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'm going to say that no DC does not need skyscrapers. Not having skyscrapers is such a unique factor that I would hate to see the District lose. Also DC at one time had like 800,000 people so the city has more room for sure. The problem is that the only way to fit an extra 200,000 people in the city limits would be to gentrify the rest of the city. There are plenty of very affordable parts of the District but the problem is they're affordable for a reason.
There are already skyscrapers in Rosslyn and Crystal City which are kinda dead at night compared to the skyscraper-less District. So I don't know. I don't think the lack of skyscrapers in the District is the reason for the suburban sprawal in this area though. Going back to the OP when most people think DC it isn't Rosslyn. A city is often defined by its skyline but we're fortunate to live in an area that is known for everything but.
As pointed out there are plenty of cities with skyscrapers but have overall low density i.e most of them outside the east coast. The District is also pretty darn dense as someone pointed out 9600 people per square mile is pretty impressive and our close-in suburbs are on their way to rivaling that number particularly Alexandria with all it's high rises.
So while I'm all for denser infill development giving the District skyscrapers would be well...a disgrace. Robbing the city of its unique feature just so a handful of people can have an office on the 40th floor just isn't worth it. Look at the dense cities of Europe hi rises and skyscrapers are in the suburbs not in the city center.
So while I understand the argument that supply and demand are what causes the DC area to have one of the highest cost of living. This high cost of living is part of the catalyst horrible traffic but roads not being upgraded fast enough to keep up with population growth is part of it too. As I mentioned there was once a lot more people in the District but so many of the neighborhoods have gotten so bad people don't want to live there. Unfortunately gentrification would be the only way to increase population in the city center. Of course with increased gentrification comes increased prices unfortunately there is no simple answer that would make everyone happy.
So in conclusion more infill development would be a better answer than building skyscrapers.
Have to dispute the "thousands and thousands" of people want to live in the District. I live in the District and I know many people who do and would like to leave it as the govt remains dysfunctional.
I live in Reston and know scores of people who only live here because they can't afford anything closer (including myself). We don't have Metrorail, the bus service is limited, traffic is horrendous (as evidenced by my nearly hour-long 7-mile commute home from Tyson's Corner today), and there are far too many chain businesses. The people here are a drawback as well---opposing new sidewalks, streetlights, road diets, bike lanes, etc. for no damn good reason other than trying to say Reston is progressive for not having them!
I'm moving out of Reston in 2010. Several colleagues and I are looking to rent a 4-BR home nearer to the District. Why would anyone want to live in such a car-centric environment?
I would feel much more comfortable being an urban pioneer and investing in restoring a blighted home in a place like Anacostia or Trinidad if random violent crime wasn't so prevalent in the District. I can handle someone breaking into my car, urinating on my front stoop, panhandlers, etc. I can handle graffiti. I can handle drug-dealing scum gunning each other down in alleys. I can handle frat boys throwing up in the street and screaming "REDSKINS!!" However, I've noticed since I've moved here that there is a concerning level of violent crime committed against innocent bystanders who are just going about their daily lives. Why is that?
That Pepco worker was shot in the head as he worked simply because he looked at some 'hood trash the wrong way as they passed him and thought it was a "challenge?" That Tennessee senator's daughter was injured in a carjacking right near Verizon Center when she was being asked for directions? A woman who owned a small liquor store in the District was shot to death after she quickly COMPLIED with a robber's demands and turned over her cash? A 9-year-old boy was shot dead through his own apartment's front door (in a trendy neighborhood!?) You're not going to get someone like me to set foot in Trinidad or Anacostia until all of that "element" is pushed out into Prince George's County, as has been occurring gradually over the years. Mug me? Sure. Not a problem. That's part of living in ANY city, and I wouldn't hold that against the city. Mug me and then shoot me in the face because you like to watch someone bleed? That's just sick, but that's what I've been hearing about lately in the District. There's a different breed of criminal element there as of late, and even though violent crime may be WAY down in 2009, as long as there are a considerable number of these RANDOM violent crimes you're not going to see people like me rushing to gentrify these parts of DC. That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
There's a different breed of criminal element there as of late, and even though violent crime may be WAY down in 2009, as long as there are a considerable number of these RANDOM violent crimes you're not going to see people like me rushing to gentrify these parts of DC. That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
Without necessarily commenting on the issue of whether violent crime in DC is random, or at least any more random than in other cities, you're falling victim to the "NW is all wealthy and expensive and safe and the other quadrants are all scary and poor" trap that a lot of people here fall into.
Petworth, Brightwood and Takoma are all working class to middle class neighborhoods that are not terribly crime-ridden or expensive, and they are in NW. NW also has neighborhoods with a lot of violent crime, such as Columbia Heights and parts of Shaw.
On the other hand, Capitol Hill is in SE and NE (mainly SE), and up and came one to two decades ago, for the most part. Otherwise, with the exception of H St NE, I wouldn't call many neighborhoods in those quadrants "up and coming".
