WHEREAS: the Office of Zoning (OZ) submitted a proposed text amendment as a "technical correction" to remove an administrative conflict between the provisions of §§223 and 2001.3 of Title 11 DCMR; and

WHEREAS: the proposal, identified as of interest to every Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC), has proven, with the benefit of hindsight, confusing (at least to some of us); and

WHEREAS: the proposal grows out of a 1997 change in the regulations – sought by the Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA) –  to give it authority to approve certain additions to single family dwellings and flats by special exception rather than an area variances (up to a maximum lot occupancy of 50 percent) – which, because of contradictory draftsmanship, appears to have failed to achieve the BZA's purpose; and

WHEREAS: the 1997 change  may well have been be intended to apply only to additions by owners of homes that were non-conforming structures (e.g., additions to a "grandfathered"  property with less than minimum side yards or back yard, or a with more than the maximum 40 percent lot occupancy); and

WHEREAS: the proposed amendment has prompted concerns that

 • the amendment as drafted might open the door to "creative" interpretations allowing changes in cases of non-conforming     uses as well as non-conforming structures (see Office of Planning report dated June 29, 2001);

 • the original intention was ill-advised and should remain ineffective (or, better yet, be repealed altogether) because it encourages evolution of lot occupancies from 40 percent up to 50 percent in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts;

 • the original amendment may not have been drafted tightly enough to limit its scope to genuine expansion of owner-occupied homes – running a risk of abuse by applicants who will in fact tear down most or all of a structure and substitute a larger structure occupying 50 percent of the lot; and

WHEREAS: factors considered in 1997 may no longer be compatible with the public interest of the District of Columbia as a whole; and

WHEREAS: the Zoning Commission has scheduled a hearing for the evening of July 12, 2001;

NOW, THEREFORE, ANC 3F recommends to the Zoning Commission that it:

1. not approve the proposed text amendment; but, instead,

2. issue an expanded public notice that addresses and offers as an alternative outcome repeal or restriction of the 1997 amendment, as well as the current proposal,

3. request the Office of Zoning to include in the new notice a preamble, in terms understandable by lay people, setting forth

 • what the 1997 amendment sought to accomplish,

 • why the 1997 amendment sought that result,

 • why the 1997 amendment failed to accomplish the result sought, and

 • why each of the alternatives now being considered might be in the public interest of the District of Columbia as a whole in the circumstances prevailing in 2001 and anticipated for the future, and

4. Commissioner David J. Bardin is authorized to represent ANC3F before the Zoning
    Commission and related proceedings.

=====================================================================

Adopted by vote of 7-0-0 at a duly noticed meeting on July 9, 2001 with a quorum present.
 

/s/ David J. Bardin____                                  /s/ Robert V. Maudlin____
Chair                                                              Secretary
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

2