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.
i used to be against them in DC, but now i'm not so sure. I understand the argument against them in a city like Paris, because it has a very unique and beautiful streetscape, but DC doesn't really have that tbh. DC just has the same ugly office buildings and glass cubes that you can find in any city (albeit shorter)
i would prefer for the height limit to be raised if it can increase density &housing supply and decrease sprawl, but i wouldn't like enormously tall skyscrapers
Last edited by r_u_a_wizard; 05-13-2016 at 04:58 PM..
DC is good how it is, after 9/11 putting skyscrapers in the same city that houses the President of our United States is just inviting trouble, as if what DC represents doesnt invite enough of it already.
The DMV has tons of history, we need to not only learn from that history but also respect and preserve it, if you want skyscrapers head 95 north and go look at Manhattans skyline.
DC is good how it is, after 9/11 putting skyscrapers in the same city that houses the President of our United States is just inviting trouble, as if what DC represents doesnt invite enough of it already.
The DMV has tons of history, we need to not only learn from that history but also respect and preserve it, if you want skyscrapers head 95 north and go look at Manhattans skyline.
Keeping the height limit and "respecting history" has no connection at all. I think this is a weak argument.
Regarding terrorism... I don't think it makes sense for the U.S. to plan it's cities based on fear of terrorists. What is the probability of another 9/11? Should we level NYC and all live underground? Should we stop running marathons because of Boston? There is a point where "fear" becomes counter productive. Especially when you do the math of probability.
Keeping the height limit and "respecting history" has no connection at all. I think this is a weak argument.
Regarding terrorism... I don't think it makes sense for the U.S. to plan it's cities based on fear of terrorists. What is the probability of another 9/11? Should we level NYC and all live underground? Should we stop running marathons because of Boston? There is a point where "fear" becomes counter productive. Especially when you do the math of probability.
To our enemies they are strategic targets, not cities. You cant protect something sticking 500 feet up in the air.
DC is a nice enough city as is, the museums and cherry blossoms make up for the lack skyscrapers, if you want New York then go live there.
I have been wondering this. Any other descent size or big size city has them, why cant we! I feel like the monument is important, but people can go to Georgetown to see it. I do not think they need to widen buildings in DC just because they can't be tall enough. Plus, DC would be so lovely if it has sky scrapers
I disagree. Having skycrapers would take away from the character of the city. Plus, on a sunny day it's actually sunny in this city as you don't have skyscrapers blocking all the great sunlight.
Keep skyscrapers out of DC. I think that's what they're trying to do with Rosslyn.
Though, now, the skyline looking towards the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial from the Capitol building already looks strange now with the addition of the random skyscrapers popping up across the river, so I think building them in DC proper, it would be weird and take away from the character.
I have yet to hear ONE legitimate reason why people in D.C. don't want the city to have skyscrapers besides aesthetics.
I personally feel that the height limit in the future (25 maybe 50 years down the road) will handicap DC's economy and affordability (if it hasn't already). If NYC or Chicago had a height limit similar to DC's there is no way that those cities economies would be as robust as they are today because of the limited supply of office space and housing that the height restriction would mandate.
If someone can give me a legitimate reason how the height restriction allows the city to function better, is better for residents, and the city's economy I would love to hear it but with the small land area of the District I can only see the height restriction obstructing the growth of the city in the future.
I see DC continuing to gentrify by continuing to improve neighborhoods by building expensive housing, restaurants, retail etc. with the same height limits that are in place now. I don't think we'll see skyscrapers in DC until every square inch of this city is gentrified. With such rapid gentrification we could definitely see DC loosening up its height limits within the next 25 to 50 years unless Congress wants to make the city a high end city overall which I think is a great idea since its our nation's capital. It all comes down to supply and demand. Some people don't agree that this city should only be accessible to people making big bucks. As someone in a high income bracket with no debt I don't mind paying a premium to live in a city that has so much to offer. If someone can't afford to live in a place that is rapidly becoming more expensive I don't feel bad for them. Either go back to school and/or work harder to make more money or move out.
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.
