^^^ Thanks for the info Cirrus. Seems like there's more possibilities for highrise development in the DC area.

DC is different in that the the federal government is able to print and borrow money infinitely without regard to budget deficits. It's not under pressure to maintain a certain level of employment or capital expenditures in order to avoid going bankrupt. It also doesn't offer a product/service that's bound by the function of supply and demand like, say, the Automotive companies in Detroit do.

To an extent, the same actually applies to finance in NYC these days too (now that the banks are too big to fail).

But that's all a discussion for another thread. I don't want to derail this one.

Tech, which is fueled by venture capital, is also not tied to the rules of manufacturing commerce. The Florida and Arizona economies, fueled by servicing a never-ending stream of retiree migration, are also not tied to the rules of manufacturing commerce. For better or worse, the rules of manufacturing commerce are not actually all that normal to a 21st Century economy. Except in some way they all are. In DC, the product being manufactured is policy, which is bound by the supply of political will and is in shockingly high demand. You might argue the American/DC "policy economy" is a bubble due to pop, but it is ultimately a product with a constrained supply, growing due to high demand, not all that unlike Uber's venture-capital-enabled money-losing bonanza, or bottomless coffee refills at a Pinellas County Denny's.

So look, if it somehow makes people feel better to say that DC is different, fine. That's true! It is sort of different. But lots of cities are different in one way or another. Charlotte got lucky with banks, Houston got lucky with oil, and Columbus lives off the state government and a gigantic state university. It happens. That's how civilizations work in the age of globalization. In the meantime, folks who feel the need to sidetrack or caveat every discussion about DC with "but but but the government is there so it doesn't count" are not contributing anything useful. The government is part of the civilization and part of the economy. It's an undeniably strong and stable anchor, so of course DC benefits from it, but many cities have anchors.

If I'm ranting here, it's because someone pops in to pull this obnoxious and off-topic card every time we try to have a discussion about anything related to DC, and it's annoying. OP asked about about zoning and height limits, and some clown interjected to say "you forgot about the government." I really really promise that I did not forget. It's just not particularly relevant.

So yes, by all means, let's cease derailing this thread. Or y'all can feel free to talk about whether government counts as part of civilization or not, and I'll happily spend my time on something else. I'm done with this line of debate.

Well they could if Virginia gave back its original portion of the DoC. That means Alexandria would also go back as well. I'd hope they don't do that, it was pretty cool seeing the Washington skyline from Embassy Suites in Alexandria. As long as the suburbs are relatively low rise, it provides unobstructed views of the heart of Washington from afar.

On a side note, it would be cool to see how Georgetown, Alexandria and Arlington would have developed without being in the District of Columbia. Maybe after the Civil War, they could have moved the capital to New York where it would make pretty much zero difference on how big the city is today. But it'd still would have benefited from being in the capital district at some point.

Or maybe the capital could have been built on the Maryland Panhandle near what is now West Virginia. I'd imagine the Georgetown-Alexandria-Arlington MSA would be around 400-600k today had it developed independently. And Georgetown would be way more interesting had it grown on its own and not been an overshadowed part of town.

A little note.

The amout of La Défense is just on the small territoiry of La Défense (0.6 sq mi). It's a much higher number the number if you take an area comparable to Arlington.
Paris Ouest La Défense, a territory covering the western inner suburbs of Paris around la Defense is just a bit smaller than Arlington. It is home to 88 million sq ft of office.

^
Fair point and not surprising.

Government does not guarantee a city's economic health. Most state governments are sprawling bureaucracies so they could be comparable to the federal government on a smaller scale and some state capitals are healthy and some are not. Plus, DC did hit a rough patch for a while and hemorrhaged population...with the same federal government based there.

DC's Fed government driven economy is less organic than other major cities where private industries have to be continually reinvented as older companies decline or move away. The city proper is still pretty much a government (or government adjacent- lobbyists, think tanks, NGOs, contractors) town. DC has a small start up scene and a few non-government related things here and there. But, no big critical mass of Tech/Finance/Media/Culture/F500 HQ industry stuff like NYC, SF, LA, Chi.

But, the suburbs, NoVa in particular has been able to leverage the international airport, well educated workforce and urban amenities to develop a reasonably impressive private sector. Its not just defense contractors anymore. Gannet, Marriott, Hilton, Capital One, Discovery Communications, and Nestle, Volkswagen (US HQ) all have their HQs in the region.

What is Washington D C's height limit?

People forget what DC looked like 30 years ago. It was not a very nice city, horrible crime and poverty outside of the wealthy neighborhoods on the north side. DC has completely reinvented itself like most US cities but even more pronounced due to the vast wealth and prosperity of the DC region. Americans should be proud that our capital is turned into such a prosperous and beautiful city that befits the status of the US capital.

^^Indeed!

Agreed! It's nothing short of incredible. Have the right zoning in place and a strong economy and wonderful things can happen.

Thank God...Washington wouldn't feel the same if it had huge skyscrapers, even if they were in a seperate district away from the city center like Paris.

A topical article on the DC region's economy was recently published on Washingtonian Magazine.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2018/0...tephen-fuller/

Its arguably a little hyperbolic. But, points out the Fed Government has gone from being a driver of the local economy to a drag. The suburbs have added some non-government related business, but the area doesn't have a private sector ecosystem to rival the other big coastal cities.

Interesting idea. I wonder how much square feet could be built on the lots right around RFK (and the stadium itself). There isn't a lot of space but if you maxed it out you could build a nice vertical district.

The flight paths for National Airport constrain high rises along the Potomac corridor. The fact that the airport is still in operation tells a lot about how seriously politicians actually take the terrorist threat relative to the convenience of having an airport so close in. The airport site would be the ideal spot for a regional skyscraper area. A new bridge across the river would probably have to be built though.

This quote almost reminded me of Hunger Games. The capital city prospers while the post-industrial hinterlands starves.

The height restriction works for DC. It's unique (for the U.S.) and given the gov't building etc. It really creates a cohesive feel and look.