Opinion ID: 2326822
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Specifics of the KCA and ANC Challenge

Text: We turn next to the attic issue. KCA argues that the BZA, concentrating on whether the sixth level of the subject building has structural headroom, 11 DCMR § 199.1, failed to address in its written decision whether the sixth level actually is an attic within the meaning of the dictionary definition of attic that is incorporated into the zoning regulations pursuant to 11 DCMR § 199.2(g). Both KCA and the ANC contend that the BZA's decision upholding the Zoning Administrator's treatment of the sixth-floor space as an attic conflicts with that dictionary definition. The ANC also asserts that the BZA ignored the evidence that the sixth-floor space has amenities (eight windows, ten general purpose duplex convenience outlets, and three ceiling light fixtures) that show that it was intended to be habitable space. KCA agrees, arguing that the sixth level is an additional floor of usable space, labeled `attic' and given a low ceiling for the evident purpose . . . of circumventing the density restrictions of the Zoning Regulations. . . .