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.
Once again, sources? I'd like to see the info stating that 1000 plus residents have been added.
City Center DC added 671 units within the complex in 2014. This is just one development project, and it is near 100% leased, bought out. At 1.6 residents per unit, that is around 1,000 residents.
Last edited by revitalizer; 01-06-2015 at 09:49 PM..
This isnt a fair comparison at all because obviously DC downtown is sprawling, While Baltimores isn't.
It is a fair comparison. It shows that there is more square footage built into a similar size area.
The reason why Baltimore's downtown is not bigger is that there is no demand for it to be. The demand for more office space in DC is there which is why it is bigger by land area and by square footage. But, the office space in downtown DC is really packed in. Also, New York City's central business district is larger than DC's central business district by land area because it, too, has more demand for higher amounts of office space. Same goes for Chicago
A city can be dense without having skyscrapers. DC proves this time and time again. A lot of mid-sized American cities build high-rises and skyscrapers, but they also have parking garages at their base or parking garages taking up enormous land next to those high rises which limit density. DC's parking at downtown DC buildings is underground, thereby using all the available above ground space for office, retail, hotel, and residential use. Also, DC builds out to the lot line for most of its buildings in the central core. All that is what gives a high floor area ratio. DC has to be more efficient at this, and builders in DC use all this to their advantage to build much more efficiently and denser than comparable mid-sized cities.
DC is denser than Baltimore.
Baltimore's CBD has about 20 million square feet of office space with about another 20 million in the rest of Baltimore City.
DC's CBD has about 40 million square feet of office space with about 96 million in the rest of DC proper.
This is in about the same size area (i.e. this does not include additional office submarkets in DC like the East End, etc that comprise the total 2.30 square miles of downtown DC land area).
Here are some Central Business Districts in the US by Land Area:
New York City: 7.82 Square Miles
Chicago: 3.36 Square Miles
Washington DC: 2.30 Square Miles
Atlanta: 2.17 Square Miles
Philadelphia: 1.71 Square Miles
Boston: 1.23 Square Miles
Baltimore: 1.09 Square Miles
It is a fair comparison. It shows that there is more square footage built into a similar size area.
The reason why Baltimore's downtown is not bigger is that there is no demand for it to be. The demand for more office space in DC is there which is why it is bigger by land area and by square footage. But, the office space in downtown DC is really packed in. Also, New York City's central business district is larger than DC's central business district by land area because it, too, has more demand for higher amounts of office space. Same goes for Chicago
A city can be dense without having skyscrapers. DC proves this time and time again. A lot of mid-sized American cities build high-rises and skyscrapers, but they also have parking garages at their base or parking garages taking up enormous land next to those high rises which limit density. DC's parking at downtown DC buildings is underground, thereby using all the available above ground space for office, retail, hotel, and residential use. Also, DC builds out to the lot line for most of its buildings in the central core. All that is what gives a high floor area ratio. DC has to be more efficient at this, and builders in DC use all this to their advantage to build much more efficiently and denser than comparable mid-sized cities.
DC is denser than Baltimore.
Baltimore's CBD has about 20 million square feet of office space with about another 20 million in the rest of Baltimore City.
DC's CBD has about 40 million square feet of office space with about 96 million in the rest of DC proper.
This is in about the same size area (i.e. this does not include additional office submarkets in DC like the East End, etc that comprise the total 2.30 square miles of downtown DC land area).
Here are some Central Business Districts in the US by Land Area:
New York City: 7.82 Square Miles
Chicago: 3.36 Square Miles
Washington DC: 2.30 Square Miles
Atlanta: 2.17 Square Miles
Philadelphia: 1.71 Square Miles
Boston: 1.23 Square Miles
Baltimore: 1.09 Square Miles
The reason why Baltimore's downtown is not bigger is...
because Baltimore build vertical in taller buildings and not outward as there is no height restriction. As a result you can fit more in a small area. Central Downtown Baltimore is barely 4% of the city’s land mass but contains nearly 30% of all Baltimore jobs. A 400 foot building in Baltimore on one lot would make for 4 100 ft. low rise office buildings in DC on 4 lots contributing to the density and square mileage of your downtown. The demand are in both cities one just becomes more timely, costly, and difficult to build taller when you could accomplish more building low like in DC. Which is somewhat an unfair comparison with cities following the American blueprint of building tall and having density in central business districts then low and spread out. Although, building low have its advantages having height helps to encourage more supply in the future for demand and development if needed. You get the most out of the scarcity of land available. Today and in the foreseeable future DC will be even denser but more compact with more traffic and more people. However, due to height restrictions I am afraid one day and even now the city might run out of room and start to expand in more parts of that city into historic neighborhoods outside of downtown or the city itself. That could be a good or bad thing but I see Tysons or some other suburb of Maryland or Virginia becoming the next Capitale du Monde if this keeps up which could take away from the urban experience. Building low reminds me of a modernized versions of the row home it can give you canyons of density but it takes up a lot of space.
A lot of mid-sized American cities build high-rises and skyscrapers, but they also have parking garages at their base or parking garages taking up enormous land next to those high rises which limit density.
