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.
That sounds great. If you can, post the plan so I can see what they plan to do.
Plan is being developed - not yet available but the first attempt to specifically densify these areas around TOD - probably a year away at this point for the plan
Best I can tell it would look like 3 x 2.8 or ~8 sq miles still large
there is an area tool if I can find it based on the lines
Also there is probably another 1 square mile of park in the middle - in the end I dont see the footprint coming anywhere close to NYC. its far closer to Chicago or even a Boston/SF/Philly for that matter - impressive none-the-less
For am similar exercize for Philly (albeit some row homes intersperced - not all that many actually) it would look like close to 2x3 miles
Center City is 2X1 which equals 2 miles squared. That is 25% of D.C.'s 8 square mile Downtown (from your calculations). Also, Manhattan has many neighborhoods like Logan Circle and Dupont that I didn't include in D.C.'s footprint and Manhattan has Central Park too. If I drop all those area from Manhattan, the gap is not that wide on footprint.
Center City
(I included all large buildings and developable or re-developable plots of land)
I'm not quite sure I get the footprint argument, especially since Center City and Manhattan are significantly more vertical including signfiicantly more street level shops to support the populations as well as tons of underground pedway shops and inside building basements allover the place. Streets in Manhattan are wall to wall shops extending in every direction at ground level instead of plain government buildings. The Pentagon also has a large footprint but it's useless to a resident much like some of Downtown DC that closes up early and has few mixed in residential or commercial. It's far worse in that regard to areas around Wall Street or the Chicago Loop. If those areas are relatively dead, I'm not sure what words I'd use to describe DC.
Manhattan doesn't have neighborhoods like Dupont or Logan Circle, neighborhoods like that are far out in Queens or Brooklyn. It's actually the opposite, DC doesn't have any neighborhoods whatsoever built out like Manhattan.
Center City is 2X1 which equals 2 miles squared. That is 25% of D.C.'s Downtown from your calculations. Also, Manhattan has many neighborhoods like Logan Circle and Dupont that I didn't include in D.C.'s footprint and Manhattan has Central Park too. If I drop all those area from Manhattan, the gap is not that wide on footprint.
For Philly I posted map of the more urbanized development similar to DC it extends beyond CC proper. U City is more similar to DC styling actually and you excluded. You are adding the Navy Yard re developments yet exclude U City from Philly - U City alone has 80K workers
As you excluded all these areas, and you use a formal boundary for CC yet not for DC, am confused. Am not saying the {hilly footprint in this regard is larger just that you are significantly reducing the size for Philly yet adding outside the formal boundary for DC, not sure I follow
Last edited by kidphilly; 10-18-2013 at 12:17 PM..
Best I can tell it would look like 3 x 2.8 or ~8 sq miles still large
there is an area tool if I can find it based on the lines
Also there is probably another 1 square mile of park in the middle - in the end I dont see the footprint coming anywhere close to NYC. its far closer to Chicago or even a Boston/SF/Philly for that matter - impressive none-the-less
For am similar exercize for Philly (albeit some row homes intersperced - not all that many actually) it would look like close to 2x3 miles
If we include pockets of row houses along with major large building development, D.C. has closer to 25 square miles in its core. Manhattan has many area's as you know that are small buildings too mixed in with large buildings along major arterials. D.C. is no different. Most of the area in the below square/diamond has major development planned in many area's from the north to the south, and east to west. What do you think?
For Philly I posted map of the more urbanized development similar to DC it extends beyond CC proper. U City is more similar to DC styling actually and you excluded. You are adding the Navy Yard re developments yet exclude U City from Philly - U City alone has 80K workers
I didn't include Logan Circle, Dupont Circle, Shaw, or Atlas District either which like I said in my earlier post would have to be included if you include U City. To be fair, take a look at the core I just posted and make a similar one for Philly as long as there are major development area's around rowhomes.
Again, not sure your point. DC's core is full of government buildings lacking street level retail and will never get developed into anything resembling Manhattan. If it only gets bigger, it will just be more dead after 6 o'clock over a larger area.
I'm also not buying your "EAST" part of the core, that area goes way past Trinidad, Gallaudet and areas of relatively dead commercial zones.
I'm not quite sure I get the footprint argument, especially since Center City and Manhattan are significantly more vertical including signfiicantly more street level shops to support the populations as well as tons of underground pedway shops and inside building basements allover the place. Streets in Manhattan are wall to wall shops extending in every direction at ground level instead of plain government buildings. The Pentagon also has a large footprint but it's useless to a resident much like some of Downtown DC that closes up early and has few mixed in residential or commercial. It's far worse in that regard to areas around Wall Street or the Chicago Loop. If those areas are relatively dead, I'm not sure what words I'd use to describe DC.
Manhattan doesn't have neighborhoods like Dupont or Logan Circle, neighborhoods like that are far out in Queens or Brooklyn. It's actually the opposite, DC doesn't have any neighborhoods whatsoever built out like Manhattan.
You know many of those buildings you are talking about are getting redeveloped right? Which buildings are you referring too? They are falling left and right and getting redeveloped one by one with retail included. Which buildings are you referring too?
You know many of those buildings you are talking about are getting redeveloped right? Which buildings are you referring too? They are falling left and right and getting redeveloped one by one with retail included. Which buildings are you referring too?
The gigantic areas of office buildings. I would have to look specifically but the number of these is very high in DC.
Again, not sure your point. DC's core is full of government buildings lacking street level retail and will never get developed into anything resembling Manhattan. If it only gets bigger, it will just be more dead after 6 o'clock over a larger area.
I'm also not buying your "EAST" part of the core, that area goes way past Trinidad, Gallaudet and areas of relatively dead commercial zones.
??????Which buildings are you talking about? All of the SW Government complex is getting redeveloped with residential. The FBI building is getting redeveloped with residential. Which area are you talking about? Also, if you go back and read, I clearly stated D.C. will never have Manhattan vibrancy, I was saying it will be swallowed by large buildings and yes, they will have retail and tons of residential.
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.