Category: Resources

Testimony: Support upzoning Wisconsin Ave. Metro corridor (DC)

Testimony: Support upzoning Wisconsin Ave. Metro corridor (DC)

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

CSC’s July 23, 2026 letter in support for Office of Planning’s Supplemental Report III recommendations, DC Zoning Case No. 25-13

July 23, 2026

Mr. Anthony Hood, Chairman, Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia

441 4th Street, NW, Suite 210S, Washington, DC 20001

RE: Support for Office of Planning’s Supplemental Report III recommendations 

In Zoning Case No. 25-13 — Proposed Zoning Text and Map Amendments to create and map – new Wisconsin Avenue Mixed Use zones for Friendship Heights and Tenleytown Metro station areas

Dear Chair Hood and Members of the Zoning Commission:

Please accept this testimony on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. We are a nonprofit organization advocating for walkable, bikeable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities as the most sustainable and equitable way for the Washington, DC region to grow and provide opportunities for all.

We wish to express our support for the recommendations in the Office of Planning’s Supplemental Report III. The data and analysis provided by OP provide a sound rationale for the recommendations for the three questions examined at the request the Zoning Commission. 

We have advocated for strengthening the form-based approach to zoning, rather than relying on a discretionary Design Review process. A Design Review process discourages new development due to the added risk of delay and uncertainty associated with a contested case. If the Zoning Commission plans to move forward with the use of Design Review for the new Friendship Heights and Tenleytown Metro zones, we support OP’s recommendations, which offer a more appropriate way to encourage quality redevelopment. 

Specifically, we support:

  1. Large lots of 15,000 SF and above in the Friendship Heights and Tenleytown Metro zones will be subject to Design Review by the Zoning Commission. Below 15,000 SF lot size, projects should be reviewed as matter of right projects. These smaller projects would still be reviewed for compliance with the zones’ urban design requirements, but not as a contested case. This approach is consistent with guidance of the Wisconsin Avenue Development Framework. OP’s rationale in the Supplemental Report III offers a detailed analysis of lot sizes and potential impacts. We concur with OP’s conclusion that 15,000 SF for lots in the two new Metro zones is an appropriate threshold for Design Review, if the Zoning Commission chooses to apply a Design Review requirement.
  2. Affordable housing projects are exempt, if they meet high affordability levels — 33% affordable for very low and extremely low income households, and are affordable for the life of the building. We support this exemption because affordable housing projects are far more sensitive, and less tolerant of the uncertainties created in the development review process. If we are serious about bringing more affordable housing to high opportunity neighborhoods like these ones – where little exists – we must do more to remove barriers. This exemption is a helpful step to lower barriers in the development review process. 
  3. Historic properties can be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB), and do not need a separate Design Review at the Zoning Commission. Appropriate design review can be provided by HPRB, since the project would already be subject to review at HPRB, and subject to the requirements of the zone that the project occurs in. A second review by the Zoning Commission would be largely duplicative. 

These recommendations will help advance increased housing, and affordable housing options in this high-opportunity Metro corridor. This rezoning helps implement the Wisconsin Avenue Development Framework and offers the potential for thousands of new homes, and the benefit that comes with that — attracting new shops, restaurants, and services around two Metro stations in Friendship Heights and Tenleytown, and the Wisconsin Avenue transit corridor. This significant upzoning advances the District’s goals to create more housing, and more affordable housing, especially in high opportunity and transit-accessible areas. 

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Cort

DC and Prince George’s Policy Director

Support for the B26-0684 – Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Authorization Amendment Act of 2026 (DC)

Support for the B26-0684 – Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Authorization Amendment Act of 2026 (DC)

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

July 2, 2026

The Honorable Charles Allen

Chair, Committee on Transportation and the Environment, Council of the District of Columbia

1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20004

Re: Support for the B26-0684 – Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Authorization Amendment Act of 2026 

Chair Allen and Committee Members:

Our organization advocates for walkable, bikeable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities as the most sustainable and equitable way for the Washington, DC region to grow and provide opportunities for all. We have been working in the District of Columbia for 29 years. 

The Coalition for Smarter Growth (CSG) supports Chair Allen’s bill, B26-0684, in particular its important provisions for: 

  • Reporting operations and safety data, including VMT and zero-passenger miles
  • Vehicle miles traveled tax
  • Supporting public transit 
  • Serving all wards
  • User interface for individuals with disabilities

CSG believes that autonomous vehicles (AVs) have the potential to improve roadway safety and provide an additional transportation option to persons without a car or unable to drive (especially in areas with limited transit options), and that AVs also have the potential to degrade our cities and towns by adding more traffic, car dependency, and control of public streets and curbspace by unaccountable private companies. Council Member Allen’s bill seeks to address these issues.

The District of Columbia must manage AVs to support adopted District policy that prioritizes people over vehicles. 

Specifically, DC’s transportation plan, MoveDC, has these policies: 

  • Policy H: Design and manage public space and the space along the roadway to be people-focused, promoting livability and public health by improving accessibility, sustainability, safety, and placemaking.
  • Policy I: Permit and program social, cultural, commercial, and flexible use of public space to improve the quality of life for current and future residents.
  • Policy Q: Promote partnerships and programs such as travel demand management to achieve 75% non-auto mode commute trips by 2032.
  • Policy R: Adapt policies to ensure equitable service, privacy protections, and data driven decision making as technology and new transportation services arise.

Multiple studies have concluded that unregulated AVs would have major impacts on traffic volumes. 

A recent academic synthesis of 26 studies found that shared AV adoption would increase total city traffic volumes by 5.3%, measured in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This increase is enough to jam up key intersections and busy urban corridors. A 2020 DC scenario study of AV proliferation in the District of Columbia, likewise found that VMT and congestion would rise significantly without strong policy measures like congestion pricing.

AV legislation must discourage excess traffic, support transit, help travelers with disabilities, and ensure accountability and transparency by AV companies

We ask, in particular, that the following critical provisions of bill B26-0684 be incorporated in a new permitting system for shared or personal autonomous vehicles in the District:

  • Reporting operations and safety data, including VMT and zero-passenger miles
  • Vehicle miles traveled tax
  • Supporting public transit 
  • Serving all wards
  • User interface for individuals with disabilities

Thank you for your consideration. We urge the committee to recommend the bill to the full Council. 

Sincerely,

Cheryl Cort

DC & Prince George’s Policy Director

Comments: Support for Missing Middle Housing Study (Prince George’s County)

Posted on by Elena Sorokina

We wish to express our enthusiasm for the county’s innovative missing middle study to address the housing needs of a range of residents. This effort will investigate how to broaden housing options to ensure Prince George’s is a great place to grow up, enjoy young adulthood, raise a family, and age in the community.