Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Additionally, putting DC in the category of NYC in terms of built environment, urban canyons is laughable. I can't think of any real urban canyons in DC (what I would call Canyons at least), They are in no way comparable.
Do you know what an urban canyon is? You clearly don't based on this post. Urban canyons have to do with the street level view of an area. Buildings must touch without gaps going on and on for a long enough time that it creates a tunnel. It's clear you don't know what an urban canyon is. NYC and DC have some of the best urban canyons in the nation because of the block pattern and how the buildings touch for miles.
Do you know what an urban canyon is? You clearly don't based on this post. Urban canyons have to do with the street level view of an area. Buildings must touch without gaps going on and on for a long enough time that it creates a tunnel. It's clear you don't know what an urban canyon is. NYC and DC have some of the best urban canyons in the nation because of the block pattern and how the buildings touch for miles.
Yes, I am aware of what an urban canyon is, I don't get the effect in DC.
DC should not be in the same breathe as NYC when the discussion is urban canyons.
They are definitely canyons. Riding down K Street from Foggy Bottom is a pretty impressive display of density from a structural standpoint. The numbered blocks can be loooooong in Downtown DC (much like the distance between Avenues in Manhattan) and DC maintains a completely built up form for 25 consecutive blocks. Going North to South, it maintains a consistent built density of about 16 or 17 blocks. In my book, those qualify as urban canyons.
They are definitely canyons. Riding down K Street from Foggy Bottom is a pretty impressive display of density from a structural standpoint. The numbered blocks can be loooooong in Downtown DC (much like the distance between Avenues in Manhattan) and DC maintains a completely built up form for 25 consecutive blocks. Going North to South, it maintains a consistent built density of about 16 or 17 blocks. In my book, those qualify as urban canyons.
That is fine, i don't feel the same way. There is no right or wrong answer.
To be fair DC does have a pretty extensive and cohesive string of buildings. Had there not been a height limit it would have looked a lot different - less footprint etc.
To be fair DC does have a pretty extensive and cohesive string of buildings. Had there not been a height limit it would have looked a lot different - less footprint etc.
Perhaps the same footprint. Maybe the CIA, NSA and DHS would have been downtown instead of in Langley, Fort Meade and Southeast, respectively.
To be fair DC does have a pretty extensive and cohesive string of buildings. Had there not been a height limit it would have looked a lot different - less footprint etc.
Absolutely, but to compare these "canyons" to those in NYC or Chicago is just laughable to me. I do not get nearly the same feeling in DC as I do in the others.
Perhaps the same footprint. Maybe the CIA, NSA and DHS would have been downtown instead of in Langley, Fort Meade and Southeast, respectively.
I would think there are some logistical reasons and security reasons for their locations actually
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.