chapters 20 through 29.

State Historic Preservation Officer or SHPO: The person designated by the Mayor to administer within the District of Columbia the historic preservation programs established by the National Historic Preservation Act; also, the administrative head of the Historic Preservation Office.

State Review Board: In the District of Columbia, the Historic Preservation Review Board.

Stop work order: An official written directive issued by a code enforcement official, such as a historic preservation inspector, to cease all construction activity on a property until corrective action is taken in accordance with the order to address unlawful work.

Structure: Anything constructed, including a building, which requires fixed location on the ground, or attached to something having fixed location on the ground.

Subdivide or Subdivision: A division or assembly of land into one or more lots of record. Subdivision includes the division of any lot of record into two or more theoretical building sites as provided by the D.C. Zoning Regulations.

Surveyor: The Surveyor of the District of Columbia, or his or her designated agent.

Unlawful work: Any work subject to review under the Act, but undertaken without a permit properly reviewed and issued pursuant to the Act, or beyond the scope of a proper permit, or at variance with the approved plans or conditions of a proper permit

Unreasonable economic hardship: Circumstances where failure to issue a permit would amount to a taking of an owner's property without just compensation or, in the case of a low-income owner or owners, as defined in this Chapter, when failure to issue a permit would place an onerous and excessive financial burden upon the owner(s).

Workmanship: As a quality of integrity, the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture, people, or artisan.

**History**
- *SOURCE: Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 7447 (July 30, 2004); as amended by Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 2281, 2301(March 19, 2010); as corrected by Errata Notice published at 58 DCR 11084, 11095 (December 23, 2011).*

Title 10 DCMR — PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude