Welcome To The End of Washington, DC As You Knew It

[DonRocks]

Height-limit restrictions considered being lifted.

[Keithstg]

One of the worst ideas ever. Predictably, our (hopefully soon to be former) mayor supports lifting height restrictions. Also funny that Vince is going to attend a hearing called "Shaping Washington DC for the future", as he's a walking, talking anachronism.

Although on the plus side, what are the air rights to my townhouse worth?!?!

[Waitman]

Long overdue, particulary if introduced intelligently surrounding existing subway stations and if comprehensive enough to take at least some pressure off residential and commercial rents. It would likely have a salubrious effect on the restaurant and general nightlife scene, as well.

[DonRocks]

I love the way people are using words to ease people into the concept, such as "relaxing" building height limits. This would be about as "relaxing" as having a turkey vulture repeatedly flying over the tip of the Washington Monument, each time depositing a rectal caffeine suppository, and simultaneously having five million naked, scum-coated, real estate lobbyists parachuting out of a plane one-by-one, bouncing off the suppository, and continuing their descent eastward towards the Capitol.

Remember the fight to save Evans Farm Inn in McLean ten years ago? Right, neither does anybody else, and now look what we have on our hands.

Don't kid yourselves about the fundamental changes that will take place should this come to pass - in fifty years, the city will be unrecognizable.

And there will be all sorts of signs up, like "Building a Better Tomorrow," as you sit there in traffic, staring upward at long-boom cranes, and some fat guy in sunglasses will be lying out at his swimming pool in Florida, puffing on a cigar and drinking a martini, without a care in the world.

Think Metro is broken now?

At least the population density will be able to support a good deli.

Enjoy.

[Waitman]

I realize that some people have an appreciation for choked commuter routes, resource-wasting and greenspace-consuming suburban sprawl, ludicrously unaffordable housing, commercial real estate costs that send business to the suburbs (see "suburban sprawl" above and add "urban unemployment") deserted downtown streets, the current state of K Street architecture and bad delis that I don't share, but infill development makes a lot of sense and a heigh limit based on the inability of 19th Century fire companies to fight a hypothetical blaze at the top of The Cairo do not.

[DonRocks]

I realize that some people have an appreciation for choked commuter routes, resource-wasting and greenspace-consuming suburban sprawl, ludicrously unaffordable housing, commercial real estate costs that send business to the suburbs (see "suburban sprawl" above and add "urban unemployment") deserted downtown streets, the current state of K Street architecture and bad delis that I don't share, but infill development makes a lot of sense and a heigh limit based on the inability of 19th Century fire companies to fight a hypothetical blaze at the top of The Cairo do not.

If I were a trillionaire and wanted to found Perfect City in Montana, I would buy a 50-by-50 mile plot of land, put a gigantic, 80-story tower right in the middle, then 70-story towers circling that one, then 60, 50, 40, all with increasingly large plots of land, and as you get 10, 20 miles from city center the buildings get shorter and the plots get larger and larger. All with state-of-the-art sewage, stormwater, parks, bike trails, and a fully integrated train system. It would be the exact opposite of suburban sprawl.

Thing is, we're not starting from scratch, and going from Point A to Point B is going to suck!

[Ericandblueboy]

Traveling in NYC doesn't suck. Most people don't have cars. And for those who do, traffic isn't that bad since the lights are properly staggered! Driving in DC sucks now because you hit every single stop light for no good reason. If people all live in urban areas, there'd be a lot less wasted energy.

[kirite]

Traveling in NYC doesn't suck. Most people don't have cars. And for those who do, traffic isn't that bad since the lights are properly staggered! Driving in DC sucks now because you hit every single stop light for no good reason. If people all live in urban areas, there'd be a lot less wasted energy.

No, traveling in NYC doesn't suck, because most people ride "in the hole in the ground" as Leonard Bernstein wrote many years ago. Can you imagine DC Metrorail coping with the consequences of no height restrictions?

[Ericandblueboy]

No, traveling in NYC doesn't suck, because most people ride "in the hole in the ground" as Leonard Bernstein wrote many years ago. Can you imagine DC Metrorail coping with the consequences of no height restrictions?

I'm not an engineer but what makes you think it makes a big difference? If ridership increases, why can't they increase the number of metro cars or frequency? What makes the NYC subway system so much different from DC's metro? Americans are a bunch of pansies to start with. Ever since I was a little kid in Taiwan, we rode public buses packed like sardines. Riding the metro is like riding first class compared to public transportation in a third world country.

