Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

medievalmachine t1_j6n1xx8 wrote

Reply to comment by resdivinae in DC is a leader in building new apartments, but they tend to be on the small side by Maxcactus

Yeah, like, what is the complaint?

29

throws_rocks_at_cars t1_j6n5xpj wrote

There is none. This is good.

Ideally, we would go even further and allow zoning changes to include dormitory-style or hostel-style apartments, for people that really don’t need their own private kitchen or bathroom. This type of apartment is being built all over major college campuses like UGA, but they’re excluded here because they don’t meet the minimum requirement to constitute a “bedroom” that can legally be listed. Before anyone gets mad and calls this tenement housing, I DO NOT THINK it should use the same advertising/lettering as a normal bedroom. I’m just saying that it should not be disallowed. When I was 18-22 this was fine. And it would have been fine for 22-25 for me, if it were legal to find.

Additionally DC should end tiered height limits. Currently, it works like this:

  • Residential: 90 feet
  • Commercial: 130 feet
  • Pennsylvania Avenue: 160 feet

This should be changed to make the limit for everything 160 feet. I want more height but we do not need to scrap the rule completely.

https://realestateinthedistrict.com/is-your-dc-bedroom-legal/

17

AsbestosIn0bstetrics t1_j6n78pn wrote

And if you REALLY want to maximize density, you move toward building barracks-style bunkhouses with rows of bunk beds in one large room, with shower facilities in a separate building. This would be a far more affordable solution for renters than 1BR or even studio apartments, as well.

3

throws_rocks_at_cars t1_j6n890j wrote

Unironically yes. If people want to pay $65 a month for a bunk in a hostel then that is ok for them to do so. This wouldn’t prevent other types of housing from being built. Luckily I am not at a place in my life where I need what you described, but I could absolutely use a dormitory-style room myself.

6

AsbestosIn0bstetrics t1_j6n8m2m wrote

There would certainly be a market for such barracks-style housing. But it would be interesting to see exactly where all the people demanding maximum density live. I'm guessing that some of them don't exactly practice what they preach.

5

greetedworm t1_j6nen70 wrote

I think chemotherapy should be free but I don't have cancer. I don't have to live in dorm housing to be an advocate for density.

11

AsbestosIn0bstetrics t1_j6njg0f wrote

Then you fit the profile. You believe that others should be forced to make sacrifices in order to achieve greater density, but at the same time you exempt yourself from such restrictions.

−12

Docile_Doggo t1_j6nm7ek wrote

Creating a greater variety of options up and down the price and density scales is a lot different from “forcing” people into a specific style of living. In fact, it’s the exact opposite

9

Gumburcules t1_j6o0wlh wrote

> You believe that others should be forced to make sacrifices in order to achieve greater density

Who exactly is being forced to make sacrifices?

Did I miss the headline where Bowser is sending jackbooted thugs to grab you out of your home and throw you into a studio apartment and shooting those who don't comply?

6

KEVINMD15 t1_j6nimce wrote

I agree on all of this, but there are a bunch of dorm style apartments throughout dc. Their labeled as Co-Living, and it seems like there is a building in all the more popular neighborhoods

2

LuciusAurelian t1_j6nr797 wrote

Isn't the height limit based on the width of the street? Is there a separate standard from different uses?

2