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.
You may want to find out when those developing edge cities appeared. D.C.'s have been around for decades. They say Tyson's Corner was the first in the country. As I said, we started it. Sure, everyone is doing it now, but we were the first. We coined it and even gave it a name.
That has NOTHING to do with edge cities in DC being unique. What difference does it make when they developed or who coined the term, you're deflecting attention away from the actual question. WHAT MAKES EDGE CITIES IN DC UNIQUE?
Also I am really curious to what office demand in DC was like in the 1970's and 1980's, you keep avoiding that question. Didn't there used to be a lot more parking lots and empty lots back then in DC? I question how much this supposed demand for office space actually pushed growth out to the suburbs. You always talk about how DC has all this land available for infill but if there has been so much "demand" why wasn't it infilled back then?
What did you graduate in? I ask because people with PHD's in urban economics and urban planning don't agree with you. What do you do for a living? The mere fact that I am arguing with someone on city-data about a topic that has been studied and published by many is pretty amusing. These aren't even my words. Take that up with Harvard/Stanford/MIT etc. etc. etc. etc.
Accounting and Finance and like to think a good sense of reality
Also how many cities do you really know - it seems you have lived in DC and Atlanta any others
What exactly is unique about them? I'm honestly asking and considering how adamant you are about them being unique I think it would be a fairly easy question to answer.
Also I am really curious to what office demand in DC was like in the 1970's and 1980's, you keep avoiding that question. Didn't there used to be a lot more parking lots and empty lots back then in DC? I question how much this supposed demand for office space actually pushed growth out to the suburbs. You always talk about how DC has all this land available for infill but if there has been so much "demand" why wasn't it infilled back then?
Well for one, D.C. probably builds a subway if height restrictions are not enacted way back in the early 1900's because the density in the city would warrant it. Not a metro, a subway like Boston did. We can't even begin to talk about all this because you guys seem to not possess the ability to think big picture. Everything you are saying is based in the paradigm of how you see D.C. today. The city would not look or be anything like it is today.
Well for one, D.C. probably builds a subway if height restrictions are not enacted way back in the early 1900's because the density in the city would warrant it. Not a metro, a subway like Boston did. We can't even begin to talk about all this because you guys seem to not possess the ability to think big picture. Everything you are saying is based in the paradigm of how you see D.C. today. The city would not look or be anything like it is today.
And how many high rises did Boston have when they built their subway? Not sure why you try to infer that somehow height restrictions severely restrict density. There are A LOT of real world examples of that not being the case at all. Europe?
SF's densest census tracts (over 80-100K ppsqm) have few high rises.
That has NOTHING to do with edge cities in DC being unique. What difference does it make when they developed or who coined the term, you're deflecting attention away from the actual question. WHAT MAKES EDGE CITIES IN DC UNIQUE?
Also I am really curious to what office demand in DC was like in the 1970's and 1980's, you keep avoiding that question. Didn't there used to be a lot more parking lots and empty lots back then in DC? I question how much this supposed demand for office space actually pushed growth out to the suburbs. You always talk about how DC has all this land available for infill but if there has been so much "demand" why wasn't it infilled back then?
See my answer to that above. Parking is needed when there is a lack of mass transit. When a subway is present, which as I said would have most likely been built in D.C. because the density would have warranted it, you don't need parking lots. Again I say, because your mind doesn't seem to allow you to break the box you are seeing this in, you can't even think innovatively about how density changes things. There would be no metro, D.C. would have most likely had an urban subway 100 years ago in the city itself like Boston and Philly.
And how many high rises did Boston have when they built their subway? Not sure why you try to infer that somehow height restrictions severely restrict density. There are A LOT of real world examples of that not being the case at all. Europe?
SF's densest census tracts (over 80-100K ppsqm) have few high rises.
And here we go again, this is not about 50 story buildings. This is about 10-12 story buildings that would have greatly increased the density in the city. This is about redevelopment which would have happened like it did in every other city as towers replace older low rise buildings. Try to use your imagination for a second. It's kind of a requirement when trying to imagine these things. You can't use your logic because it's not really logical. You are trying to guess the unseen.
By the way, what are the street widths of those real world examples?
See my answer to that above. Parking is needed when there is a lack of mass transit. When a subway is present, which as I said would have most likely been built in D.C. because the density would have warranted it, you don't need parking lots. Again I say, because your mind doesn't seem to allow you to break the box you are seeing this in, you can't even think innovatively about how density changes things. There would be no metro, D.C. would have most likely had an urban subway 100 years ago in the city itself like Boston and Philly.
Not sure why you think DC would have been any denser back then than it was. And please try to think outside of this "high rises are needed for density" box you seem to be stuck in.
You may want to find out when those developing edge cities appeared. D.C.'s have been around for decades. They say Tyson's Corner was the first in the country. As I said, we started it. Sure, everyone is doing it now, but we were the first. We coined it and even gave it a name.
Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, Long Beach - all have been around for decades and are on the list for Edge Cities.
For the record I believe the first edge city is considered to be New Center in Detroit.
I too see nothing unique about DC's edge cities. They generally look like places I would never in a million years want to live (Alexandria excluded).
Well for one, D.C. probably builds a subway if height restrictions are not enacted way back in the early 1900's because the density in the city would warrant it. Not a metro, a subway like Boston did. We can't even begin to talk about all this because you guys seem to not possess the ability to think big picture. Everything you are saying is based in the paradigm of how you see D.C. today. The city would not look or be anything like it is today.
DC had greter density than today in 1940. It is lower density than when the Metro opened which does a decent job as a subway in the core (better than all but maybe 3 or 4 other cities). It built what was the best technology for the time as well and the ability to scale to the burbs better than a traditional subway.
I think we are actually thinking big picture- also mass skyscraper construction a relatively new paradigm and even at its inception the biggest draw of DC was just a fraction of the size it is today, facts just are not supporting your asertions
Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, Long Beach - all have been around for decades and are on the list for Edge Cities.
For the record I believe the first edge city is considered to be New Center in Detroit.
I too see nothing unique about DC's edge cities. They generally look like places I would never in a million years want to live (Alexandria excluded).
Since you think Alexandria is an edge city, it seems you do not know what an edge city is. Do the cities you listed meet the following criteria?
1. The area must have more than five million square feet of office space (about the space of a good-sized downtown)
2. The place must include over 600,000 square feet of retail space (the size of a large regional shopping mall)
3. The population must rise every morning and drop every afternoon (i.e., there are more jobs than homes)
4. The place is known as a single end destination (the place "has it all;" entertainment, shopping, recreation, etc.)
5. The area must not have been anything like a "city" 30 years ago (cow pastures would have been nice)
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.
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.