[Keithstg]

particulary if introduced intelligently surrounding existing subway stations and if comprehensive enough to take at least some pressure off residential and commercial rents.

C'mon. You've certainly lived here long enough (and seen this Congress, city council, and mayor in action) to know that intelligent and comprehensive are not exactly, um, strong suits...

[Josh Radigan]

I'm not an engineer but what makes you think it makes a big difference? If ridership increases, why can't they increase the number of metro cars or frequency? What makes the NYC subway system so much different from DC's metro? Americans are a bunch of pansies to start with. Ever since I was a little kid in Taiwan, we rode public buses packed like sardines. Riding the metro is like riding first class compared to public transportation in a third world country.

The Subway in DC was a nightmare from day 1 because it was never really valued as a true way of mass transit. It was a novelty item that made washingtonians believe we were and are today a big city to the likes of Chicago and NYC. Another issue with the subway, shuting down at night. Reading different reports on the faults of the system itself is that running constantly would aleviate the issue of 'breathing' tracks.

[johnb]

I'm not an engineer but what makes you think it makes a big difference? If ridership increases, why can't they increase the number of metro cars or frequency? What makes the NYC subway system so much different from DC's metro? Americans are a bunch of pansies to start with. Ever since I was a little kid in Taiwan, we rode public buses packed like sardines. Riding the metro is like riding first class compared to public transportation in a third world country.

Well, they can't increase the rush hour frequency much if at all; the system is already maxed. Nor can they make the trains longer than the current maximum, not necessarily because of train technology but because, as a practical matter, the stations can't be made longer to accommodate them. What makes the NYC system basically different is that most lines have 4 tracks, two local and two express, giving it exponentially more capacity. That was considered when DC was built, but it was cost prohibitive, so the system DC got is a low capacity, two-track, local stop system throughout. Bottom line: Metro is locked in, and at most can provide only marginal increases in capacity at rush hour, which is when it matters.

Alas, regressing to third-world service levels is probably not a solution that will sell to pansy Americans. There are reasons why nobody wants to be third world any more, including the pansies in Taiwan. Third world cuisine may be fine; third world public services, not so much.

[Ericandblueboy]

Alas, regressing to third-world service levels is probably not a solution that will sell to pansy Americans. There are reasons why nobody wants to be third world any more, including the pansies in Taiwan. Third world cuisine may be fine; third world public services, not so much.

NYC subway during rushhour is also packed like sardines. I rode it for years. I don't think Americans who rely on public transportation will have much of a choice. People will adapt, especially since there's no money to throw at the problem.

[Waitman]

Thing is, we're not starting from scratch, and going from Point A to Point B is going to suck!

City's are't preserved in amber, they can and should grow and change.

Can you imagine DC Metrorail coping with the consequences of no height restrictions?

Yep. There is already talk of a new downtown line (expensive but worth it). More cars, and -- importantly -- spreading development to other parts of the city will also help

C'mon. You've certainly lived here long enough (and seen this Congress, city council, and mayor in action) to know that intelligent and comprehensive are not exactly, um, strong suits...

Actually, some of the planning has been pretty good. Development in Columbia Heights, Gallery Place and the near the ballpark has gone pretty well -- I don't love a lot of it, but it's been very successful. And there are enough neighborhood activists and monied interests to ensure that greenspace and a lot of low-density and residential development will remain.

The Subway in DC was a nightmare from day 1 because it was never really valued as a true way of mass transit. It was a novelty item that made washingtonians believe we were and are today a big city to the likes of Chicago and NYC. Another issue with the subway, shuting down at night. Reading different reports on the faults of the system itself is that running constantly would aleviate the issue of 'breathing' tracks.

I disagree. The DC subway is a pretty good system, far superior to Boston's and San Francisco's and as good -- given the smaller size and population density -- as New Yprks.

[johnb]

NYC subway during rushhour is also packed like sardines. I rode it for years. I don't think Americans who rely on public transportation will have much of a choice. People will adapt, especially since there's no money to throw at the problem.

Yes the NYC system is packed, but so are the systems in Washington and Santiago Chile (the three cities where I have lived and ridden extensively, and can speak from personal experience). In fact, it's safe to say that just about every subway system everywhere is packed. The point is that the DC system is already carrying what it can handle, and there is no way to increase capacity on existing lines except on the tiny margins. Silver will help, but if downtown DC gets a big increment of workers, and work schedules stay the same, things will get pretty grim pretty fast.

