HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 5:55 AM
jd3189's Avatar
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 3,684
^^^ Thanks for the info Cirrus. Seems like there's more possibilities for highrise development in the DC area.
__________________
There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self.
-Aldous Huxley

Continue improving until the end.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 6:04 AM
skyscraperpage17 skyscraperpage17 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Yes, and much of the Silicon Valley's success is because of Stanford's tech school. And much of New York's success is because of finance. I don't know why it's supposed to be some kind of "but" insight that cities have anchor industries. Nobody in DC is under any misconception that the federal government's presence is not highly tied to the city's success.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 7:00 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 17,885
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.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 7:28 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Arlington is in Virginia thus DC cannot merge with or annex it.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 8:40 AM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
I'll repeat what I said: It's likely a political impossibility and Constitutionally dubious. So we don't disagree MUCH. You are right that the federal government has no authority over state boundaries with this single possible exception since this bit of Virginia actually WAS ceded to the Feds by Virginia as a result of a historical deal and then returned to it by the Federal government. Could that government take back their action returning it? That's for the lawyers.

A little history:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ashington,_D.C.

So that's how DC was created and later modified and, as I said, I'll let the lawyers argue about whether any of the legislative acts, state or federal, could be undone. One point though--that it did take acts of the state legislatures for the land to cease being parts of Maryland and Virginia originally shows JManc is correct that the Feds couldn't just take it or any part of any other state, but having been given it once could make it unique.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 12:31 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 3,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Let's do some points about Arlington.

2. Arlington already has about the same amount of office space as La Defense. They both have about 40 million square feet of office space. Arlington has a little more than La Defense if you include the Pentagon; La Defense has a little more if you don't. Arlington's office market is spread out, however, in TODs around 7 different Metro stations, and a bit elsewhere.
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.

Last edited by Minato Ku; Jan 3, 2018 at 3:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 3:00 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 17,885
^
Fair point and not surprising.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 3:57 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Registered Putz
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 23,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eightball View Post
Good comment Cirrus, but you forgot - DC loves to pat itself on the back for all the growth but much of it is because the federal government is based there. People can claim and stutter otherwise but numerous corporations have moved to the area to be close to the federal government. Not too mention all the direct federal jobs and endless contractors etc who suck on the government teat - as well as the insane and always growing defense industry. And yet, despite all of this incredible financial stimulus, African American incomes in the city are actually stagnant or decreasing while shooting thru the roof for whites and Asians. SMDH
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.
__________________
Houston owes its existence to three Upstate New Yorkers: Augustus Chapman Allen, John Kirby Allen and Willis Haviland Carrier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 12:09 AM
jpdivola jpdivola is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 245
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 3:21 AM
Dariusb Dariusb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texarkana, TX
Posts: 276
What is Washington D C's height limit?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 3:47 AM
BG918's Avatar
BG918 BG918 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,857
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 4:37 AM
Dariusb Dariusb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texarkana, TX
Posts: 276
^^Indeed!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2018, 7:28 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dariusb View Post
What is Washington D C's height limit?
Quote:
The Height of Buildings Act of 1910 was an Act of Congress passed by the 61st United States Congress on June 1, 1910 to limit the height of buildings in Washington, D.C. The original act was passed on March 1, 1899 when the 55th United States Congress approved the Height of Buildings Act of 1899. The original act restricted the heights of any type of building in the United States capital city of Washington, D.C., to be no higher than 110 feet (34 m). In 1910, the 61st United States Congress enacted a new height restriction law limiting building heights to 130 feet (40 m), or the width of the right-of-way of the street or avenue on which a building fronts, whichever is shorter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height...gs_Act_of_1910
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2018, 9:00 PM
CIA CIA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
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.
Agreed! It's nothing short of incredible. Have the right zoning in place and a strong economy and wonderful things can happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2018, 11:22 PM
ThePhun1 ThePhun1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Houston/Galveston
Posts: 1,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2018, 1:50 AM
jpdivola jpdivola is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 245
A topical article on the DC region's economy was recently published on Washingtonian Magazine.

Quote:
Is Washington’s Local Economy in Trouble?
For decades, the booming capital has outpaced the rest of the country. Recent data paints a scarier picture.
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2018, 7:52 AM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is offline
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
DC could just establish an area for high-rises like Paris' La Defense or London's Canary Wharf. Arlington would be the best place for it. In fact, would it harm Washington if they just reannex Arlington?
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.

Last edited by nomarandlee; Jan 13, 2018 at 10:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2018, 11:03 AM
Pavlov's Dog Pavlov's Dog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee View Post
Interesting idea. I wonder how much square feet could be built on the lots right around JFK (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.

Last edited by Pavlov's Dog; Jan 10, 2018 at 11:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jan 11, 2018, 2:42 AM
goat314's Avatar
goat314 goat314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St. Louie
Posts: 487
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
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.
This quote almost reminded me of Hunger Games. The capital city prospers while the post-industrial hinterlands starves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jan 11, 2018, 2:41 PM
themaguffin themaguffin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,110
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.