And comparing Manhattan crime to DC's is not a valid comparison. If we assume that every type of neighborhood found in DC is also found in New York City, but tenfold (NYC has at least 10x the population of DC), then Manhattan is basically downtown/Penn Quarter/Logan/Dupont/Shaw/U St x 10. Most of DC's high crime neighborhoods have their equivalents in the Bronx and Brooklyn, which are just as much a part of New York as Manhattan is.
You're not going to get someone like me to set foot in Trinidad or Anacostia until all of that "element" is pushed out into Prince George's County, as has been occurring gradually over the years. Mug me? Sure. Not a problem. That's part of living in ANY city, and I wouldn't hold that against the city. Mug me and then shoot me in the face because you like to watch someone bleed? That's just sick, but that's what I've been hearing about lately in the District. There's a different breed of criminal element there as of late, and even though violent crime may be WAY down in 2009, as long as there are a considerable number of these RANDOM violent crimes you're not going to see people like me rushing to gentrify these parts of DC. That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
Uh, welcome to the big city? There is crime in low-income neighborhoods in every large city on earth! And no, you don't need to move there, I would stay in Reston if I were you. It sounds like you are a crime-victim in waiting because you are so worried about it. And let's be honest, it's not like you're ever going to be getting a condo in Naylor Gardens or Barry Farm!
I grew up in DC, I have visited friends, worked, etc. in some the "violent" areas (Trinidad, Anacostia et al.) you mention countless times and NEVER been a victim of any crime, much less a violent crime, or seen one (I'm not counting when I was a kid in school in N.E. and I'd get jumped sometimes by other kids, that's just a growing-up thing and the worst I ever got was a punch to the head). Frankly, it's a joke talking about D.C. as this huge high-crime area, there are actually some pretty decent neighborhoods in S.E. for example with way lower crime than you would imagine.
This link to the "worst crime neighborhoods" by statistic sheds a bit more light on it. DC has none in the top 25. Baltimore has a couple and Richmond has one. NYC is definitely in there. So get a grip.
I live in Reston and know scores of people who only live here because they can't afford anything closer (including myself). We don't have Metrorail, the bus service is limited, traffic is horrendous (as evidenced by my nearly hour-long 7-mile commute home from Tyson's Corner today), and there are far too many chain businesses.
I'm moving out of Reston in 2010. Several colleagues and I are looking to rent a 4-BR home nearer to the District. Why would anyone want to live in such a car-centric environment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScranBarre
That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
Manhattan is super expensive way more than the District. The majority of Manhattan isn't poverty stricken that would be why you wouldn't hear about a lot of random violent crime there. I'm sure the other boroughs will tell different stories.
But see the whole chain restaurant thing well that's ANY suburb and not really unique to Reston. If you could pay $1300 a month in Reston then you could afford to live in the city with roommates. I mean I understand the disillusionment but blaming Reston won't solve problems. Most people have roommates when they first get out of college. And most certainly don't own homes. So it isn't a DC thing. Now what is a DC area thing is that people tend to have roommates longer than most other cities and there are more crowded group homes. Look at what you can do. And one thing you can't do is make the DC area cheaper.
The truth of the matter is that every city has bad neighborhoods that are often violent. The poor do indeed need somewhere to live. As mentioned the entire District and Manhattan aren't really comparable.
Getting back to the subject of skylines, I don't know when the word skyline became synonymous with skyscrapers.
The definition of skyline is:
1. the boundary line between earth and sky; the apparent horizon: A sail appeared against the skyline.
2. the outline of something, such as buildings in a city, against the sky. The skyline of Tuscon is buildings, but in the desert the skyline is mostly cactus and rock formations.
DC has a skyline. A low slung, European skyline that is distinctive and attractive because it includes domes, monuments, steeples, etc. as well as unique buildings.
Who says a skyline has to be row after row of tall buildings? Is it because they're phallic symbols, so guys assume bigger has to be better? If we're going to get into symbolism, I like DC's ying/yang approach--a phallic symbol (Washington Monument), a domed "female" symbol (capital building) and between the two the symbol of the center of power (white house.)
A row of skyscrapers is ok, but IMO for most cities too many tall buildings can look crowded, and makes the skyline hard to distinguish from other cities. I like DC's skyline--although I agree with the poster who said there are a few too many flat-top buildings. I'd love to see a few more domed buildings and steeples, and I'd go along with an amendment to the height restrictions that would strictly allow features like that.
I live in Reston and know scores of people who only live here because they can't afford anything closer (including myself).
Is it because you can't afford it, or because Reston is more convenient to work (which I suppose you could factor into the "cost" issue, but I won't go into that)? If it's purely money, do more research. I have one friend paying about the same as you do for a studio in Dupont (with parking, he works out in Tyson's) and another who pays less for a 1-bedroom in Adams Morgan. And another with a 1-bedroom behind the Capitol building for about the same price (not NW, but a great area). They're definitely "deals", but the deals are there if you look for them.