[brian]

Let's be realistic and say there's a 0% chance that there will be any change in height restrictions in downtown DC in the next few decades. And in the event that height restrictions are lifted in select other parts of the city, surely putting more housing and offices in DC will cause less traffic than putting offices in DC and housing in Loudon County.

DC's apartment vacancy rates are much lower than Maryland and Virginia's, indicating greater demand for residential units in the city than the suburbs. DC also has the lowest vacancy rate for office space of any market in the nation, and again it's lower than MD and VA. This area has some of the fastest growing suburbs in the nation and allowing higher density in the city will allow businesses and people to locate where they actually want to.

The reason all the office buildings in DC are so uniform and uninteresting is BECAUSE of the height limit and building codes, which provide incentive for every developer to maximize the building envelope without providing setbacks or public areas. I guarantee any changes to DC's skyline will be less noticeable from the National Mall than Rossyln's skyline is. Right now there are multiple overlapping agencies charged with preserving the architectural and urban character of the city (HPRB, NCPC, Committee of 100, etc.) and those will continue to have an overwhelmingly strong voice - but none of them are structured in a way that take into account the economic, social, and regional impacts of their decisions.

[Josh Radigan]

City's are't preserved in amber, they can and should grow and change.

...

Yep. There is already talk of a new downtown line (expensive but worth it). More cars, and -- importantly -- spreading development to other parts of the city will also help

...

Actually, some of the planning has been pretty good. Development in Columbia Heights, Gallery Place and the near the ballpark has gone pretty well -- I don't love a lot of it, but it's been very successful. And there are enough neighborhood activists and monied interests to ensure that greenspace and a lot of low-density and residential development will remain.

...

I disagree. The DC subway is a pretty good system, far superior to Boston's and San Francisco's and as good -- given the smaller size and population density -- as New Yprks.

My father-in-law has been taking the subway for the past 30 years and although its not a headache, he deals in more day to day issues with train failure, escalators being shut and peak scheduled track work. I used to take it to prep school in the 80's and loved it, but as well at that time, the big crush of customers had not found the appeal of the subway. Ballston used to be the last stop, as well there were far fewer stations and even lines.

[RWBooneJr]

The title of this thread should be "Welcome to the end of Anacostia as you know it." What is being proposed here is not a free-for-all where all of downtown gets taller. It is an entirely new business district to be built in an area outside of the central core. It would ruin DC no more than La Défense ruined Paris. Such development would further gentrify the city, forcing even even more low income residents out. But that is a different debate entirely.

[DonRocks]

The title of this thread should be "Welcome to the end of Anacostia as you know it." What is being proposed here is not a free-for-all where all of downtown gets taller. It is an entirely new business district to be built in an area outside of the central core. It would ruin DC no more than La Défense ruined Paris. Such development would further gentrify the city, forcing even even more low income residents out. But that is a different debate entirely.

I thought it was an easing of height restrictions, city-wide. If that ever happened, and you owned a building on 12th and Penn, wouldn't you want to double the height? I would.

(I'm not opposed to lifting the height restrictions, by the way, but I hold no illusions as to what would become of it, and I repeat my example of Evans Farm Inn which I liken to the Tasmanian Shrew - I'll probably never see one, but I take comfort in knowing that it still exists, out there, somewhere. I've lived long enough to know that DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT EQUAL PROGRESS.)

[Waitman]

I thought it was an easing of height restrictions, city-wide. If that ever happened, and you owned a building on 12th and Penn, wouldn't you want to double the height? I would.

(I'm not opposed to lifting the height restrictions, by the way, but I hold no illusions as to what would become of it, and I repeat my example of Evans Farm Inn which I liken to the Tasmanian Shrew - I'll probably never see one, but I take comfort in knowing that it still exists, out there, somewhere. I've lived long enough to know that DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT EQUAL PROGRESS.)

You realize, right, that increasing the height limit would diminish the pressure to develop parcels like the Evans Farm Inn, right?

I think there are competing proposals, depending on who you talk to, by the way.

Kudos to Brian for his post.

[DonRocks]

You realize, right, that increasing the height limit would diminish the pressure to develop parcels like the Evans Farm Inn, right?

Charles, I don't agree with this - anything inside the beltway would become more valuable, and there would be greater incentive to sell (look at NYC for your example). This is the nation's capital, and people will swarm here like tarantulas to Sadiya.

Doubling the population of this area might sound like "a profound change," but so is dying and going to Hell.