TESTIMONY OF JENNY REED, POLICY DIRECTOR, DC FISCAL POLICY INSTITUTE
At the Joint Public Oversight Roundtable on
The DC Zoning Regulations Update
Committee of the Whole and Committee on Libraries, Parks Recreation and Planning
October 5, 2012
Chairman Mendelson, Chairman Wells, and members of the committees, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Jenny Reed, and I am the Policy Director at the DC Fiscal Policy Institute. DCFPI engages in research and public education on the fiscal and economic health of the District of Columbia, with a particular emphasis on policies that affect low- and moderate-income residents.
I am here today to speak in support of zoning changes that would allow for reductions in parking requirements in new developments and that would allow accessory apartment units in lower density residential zones. These would reduce the costs of developing new housing and increase the housing supply, which in turn could create more affordable housing or at least lessen the pressures that have led to sharply rising rents in the city in recent years. The DC Fiscal Policy Institute believes that addressing the city’s growing affordable housing crisis is critical, and zoning changes can play an important part.
Modernizing parking regulations makes sense to reflect the enhanced access to public transit in the District, the increased use of bicycles, and the emergence of more non-car ownership transportation options. DCFPI supports the proposed elimination of parking requirements or at least creating more flexibility over parking in new developments, allowing developers to more realistically develop parking that matches the need of expected residents. We also support setting maximum parking thresholds above which a developer would be required to mitigate the negative impacts of additional and unnecessary vehicle parking and related traffic. Developments with lower parking requirements will be cheaper and could devote more space to housing.
The DC Fiscal Policy Institute also supports zoning regulation changes that would allow for the creation of accessory apartments in lower density neighborhoods. This would help more homeowners afford to stay in their homes and increase density in a growing city where housing density has declined substantially. It is likely that many accessory units would have below-average costs as well, increasing DC’s stock of moderately priced housing. And by creating more housing supply, this would reduce the pressures on rents in other parts of town.
To be clear, we believe these changes can play an important in maintaining a diverse housing stock that is affordable to residents at different income levels, but it alone will not be sufficient to address the city’s affordable housing needs. It is likely that new developments, even with limited parking requirements, will be out of reach for most low- and moderate-income families. Accessory dwelling units may be lower cost, but not at the levels needed for a working poor resident. And most accessory units are likely to be small and not appropriate for families with children. Finally, the zoning changes can be helpful but alone are not adequate to meet the scale of DC’s housing problems. There are 50,000 DC households that spend more than half their income on housing, and most have incomes below 30 percent of the area median income, or less than about $30,000 for a family of four. Public investments that help preserve or develop affordable housing or that help residents afford the housing that exists are still very important. That includes the Housing Production Trust Fund and DC’s Local Rent Supplement Program, among others.
In sum, these zonings changes, combined with Inclusionary Zoning and robust public investments in housing, can together help the city provide decent and affordable housing to all residents.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I am happy to answer any questions.