D.C. without a building-height limit
The New York Times recently had a pretty good article about the height limit debate in DC. It's worth a read.
In general, I think the height restriction is a pretty terrible policy. Unlike some who share this sentiment, I'm not convinced that overturning it will suddenly fix all of the problems it's created. Similarly, the idea that reversal of the height limit will radically change D.C.'s skyline overnight seems overblown as well.
Could a few extra stories be added to the top of downtown buildings? Probably. Would skyscrapers pop up where modest buildings currently exist? Not in the short-term. That sort of transformation would take years or decades to happen.
[Continue reading Rob Pitingolo's post here at Extraordinary Observations.]
Rob Pitingolo blogs at Extraordinary Observations. The Local Blog Network is a group of bloggers from around the D.C. region who have agreed to make regular contributions to All Opinions Are Local.
By
Rob Pitingolo
| November 9, 2010; 5:08 PM ET
Categories:
Arlington, D.C., economy
Save & Share:
Previous: Rethinking early voting
Next: Bias in The Post's 'Team Thomas' editorial
Posted by: Greent | November 10, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.
The height restrictions are fine. There is no issue with the height of buildings.
You want to make some more buildings: SE is in need of development. NE is in need of more development. SW is in need of more development.
"Would skyscrapers pop up where modest buildings currently exist? Not in the short-term. "
What?!?! Of course they would. The minute the restrictions are lifted, every new development would increase their building.
And what about the long term?