New homeless shelter in D.C. faces backlash over zoning violations
- Aston shelter, located in Foggy Bottom, was converted from a former college dorm and is the first in D.C. to accept couples and adult families of any gender.
- The shelter is currently set to accommodate 50 residents, with plans to double its capacity to 100.
- Community backlash against the shelter has raised concerns about zoning violations and quality of life in the area.
In August 2023, the city of Washington D.C. purchased a building in Foggy Bottom, previously a college dorm for George Washington University, for $27.5 million to convert it into a homeless shelter called Aston. The shelter is designed to accommodate couples and adult families regardless of gender, providing a unified living space which contrasts with other city shelters that typically separate families based on gender. Initially, Aston can house up to 50 residents, but it has plans to expand to accommodate 100 in the future. The typical stay for residents at Aston is expected to last one to three months while they seek permanent housing. However, the establishment of this shelter has sparked significant controversy in the Foggy Bottom area, leading to lawsuits and strong opposition from local residents and businesses. The main concerns revolve around zoning regulations, as the West End D.C. Community Association claims that the Aston shelter violates these regulations and that the District of Columbia did not sufficiently explore other possible locations. Legal actions include attempts to block the shelter and appeals to the zoning board, arguing that the city is bypassing necessary public hearings and approvals for such a facility. Residents have expressed concerns about quality of life and the impact on the local community, emphasizing that the location does not align with existing zoning laws. On the other hand, the first residents of the Aston shelter have started to share positive experiences. Petro Bemah, one of the newcomers, highlighted the benefits of individual private rooms as opposed to traditional shelters that often house multiple men in shared spaces. This arrangement has not only provided him with a safer environment but also fostered a sense of community and encouragement among the residents. This juxtaposition of opinions—between the residents who benefit from the shelter’s unique offering and the community’s pushback—illustrates the complex socio-political dynamics surrounding homelessness solutions in urban settings. As the city navigates this contentious situation, the upcoming court decisions and community reactions will further shape the conversation about how to effectively address homelessness and manage zoning compliance in neighborhoods characterized by affluence and development.