[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?