Preservation League Guns for a Fight

The DC Preservation Leauge issued its 2007 list of Most Endangered Places in a press release. Here's a sampling:

• DCPL warns "the view from the west porch of the United States Capitol overlooking the “Grand Avenue” of the National Mall and beyond to the Potomac River and Arlington National Cemetery was once open to visitors. Today, extreme security measures cut off public access to this remarkable view . . . Centuries of careful urban planning that created a city symbolic of openness, freedom, and democracy have been overturned by spontaneous, ill planned measures."
  
  
  Is this a reference to the over zealous cops that put a few ropes on the Capitol, or a reference to the high-rises of Arlington? True the off-limit signs at the Capitol are off-putting, but the USA Today building and its ilk are worse, if you ask us DCPL. If the DCPL can wax about the lack of access, how about demanding that Arlington abide by the DC height limit?
  
• Three former DC public schools located between North Capitol and 3rd Sts.
  NW "represent an irreplaceable view of the developing architecture." Armstrong High School, Slater Elementary School and Langston Elementary School. Though plans are in the works all now "are completely empty and prey to squatters and thieves," DCPL said. "Attempts to contact the Board of Education . . . regarding these schools and their dilapidated condition went unanswered." Shame.


• The row houses of Columbia Heights, Eckington and Capitol Hill east are all under development pressure.


• Last year we wrote about the risk of turning Mt. Pleasant Street into a strip mall.

RAISE THE ROOF!!! Again!!!

Reiterating his argument that the height limit is bad for DC, UMD Prof.Roger Lewis in the the WaPo argued that with relaxed height limits:

"there would be places where taller, more iconic edifices could serve as landmarks. A bit more variation in building heights, and slightly more height for buildings framing key intersections, could enhance the look of many streetscapes. "

In effect, with downtown street widths rarely exceeding 90 feet to 110 feet, D.C. buildings can rise no more than 110 feet or 130 feet, except on Pennsylvania Avenue, where 160 feet is allowed.

Does the hight limit really matter when they are building 30 stories in Arlington? Brookings' Christopher Leinberger argued DC must grow up to grow.

Movin' On Up

DC continues to experience an upswing with property gaining in value as the city rebounds.

Case in point the recent purchase by Hines of 2100 M St NW for $152.5 million at $497.29/square foot. The acquisition of the Farragut North property was done out of their value-add office investment program, said Globest.com.


One way Hines might add value to the project would be to add an additional 100,000 sf to the building, according Hines Vice President John Harned.

Harned may be thinking he can add a floor or two, which seems to be a trend of late. Ideally, he could add another 20, rather than just two, but alas that would mean we live in Arlington and not the nation's capitol.

What Height Limit?

How does the DC height limit have any meaning if there are 30 story buildings Rosslyn? These buildings will be visible from the Mall, G-town, the Capitol steps.

Sounds like Arlington thinks the DC height limit is backed by a bunch of chumps. "It will become Rosslyn's main attraction," said Jim Pebley, an Arlington planning commissioner told the WaPo. "It will beat anything else in the capital, including the Washington monument. It will be where you take your folks when they come to visit."

RAISE THE ROOF!!!

"We have a moral imperative to increase density, to get us out of our cars," said Christopher Leinberger, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, said in the WaPo, making a global warming argument against the height-limit on commercial buildings, condos etc.

Developers, architects and planners grouse that the law imposes constraints that force builders to erect box-like buildings with low ceilings and it prevents the kind of population density necessary to draw higher-quality retail.

In 2003, DC commissioned a study that concluded that the city could generate an additional $10 billion in tax revenue over 20 years if it raised the height limit to 160 feet.

On the other hand, "I would state emphatically that we have the Height Act to thank for preserving the city's character," said Patti Gallagher, executive director of the National Capital Planning Commission.

True enough, but the limit also has created "downtowns" in Tysons and Bethesda, sucking economic activity away from the city and creating sprawl, sprawl and more sprawl.

BUILD UP, NOT OUT

Landlords in DC are adding floors to thier buildings, reports the WaPost.

In other cities with complex transportation systems, landlords add ten or 20 floors. Here three are added at 2020 K St. NW.

"With tenants in place the work had to be done off hours so not to disturb them, which added to the cost," said Mark Minich, executive vice president of Cushman & Wakefield, a commercial real estate firm. Nonetheless, "it paid off handsomely, he added.

The 130-ft height limit makes no sense in this era of global warming. DC has a Metro to move the people. So why not let landlords build up? The Roslyn skylines destroys the aesthetics of the mall more than any buidling up in NOMA would. Sure keep heights in historic areas low and set a reasonable limit elsewhere (25 stories?). But the headline should be twenty stories added, not three.

The Sky's The Limit! Not Here.

Standing on the mall, looking at the Rossyln skyline, we always found the Rosslyn skyline to be perplexing. Why there, not here? If low buildings make us special, how am I supposed to feel special when standing by the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument or the waterfront looking at the U.S.A. Today building?

First the facts as originally articulated here. Contrary to what some believe, the height limit is not set by the Washington Monument or the dome of the U.S. Capitol. A revised height law in 1910 did away with the fixed maximum. That legislation, still in effect, states that no new building may be more than 20 feet taller than the width of the street in front of it.

For example, the height limit for buildings fronting a 110-foot-wide stretch of Connecticut Avenue NW is 130 feet, while the limit for buildings facing 60-foot-wide residential streets in Cleveland Park would be 80 feet. At some parts of Pennsylvania Avenue, however, a height limit of 160 feet is permitted.

As suggested here, maybe the height limit should be done away with to encourage low-income housing. Does the height limit help D.C. or collar its economic growth? Certainly there are places where there is no place for tall buildings, i.e. Capitol Hill, Georgetown and Pennsylvania Ave.

But what about New York Ave. or upper Wisconsin, Connecticut or Georgia Aves? What about Anacostia? Wouldn't skyscrapers in Anacostia be equi-distant to the mall to Rosslyn?