[natrius]

Limiting housing supply in desirable locations is the new redlining. I understand liking the character of a place, but it seems morally problematic to use the police power to enforce that character at the expense of those who will no longer be able to afford to live there as demand increases while supply doesn't. Those same people are often the first to support affordable housing mandates without recoiling at the inefficiencies of the Rube Goldberg machine of policy they've constructed.

[adestefan]

This is never about housing. It's about corporations wanting to be pack in more and more lobbyists as close as they can.

[natrius]

It's about both of those things. Luckily, I don't think corporations and lobbyists are boogeymen. Why shouldn't they be allowed to work in convenient locations? The most successful, established firms already do work in those convenient locations, but since supply is so restricted, smaller firms can't afford it.

When you restrict supply, the folks with money win.

[adestefan]

I don't think they're boogeymen either, but this will not lead to affordable or convenient housing and anyone who believes otherwise is a just a fool. This is from the experience of living in the city for 5 years.

If there was actual demand for denser housing or office space you'd see it sprouting up across the river in Virginia or outside the southeast of the city where land is dirt cheap. Remember the city itself is tiny and the areas outside the city do not have these restrictions.

[natrius]

"If there was actual demand for denser housing or office space you'd see it sprouting up across the river in Virginia or outside the southeast of the city where land is dirt cheap."

This is untrue. If housing desirablility is inversely proportional to the distance from the White House, then the area of equally desirable housing increases with square of the distance. You won't get dense nodes. It'll be spread around in a circle.

"this will not lead to affordable or convenient housing"

The more housing you allow, the cheaper it will be compared to a universe with supply restrictions. Do you disagree with that?

[eli]

There is absolutely demand for affordable housing in desirable parts of the city. It's not that people want denser living, they want to live in a nice part of the city. Way out east of the river is not a great place to live or work for a variety of reasons.

(And, obviously, there are tall office buildings in Rosslyn just over the bridge from DC.)

[rayiner]

Uh, do you not see the high rises right across the river in Arlington?

[eli]

Do you have any evidence to support that? I think the push for ending the height restrictions was mostly coming from residential developers.

Lobbyists can live anywhere (I'm sure many/most live outside DC proper) and, if anything, I would argue that it's increasingly less important for a lobbying firm to physically be on K St or the Hill.