Yes this is true as in modern times American cities are in the age of the automobile. With its height restriction DC imitates the model of a true urban grid US cities before there was such a dependence on cars where buildings lined the streets and when there were no garages downtown. This is because it would abandon the height restrictions if the garage above ground acts as a base for the actually building on top of it. However, if we are talking about population density as being a building occupied with people then that would limit density. If we are just talking about an above ground garage taking up space downtown that would definitely contribute to density occupied or not. Many vacant buildings can make density. Now a garage above ground is not necessarily a bad thing. If demand needed a garage to be repurposed into apartments it could be done. This is already being done in downtown Baltimore and in the Mount Vernon neighborhood to add to the density and vibrancy as growth continues. When the time come for an alternative to DC's apartment demand could those cave-like underground parking garages get converted? And who knows what might happen if there was still a demand for office space at the same time and it becomes a little pricier to live there. Those jobs and people just might be coming to Baltimore. Don't get me wrong people depend on cars and there are garages in downtown DC they are just not seen. Even though what's being done in DC can accomplish both population and building density on street level only the history behind the buildings can make for a true urban experience. That's just to say which downtown has more character? Can you look down a city street and see a plethora of historic office buildings? Is it a mixture of buildings, is it lively or can it be lively? Does it attract people or visitors? Is it just a 9-5 district? Does it offer any amenities? And the list goes on.
Lastly,
There are currently almost 30 million square feet of office space taken from the Business of Downtown report.
Last edited by Northernest Southernest C; 01-07-2015 at 11:04 AM..
The reason why Baltimore's downtown is not bigger is...
because Baltimore build vertical in taller buildings and not outward as there is no height restriction. As a result you can fit more in a small area. Central Downtown Baltimore is barely 4% of the city’s land mass but contains nearly 30% of all Baltimore jobs. A 400 foot building in Baltimore on one lot would make for 4 100 ft. low rise office buildings in DC on 4 lots contributing to the density and square mileage of your downtown. The demand are in both cities one just becomes more timely, costly, and difficult to build taller when you could accomplish more building low like in DC. Which is somewhat an unfair comparison with cities following the American blueprint of building tall and having density in central business districts then low and spread out. Although, building low have its advantages having height helps to encourage more supply in the future for demand and development if needed. You get the most out of the scarcity of land available. Today and in the foreseeable future DC will be even denser but more compact with more traffic and more people. However, due to height restrictions I am afraid one day and even now the city might run out of room and start to expand in more parts of that city into historic neighborhoods outside of downtown or the city itself. That could be a good or bad thing but I see Tysons or some other suburb of Maryland or Virginia becoming the next Capitale du Monde if this keeps up which could take away from the urban experience. Building low reminds me of a modernized versions of the row home it can give you canyons of density but it takes up a lot of space.
A lot of mid-sized American cities build high-rises and skyscrapers, but they also have parking garages at their base or parking garages taking up enormous land next to those high rises which limit density.
Yes this is true as in modern times American cities are in the age of the automobile. With its height restriction DC imitates the model of a true urban grid US cities before there was such a dependence on cars where buildings lined the streets and when there were no garages downtown. This is because it would abandon the height restrictions if the garage above ground acts as a base for the actually building on top of it. However, if we are talking about population density as being a building occupied with people then that would limit density. If we are just talking about an above ground garage taking up space downtown that would definitely contribute to density occupied or not. Many vacant buildings can make density. Now a garage above ground is not necessarily a bad thing. If demand needed a garage to be repurposed into apartments it could be done. This is already being done in downtown Baltimore and in the Mount Vernon neighborhood to add to the density and vibrancy as growth continues. When the time come for an alternative to DC's apartment demand could those cave-like underground parking garages get converted? And who knows what might happen if there was still a demand for office space at the same time and it becomes a little pricier to live there. Those jobs and people just might be coming to Baltimore. Don't get me wrong people depend on cars and there are garages in downtown DC they are just not seen. Even though what's being done in DC can accomplish both population and building density on street level only the history behind the buildings can make for a true urban experience. That's just to say which downtown has more character? Can you look down a city street and see a plethora of historic office buildings? Is it a mixture of buildings, is it lively or can it be lively? Does it attract people or visitors? Is it just a 9-5 district? Does it offer any amenities? And the list goes on.
Lastly,
There are currently almost 30 million square feet of office space taken from the Business of Downtown report.
You have some good points. Thanks.
The bigger downtown I was referring to in that instance was available square footage, which DC has more of. Downtown DC BID is 2% of the land area and provides 38% of the private and government office space in the city. Add in the CBD, and that's about 4% of land area and more than 50% of private and government office space of the entire city. In DC's 4% of land area, DC is providing way more office jobs than in Baltimore's 4% of land area. So, 4% land area for Baltimore would be 3.2 square miles. Shouldn't Baltimore's CBD land area be lower? DC's 4% of land area for its downtown area is 2.4 square miles.
DC still has a lot more office space in its central area. With the East End and CBD combined, it is 80 million square feet of private office space right in there.
I understand potential density associated with taller building heights, but I am mostly referring to the actual density observed, which DC is delivering on more so than most mid-sized cities in the US.
The office square footage was taken from the Transwestern reports that I cited for both cities to keep things even. If you look at 5 different reports, they'll have 5 different sets of numbers. Yes, I see that Baltimore's CBD is at 29 million square feet. thanks!
DC just supports a higher base of jobs than cities of comparable population size, which in turn creates the need for a bigger downtown. And, DC's 12-story (130 foot) office buildings and 14-story residential buildings are technically high-rises (115 feet+) by the most acceptable definition of the term worldwide. In DC's C-5 zoned land in a part of downtown, it is 160 feet. They aren't low rises.
Thanks again for your input. My goal is really just to bring some numbers into the discussion to see if it jives with what one feels or assumes or reality as it relates to how we perceive density, urbanity, etc.
Last edited by revitalizer; 01-07-2015 at 01:06 PM..
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.
