Legalize Georgetown

Parking

by David Alpert • April 4, 2008 5:44 pm

I love DC's rowhouse neighborhoods. I love the many buildings on a block with interesting colors and shapes. I love the neighborhood feel of the corner store. I love seeing people out walking their dogs, biking to work, or doing shopping. I'd like to preserve the neighborhoods that have this, and build new neighborhoods that have it too.

Georgetown couldn't legally be built
today. Photo by KRob2005 on Flickr.

If Georgetown burned down tomorrow (I sure hope not!) then the zoning code should allow it to be rebuilt similar to the way it is today. If someone wanted to expand the rowhouses of Capitol Hill to vacant blocks in Southeast they hould be able to. But that's not true, and I'm honestly baffled by people who argue otherwise. For example, Barbara Zartman, of the Committee of 100 and a Georgetown resident, argued in Wednesday's parking zoning meeting that R-4 zones (like Georgetown) should keep the current requirements forcing every new building to have at least 1 parking space and for larger buildings to have 1 space per 3 units. Our old neighborhoods in R-4 zones certainly don't meet this requirement today.

My current building in Dupont has 13 apartments and zero parking spaces. If it were rebuilt today, it would need an empty lot next door that's about the same size as the building to fit the seven spaces required under current zoning. It would mean more cars crossing the sidewalk, and one of the prettiest blocks in Dupont would be much less. And having these spaces would encourage more driving and raise the cost of living here.

"We're not like Europe," said one person in the historic preservation meeting. People drive instead of walking to the store. Well, we're not more like Europe because of policies that block it and vocal advocates who oppose change, even change that makes DC more like Europe.

6 comments — Share	— tags: anti neighbors, DC, Georgetown, historic preservation, parking minimums, zoning update

Parking minimums irrelevant to Georgetown waterfront (Aug 27, 2008)
Parking countdown #2: This is what a neighborhood without minimums looks like (Jul 30, 2008)
Throwing the baby out with the 400-foot buffer (Apr 7, 2008)
Early draft of parking zoning rules reduces some minimums (but not enough) (Apr 7, 2008)
Less parking at 14th and U would solve many problems (Feb 15, 2008)

Comments

I think you look at Old Town you can see Historic Vrs Contemporary zoning. Most of Old Town historic streets are very much like Georgetown and so are the residence attitude. One only has to look north of Queen to see the more contemporary changes with their parking spots, as those locations have mostly been developed within the last 30 years; while preserving the architectural look of Old Town. Take a look at the satellite photos of Old Town and your prediction is pretty much proven. Also, you only have to walk the streets to feel the difference.

by RJ on Apr 5, 2008 2:48 pm

RJ: You're absolutely right, Old Town is a great example. The cuteness drops off quite rapidly as you move just a couple blocks away from King in either direction.

by David Alpert on Apr 6, 2008 2:04 pm

I am a rabid preservationist, but there is definitely a generational difference amongst preservationists about this issue. You could argue that unintentionally, preservationists taking the Zartman (and sadly, often the CHRS position on traffic) are more pro-road, pro-freeway than their positions 40 years ago.

by Richard Layman on Apr 6, 2008 4:23 pm

great post. you're so right.

all of these regulations in the background silently make our landscape what it is. we need to tear all of this crap out so that we can live like normal human beings.

by Toby Murdock on Apr 7, 2008 11:13 am

North of Queen wouldn't properly be considered "Old Town", would it? Different neighborhood with a different history.

by dcuist on Apr 9, 2008 11:10 am

Old Town is much more complex than people seem to understand. There are some fine blocks of very historic houses well north of Queen Street (Lee's boyhood home on Oronoco comes immediately to mind) and some horrific 20th century dreck right on King Street (like the pseudo-Colonial addition to City Hall fronting the equally awful Market Square).

There are some excellent examples in Old Town of row housing developments that incorporate both top-notch architecture AND embedded parking facilities (one of them is right across from my office here on Union Street). Other examples of this type may be less architecturally pleasing, like the houses that replaced the old Berg public housing, but the point is that parking doesn't have to be incompatible with aesthetics and livability.

by Jim Stone on Apr 11, 2008 2:10 pm