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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
I don't know if that's all that reasonable for a metric. You can have 100 million square feet of office space in sprawling cities without urban canyons at all or have a downtown declared to be far larger than just two square miles. You can also make urban canyons with buildings that are used for more than just office space. What you're saying is pretty tangential to the idea of urban canyons, but does seem like a topic about which cities have the most office space though I'm sure that already exists.
Can someone dig out the most class A office space thread maybe with updates?
As of the latest thread ran on this, only 2-3 years back. DC had more class A office space metro wide than some major metropolises had total office space. I do remember that much.
On one hand DC likely ranks as people are saying. On the other hand, some of the variances between cities' office stats are different methods or standards between local brokerage offices.
On one hand DC likely ranks as people are saying. On the other hand, some of the variances between cities' office stats are different methods or standards between local brokerage offices.
DC proper has roughly the same office space as Chicago
Precisely. Since everybody is a making up their own arbitrary definitions on the spot since the thread started there's no consensus here. My definitions have already been given, but I'll just make it that much more simple.
If you are standing on the street in between a block full of buildings and the buildings are high enough to enclose you in so that shadows of the buildings cover the whole street and block sunlight. Then you are standing inside of an urban canyon IMO.
Also one small tidbit, the Google Earth camera on top of the car is already about 15 feet in the air, so any "street level" pictures from Google maps are not actual street level, as none of us are 15 feet tall. Believe it or not that 9/10 foot difference matters in perception when walking around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulll
I agree! I'll use the analogy of how one would feel in a natural canyon somewhere out west.
It may not feel as claustrophobic and asymmetrical as New York City (when I was there it's really hard to not just stare up the whole time lol) or even Boston. Washington DC is a more wide and symmetrical canyon set up. It may not feel like a canyon to some, fair enough (to me it still did, just a different feeling, more of a unified, spacious one) but it's definitely still considered a canyon.
Like I said, there are uniquely narrow, tall and really asymmetrical canyons, and more spaciously wide, not as tall, but symmetrical canyons and everything in between.
If posters looked at my comparisons to natural canyons you can't deny that the wide one isn't a canyon - just a DIFFERENT type of canyon. Just because it's not as narrow or having that claustrophobic effect doesn't make it less of a canyon by definition.
I agree with both of you, and would add the importance of length and continuity of the "canyon." I think 10 continuous blocks of 14 story buildings with no breaks is far more of a "canyon" than 3 blocks of 50 story buildings, with gaps between them.
Another interesting point to consider, a canyon is created relatively uniformly (river cutting through rock) so even the undisputed ruler of US urban canyons (NYC) where you might have lots of 20-40 story buildings with some huge exceptions, say 80-100+ story buildings randomly peppered around, creates a very different canyon effect than DC's pretty uniform canyons (there isn't a Pike's Peak next to the Grand Canyon). Not saying one is better than the other, just that they are two fairly different experiences, both of which I personally enjoy greatly.
And as far as having narrower streets, I love the wide blvd/ave feel, particularly sitting on a street side outdoor patio of a cafe and taking the whole scene in, really gives that unique European vibe. I'll admit I grew up absolutely loving the traditional American skyline cities and ended up in DC for work and hated the architecture and found irony in me ending up in the one American city with a European skyline, but have grown to enjoy the uniqueness (in the US) of it.
Also, just for fun if you're willing to really think outside the box, there's a unique canyon-esque vibe to standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial looking down the mall, particularly at night, that in my opinion rivals the most epic high-rise views of Manhattan. It was such a moment that started me warming-up to enjoying the architecture/streetscape/"skyline" of DC and not feeling I was so missing out by not living in NYC (i.e. a feeling of we've got some pretty incredible views to enjoy, and enjoying that we're not just trying to be a smaller version of something better, we're doing our own thing--back to the point of having wider blvd/ave and the resulting unique feel).
Most european cities don't really have that many wide streets they might have a grand boulevard or two but the majority of their streets are much narrower. Even in Paris many of the widest streets aside from the Champs-Elysees which is by far the widest street in the city are about 4 lanes wide and most are less than that. For comparison M St. is about as wide as Boulevard St. Germain on of the wider streets in Paris, but in DC M st. pretty average in width. That isn't bad, but I don't think DC really is that European looking because when I think of a typical European city street I think of something that looks more like downtown Boston or the North End of Boston. Narrow curving streets with 1-2 driving lanes and narrow sidewalks or shared/pedestrianized streets.
I think DC's streetscapes can be really nice and very enjoyable, but they don't feel particularly European to me. They seem more like an idealized imagining of what Paris would be like if it had been designed from a blank slate in the 1800s.
I obviously can't tell you whether you felt it was particularly European or not, that's your own experience, but what you describe above as differences between DC and Paris is basically the difference in Paris pre- and post-Haussmann reconstruction of Paris. What you describe DC is like and Paris is not like, is in effect a large part of what Napolean III and Huassmann were trying to create, which are the experiences I've had sitting in cafes in DC and Paris in recent years.
Could you imagine what DC would look like if it didn't have Height limits?
Probably like a narrow maybe 3 block wide strip of highrises that quickly turns into single family homes, Dollar Stores and Boost Mobile phone stores, with a bunch of large surface parking lots that stretches along an interstate that at certain vantage points looks like a large dense core, but its really just an optical illusion of density. I mean. Quite a few 4-6Million Metro areas are like that. Although, who doesn't love a 900Ft. tall Bank Tower and fun lobby that has - if you're lucky - a Potbelly. Fun, fun.
The height limit is great. The best parts of San Francisco, IMO, aren't where the high rises are. Why would anyone want to change it? Although, I will say San Francisco does have a nice high rise district pedestrian wise. NYC and SFO are the only cities in the US where the area with high rises are pedestrian friendly and not boring sterile lobbies with a Ruth Chris Steak House and Starbucks and if lucky, a CVS. (I haven't been to Chicago - I assume it too has a pedestrian friendly highrise area)
Anyway, I would consider DC to have one of the better wall/canyon of high rises. But, I mean. I consider Paris, Madrid, Lisbon, etc. to have great skylines. So. It depends on what your definition of a high rise and mid rise is.
If you're talking 500Ft.+,
I'd have to say NYC - Chicago - SFO - Philly - Miami. If DC was included, I would probably replace it with Miami.
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.
