Rent Control Reform Re-Introduced to City Council


Dee Foscherari
 

Carren is absolutely correct. Rent Control MUST be part of affordable housing here in DC now and for the future. The new bill is pending and developers and landlords will do their very best to reduce it to their collective advantage  Every one needs to make sure we are all  aware of the consequences as a result of DC Council passing gutted control legislation..
 
Dee Foscherari
Washington, DC 20008
foscherari@... 

-----
The previous message is available in full at:
https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/161673 


Bob Goldfield
 


Hand in hand with rent control, we need to look at increasing the overall supply of housing in the District. The height restrictions on buildings creates an artificiality of the  scarcity of housing. Outside of the downtown area we should lift the restrictions to allow taller buildings this would increase the units available and lower the costs in other parts of the community. At the same time being close to a Metro Station or on  a Metro Bus line also impacts the price of housing and the costs of rents. There is no reason why we cannot have taller buildings in Van Ness, Cleveland Park, Tenleytown or Woodley Park and Adams Morgan. 

I heard that several DC hotels are looking at going out of business. The city should eminent domain these and convert them into public housing units.

-Bob
Connecticut Avenue


Paul Warren
 


I am genuinely surprised at the absolute disregard for property rights and process when these topics come up. I understand that there are a lot of armchair housing experts in our community and to argue densification is some sort of DC litmus test, but slow down.

A hotel going out of business does not give the City any right to exercise eminent domain. That building still has an owner who has a right to seek tenants or even remodel/transition or maybe even raze. You simply cannot tell a property owner that because their tenant has left you are going to low-ball their land.

Can you imagine if the city started doing that for private houses? You are planning on moving, the city gives you some meaningless sum based off of a tax assessment and then keeps the lots until they had enough to replace single family homes with four packs and six packs or why not just build higher and put replace them with apartment buildings. Actually, the density crowd would love that idea...

God bless the height restrictions in this city, less we just become Bethesda south.

Actually, that is another great idea. We retrocede back to Maryland and just merge with MoCo. We get all of their great height laws and a few senators.

:-)

Paul
Warren St

Hand in hand with rent control, we need to look at increasing the overall supply of housing in the District. The height restrictions on buildings creates an artificiality of the  scarcity of housing. Outside of the downtown area we should lift the restrictions to allow taller buildings this would increase the units available and lower the costs in other parts of the community. At the same time being close to a Metro Station or on  a Metro Bus line also impacts the price of housing and the costs of rents. There is no reason why we cannot have taller buildings in Van Ness, Cleveland Park, Tenleytown or Woodley Park and Adams Morgan. 

I heard that several DC hotels are looking at going out of business. The city should eminent domain these and convert them into public housing units.

-Bob
Connecticut Avenue

----
The previous message is available in full at https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/161686  


Ellen Sullivan
 


I agree with Arlene! Rent control is a well-intentioned policy, but it worsens the problem it's meant to help. By artificially decreasing the prices of certain homes, you make the price of all the other units skyrocket and you encourage property owners to take their old units off the market and put them toward more profitable uses. On top of that, many of the people who benefit from rent control are wealthy and could afford to live elsewhere.

It's easy to see the few beneficiaries of rent control, but too often we ignore all the people who are paying wildly high rental prices or who can't afford to move into the city.

Instead of rent control, we should increase the supply of housing to meet demand and offer means-tested subsidies directly to people who can't afford the market rate.
 
Ellen
Macomb St.


Karen Davis
 


"God bless the height restrictions in this city, less we just become Bethesda south." Or, maybe even worse, Rosslyn? Agreed. God bless our city's height restrictions!
 
Karen Davis
Connecticut Ave.

- previous message -
I am genuinely surprised at the absolute disregard for property rights and process when these topics come up. I understand that there are a lot of armchair housing experts in our community and to argue densification is some sort of DC litmus test, but slow down.
A hotel going out of business does not give the City any right to exercise eminent domain. That building still has an owner who has a right to seek tenants or even remodel/transition or maybe even raze. You simply cannot tell a property owner that because their tenant has left you are going to low-ball their land.
Can you imagine if the city started doing that for private houses? You are planning on moving, the city gives you some meaningless sum based off of a tax assessment and then keeps the lots until they had enough to replace single family homes with four packs and six packs or why not just build higher and put replace them with apartment buildings. Actually, the density crowd would love that idea...
God bless the height restrictions in this city, less we just become Bethesda south.
Actually, that is another great idea. We retrocede back to Maryland and just merge with MoCo. We get all of their great height laws and a few senators.