NoMa and "Capitol Riverfront" Are FAKE Neighborhoods (apartment complex, organic)
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.
Im not sure how anyone could confuse the modernism of NoMa with the neotrad facadism of Clarendon - heck, the new developments in Rosslyn aren't quite like the Clarendon standard. And, OTOH, there are new buildings up north of downtown DC that are no less bland than either of those. If all "bland" means is that the corridor north of downtown has some actual pre WW2 apt buildings and other dense development, while the Reston, Arlington, NoMa, and CapRiv do not, thats not disputable (except for a few residual older buildings with varying amounts of charm in North Arlington, and the historic parts of the Yards), but Im not sure it says as much as one might think it says.
NoMa:
Clarendon:
<shrug>
I don't think it's inherently bad or good. Just saying that I don't blame people for noting a similar style.
That's similar to how true "Columbia Heightians" don't consider the part of their neighborhood on top of the Metro to be part of their neighborhood. They like to think of their hood more as 11th Street than Bed, Bath, and Beyond.
In the end, the far more pervasive use of the Metro stop than the Naval facility, which is several blocks from the Navy Yard Metro, will win out as it always does and the area on top of and adjacent to the Navy Yard metro stop will adopt that name, probably just with the "the" in front of it.
Maybe. AFAICT some folks from the northern part of the neighborhood who need to take the orange/blue lines simply bypass the Navy Yard stop - with the wait for the green line train, and the hassle of the L'enfant transfer - and walk or CaBi to the Capital South metro stop. That places a bit of a limit on the metro stations impact on neighborhood identity, compared to areas more built around the metro stop. besides, "Navy Yard-Ballpark" though perhaps named that way to guide clueless suburban and out of town baseball fans, can also be read as acknowledging that one end of the area served isn't the Navy Yard.
I'd say those two buildings are quite different, and do illustrate the difference between Clarendon's attempt to recreate pre-WW2 DC apt buildings and NoMa's move away from that model. That the NoMa building is still not particularly adventurous does not alter that.
edit cause you added a third building. That second NoMa building is not like the first. at least from that angle. though it still makes more of an allusion to modernism than the Clarendon building does.
Maybe. AFAICT some folks from the northern part of the neighborhood who need to take the orange/blue lines simply bypass the Navy Yard stop - with the wait for the green line train, and the hassle of the L'enfant transfer - and walk or CaBi to the Capital South metro stop. That places a bit of a limit on the metro stations impact on neighborhood identity, compared to areas more built around the metro stop. besides, "Navy Yard-Ballpark" though perhaps named that way to guide clueless suburban and out of town baseball fans, can also be read as acknowledging that one end of the area served isn't the Navy Yard.
And some people in Shaw walk to U Street Metro and some people in Adams Morgan walk to Dupont Metro or U Street Metro. I'm not sure that's a valid argument.
The Ballpark addition is definitely there to guide baseball fans, not denote a separate area.
Im not sure how anyone could confuse the modernism of NoMa with the neotrad facadism of Clarendon - heck, the new developments in Rosslyn aren't quite like the Clarendon standard. And, OTOH, there are new buildings up north of downtown DC that are no less bland than either of those. If all "bland" means is that the corridor north of downtown has some actual pre WW2 apt buildings and other dense development, while the Reston, Arlington, NoMa, and CapRiv do not, thats not disputable (except for a few residual older buildings with varying amounts of charm in North Arlington, and the historic parts of the Yards), but Im not sure it says as much as one might think it says.
I think it's more that you have buildings that are virtual carbon copies of other buildings you can find all over the Metro area. And the fact that there's no older housing stock in the immediate vicinity to diversify the aesthetics of the neighborhood. True, similar buildings are being constructed in Shaw and the U Street Area, but the legacy housing stock of those neighborhoods helps give them a very different texture.
I'd say those two buildings are quite different, and do illustrate the difference between Clarendon's attempt to recreate pre-WW2 DC apt buildings and NoMa's move away from that model. That the NoMa building is still not particularly adventurous does not alter that.
Well, Clarendon and similar places like Ballston have many buildings that aren't trying to be neo-prewar. They're just that generic modern condo / office design we see everywhere now. Though I do appreciate some of the adventureness in NoMa's designs.
Well, Clarendon and similar places like Ballston have many buildings that aren't trying to be neo-prewar. They're just that generic modern condo / office design we see everywhere now. Though I do appreciate some of the adventureness in NoMa's designs.
ballston sure, and Rosslyn. Not too many in Clarendon, that I can recall.
I think it's more that you have buildings that are virtual carbon copies of other buildings you can find all over the Metro area. And the fact that there's no older housing stock in the immediate vicinity to diversify the aesthetics of the neighborhood. True, similar buildings are being constructed in Shaw and the U Street Area, but the legacy housing stock of those neighborhoods helps give them a very different texture.
well yeah, new buildings, other than the most adventurous post modernist stuff strikes many people as "bland", while actual older buildings offer something different. So to that extent all areas with only new buildings (leaving aside the SFHs in the RB corridor, which are not visible from the main drag, and of course the old industrial buildings at the Yards, like the Foundry, - all of which are south of M street) are going to have something in common. I tend to think of "oh its bland" as suggesting something more than that, but that could just be me.
I guess I've just never thought of Clarendon as trying for a retro style. Maybe I'm missing it.
the first of those pics is DEFINITELY trying to be retro - all euro town plaza. The second is one of the few modernist buildings around there.
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.
