Zoning
Zoning Commission too important for thoughtless pick
At a DC Council hearing on Zoning Commission nominee Greg Selfridge, it became evident that he lacks the experience and policy depth for this extremely important board.
As Lydia DePillis reported, Selfridge is a developer, but seems to have little knowledge of zoning issues or citywide policy, and didn't even specifically want to be on the Zoning Commission:
Selfridge ... had no personal relationship with the Mayor, but had asked the head of Boards and Commissions for a position, and that it was decided that the Zoning Commission might be a good fit.Every board is important, but the Zoning Commission is especially important because it's one of the areas where the federal government maintains considerable influence over the shape of DC. Two federal representatives, Peter May from the National Park Service and Michael Turnbull from the Architect of the Capitol, serve alongside three Mayoral representatives. Unlike in most places, like Montgomery County, the elected legislature doesn't have the power to review land use decisions.He has been to exactly two Board of Zoning Adjustment meetings, had only glancing familiarity with the comprehensive zoning review underway right now, and had only read bits of the District's Comprehensive Plan. He didn't have much to say about the priorities of affordable housing and historic preservation except that he supported them.
"As far as intimate familiarity with the regs, I don't have it," Selfridge said, "but I'm certain that I could get myself up to speed."
DC has limited control over its own destiny in a number of areas, including land use. It's therefore particularly important that DC's representatives be extremely knowledgeable and effective advocates for the District's needs. They need more than a cursory knowledge of policy, or else they're likely to be swayed by the persistently anti-urban attitudes of Peter May or simple ignorance.
For example, DePillis notes, Selfridge's first reaction to zoning on U Street is that it needs lots of parking and not so many restaurants. He's also uncomfortable with new restaurants on Barracks Row. Sounds like someone very nervous about growth, even good growth in neighborhoods that want it.
This makes me wonder whether Fenty has much of a vision for the city. He's aggressively pushed streetcars and bike lanes and added housing opportunities, but how much of that is just the good counsel of Harriet Tregoning and Gabe Klein? When he overrides them, it often seems to be for the worse, like on sidewalks.
Mayor Williams talked about a goal of bringing in 100,000 new residents to DC. That's the right path to grow our tax base and our retail offerings and make DC a better place to live. Now Fenty has nominated someone to the Zoning Commission who seems instinctively uncomfortable with the urbanism Fenty's been advancing just because the guy asked to be nominated to something.
According to DePillis, the Council is expected to reject either Selfridge or Stan Wall, Fenty's other recent nominee, because they don't want all three DC members to be developers. The Council should send Selfridge back and ask the Mayor to pick someone who shares his policy goals and who has the policy depth to defend them against people like May.
Maybe we can help him find someone. Anyone here want to apply for the Zoning Commission? You need to be able to spend every Monday and Thursday night at the meetings.
Comments
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- Metro policy for refunds after delays falls short, riders say
- M Street cycle track keeps improving, draws church anger
- Cyclists are special and do have their own rules
- O'Malley announces first projects using new gas tax money







by yatesc on Jun 28, 2010 11:39 am • link • report
i get the feeling he wouldn't allow such an open-ended questioning, though...
by IMGoph on Jun 28, 2010 12:17 pm • link • report
by Adam L on Jun 28, 2010 12:40 pm • link • report
Twice a week is a pretty big committment.
by Michael Perkins on Jun 28, 2010 12:50 pm • link • report
by Phil on Jun 28, 2010 4:05 pm • link • report
Community representatives that are in a position to learn the subject matter that they'll be expected to be experts in may work for some appointments, but as David so well explains, this is a critical appointment for the District in many many ways. Putting a newby up for this, no matter how well intentioned or eager to learn, is complete folly on Fenty's part ... and probably not very fair to Mr. Selfridge either who is finding himself in front of a bunch of questioners ... who he can't answer ... through no fault of his own. No disrespect to Mr. Selfridge, but he'd probably impress a lot more people if he voluntarily withdrew his name from this appointment.
by Lance on Jun 28, 2010 9:50 pm • link • report
"Selfridge ... had no personal relationship with the Mayor, but had asked the head of Boards and Commissions for a position, and that it was decided that the Zoning Commission might be a good fit."
Gee, I can just put my name in the hopper and some bureaucrat on the Mayor's staff decides where I'm "a good fit"? Please tell me it doesn't really work this way.
by Paul on Jun 29, 2010 9:00 am • link • report
"He speaks to parking problems around Barracks Row because they have serious parking shortages over there as anyone who lives near it would tell you."
Phil, there are "parking shortages" near Barracks Row b/c too many people with antiquated suburban mindsets drive to a transit-accessible, walkable neighborhood. Neighborhoods like 8th Street, SE and U Street, NW do NOT need more parking. Too much parking is the problem. Remember all the parking lots around Massachusetts Ave., NW? That was a great place to be, wasn't it? All that great parking!!!
by Edna Wellthorpe on Jun 29, 2010 10:04 am • link • report
Also, I wholeheartedly agree that there are many good reasons to grow DC's population - but I disagree with the general idea that increasing the tax base is one of those reasons: tax base would grow, but so would the demand for government services. Of course, if you think there's a specific reason to think tax base would grow more than demand for services, that's a different story.
by Arnold on Jun 29, 2010 10:43 am • link • report
I think the line of reasoning, first articulated (at least informally) back in the 90s, was that we needed more higher-income people with relatively low demand for services to correct the revenue shortfalls to run a city where so much of the land is untaxable (i.e., has government buildings or tax-exempt organizations on it.) The thought was that DINKs (as they were called at the time ... 'Dual Income No Kids') were the ideal new resident since they'd bring in large income tax revenue but not use many services.
It's interesting to see now that what is happening given that the very folks who supposedly wouldn't cost the city much are demanding expensive items such as a streetcar system ... and dog parks ... and, wonder of wonder, better schools ...
by Lance on Jun 29, 2010 12:01 pm • link • report
Add a Comment