The One Front Door Amendment Act of 2026 directs the District of Columbia Department of Buildings to write rules by July 1, 2027 that would allow certain multifamily residential buildings to be served by a single entrance and egress stairway. The measure applies to buildings with more than two dwelling units and would permit this design for buildings up to six stories above grade plane, and it also references high-rise buildings as defined by the bill. The bill adds a new statutory definition of “multifamily residential building” and creates a new section in the District’s construction code law to establish the rulemaking mandate.
In developing the new rules, the Department must consider fire safety and evacuation protections, including fire-resistive construction, automatic sprinklers, maximum travel distances to the stairway, and door-swing requirements. The Department must also consider limiting these buildings to no more than four units per floor, or an equivalent square-footage limit, and review best practices from other state, local, and international codes that allow single-stairway residential buildings. The bill does not itself change the construction code immediately; instead, it requires the agency to promulgate rules and preserves the Department’s broader authority to regulate multifamily buildings afterward.
Impact
The bill amends the Construction Codes Approval and Amendments Act of 1986 by adding a new definition and a new rulemaking section, thereby expanding the District’s building-code framework to potentially allow single-stair multifamily residential buildings under specified conditions. Its practical effect is to require the Department of Buildings to evaluate and potentially revise code standards for building layout, fire protection, and means of egress for certain residential projects. The measure could affect developers, architects, builders, fire-safety regulators, and future occupants of multifamily housing by opening the door to a different building design standard in the District.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad support in the Council, passing first reading and final reading unanimously by 12-0 votes. The lack of recorded committee transcripts in the provided materials limits insight into detailed debate, but the unanimous votes suggest a generally favorable view of the proposal. The structure of the bill also indicates an effort to balance housing design flexibility with safety safeguards, which likely contributed to its positive reception.
Contention
The main policy tension in the bill is between allowing more flexible, potentially more affordable or efficient residential building designs and maintaining fire and life-safety protections. Any concerns would likely center on whether a single stairway is safe in taller multifamily buildings, especially in high-rise contexts, and whether limits such as sprinklers, fire-resistive construction, travel-distance rules, and unit-per-floor caps are sufficient. Because no committee transcript is provided, no specific member or stakeholder objections are documented here, but the bill’s safeguards show that safety advocates and code officials were likely important audiences in shaping the measure.