Yes, it's a pricey area. However, living in "chi chi NW DC" isn't exactly out of the question, as all of the people I mentioned are entry-level federal employees with the same GS pay scale that you and your friends have. Not to mention that once you branch out of the Georgetown/Dupont/Adams Morgan area there's a good number of viable options. I'd think that more of the problem with "sprawl" isn't the people being purely priced out of DC for lack of density but those who move here and want the SFH with a yard and fence, not a condo on the 16th floor. They're the ones moving further out because you legitimately can't find a good-sized piece of land for a semi-reasonable price closer in.
I would feel much more comfortable being an urban pioneer and investing in restoring a blighted home in a place like Anacostia or Trinidad if random violent crime wasn't so prevalent in the District. I can handle someone breaking into my car, urinating on my front stoop, panhandlers, etc. I can handle graffiti. I can handle drug-dealing scum gunning each other down in alleys. I can handle frat boys throwing up in the street and screaming "REDSKINS!!" However, I've noticed since I've moved here that there is a concerning level of violent crime committed against innocent bystanders who are just going about their daily lives. Why is that?
That Pepco worker was shot in the head as he worked simply because he looked at some 'hood trash the wrong way as they passed him and thought it was a "challenge?" That Tennessee senator's daughter was injured in a carjacking right near Verizon Center when she was being asked for directions? A woman who owned a small liquor store in the District was shot to death after she quickly COMPLIED with a robber's demands and turned over her cash? A 9-year-old boy was shot dead through his own apartment's front door (in a trendy neighborhood!?) You're not going to get someone like me to set foot in Trinidad or Anacostia until all of that "element" is pushed out into Prince George's County, as has been occurring gradually over the years. Mug me? Sure. Not a problem. That's part of living in ANY city, and I wouldn't hold that against the city. Mug me and then shoot me in the face because you like to watch someone bleed? That's just sick, but that's what I've been hearing about lately in the District. There's a different breed of criminal element there as of late, and even though violent crime may be WAY down in 2009, as long as there are a considerable number of these RANDOM violent crimes you're not going to see people like me rushing to gentrify these parts of DC. That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
Not sure what you are looking for... You work in the burbs, so moving into the District won't help your commute as much. You could easily rent a studio in the nice areas of DC for 1300 maybe even with parking. I don't know, maybe your one bedroom in Reston for the same price is really nice and you are looking only in brand new luxury buildings with amenities like gyms and pools, in this case DC will not be affordable. but you have to sacrifice somewhere.
You have to decide if your taste for a certain lifestyle and living arrangements is too high-end and maybe you need to go into the profession that gives you more money, as this may be something more important for you than you realize (especially since you will be getting older and your tastes may become more demanding). Otherwise you will forever be frustrated with what you get for what you earn. It seems like you have no confidence that you will earn good enough income in your current career to be able to afford anything you truly like. From what I read, you are very particular about your living arrangements. This conflict won't get resolved on its own, something will have to give.
Alternatively, you can look at cities with lower COL as long as you get the same or slightly lower salary, your money there will go much further.
If your knowledge of gentrifying areas is limited to Anacostia or Trinidad I can see how you can be discouraged and mislead. There are plenty of low crime and down-to-earth affordable areas in the district that some of the posters here have mentioned. If this isn't to your satisfaction, nothing is wrong with that.. It's just you have more expensive taste, so, you'd have to figure out how to make more money, especially since you are so young.
Expensive taste? Hardly. I drive a Mazda. My complex doesn't have a fitness center, pool, or any other upscale amenity. On the contrary I've already had six maintenance-related issues since moving here. I splurge on Chick-Fil-A---not Morton's or Ruth's Chris. I clip coupons. This area is simply gearing itself increasingly towards those with expensive tastes, making the options that the lower-middle-class have increasingly limited.
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.
That Tennessee senator's daughter was injured in a carjacking right near Verizon Center when she was being asked for directions? A woman who owned a small liquor store in the District was shot to death after she quickly COMPLIED with a robber's demands and turned over her cash? A 9-year-old boy was shot dead through his own apartment's front door (in a trendy neighborhood!?) You're not going to get someone like me to set foot in Trinidad or Anacostia until all of that "element" is pushed out into Prince George's County, as has been occurring gradually over the years. Mug me? Sure. Not a problem. That's part of living in ANY city, and I wouldn't hold that against the city. Mug me and then shoot me in the face because you like to watch someone bleed? That's just sick, but that's what I've been hearing about lately in the District. There's a different breed of criminal element there as of late, and even though violent crime may be WAY down in 2009, as long as there are a considerable number of these RANDOM violent crimes you're not going to see people like me rushing to gentrify these parts of DC. That leaves everyone confined to the "chi-chi" quadrant of the city known as NW, where middle-class pencil-pushers like me can never dream to live. Manhattan has a much larger population than the District, but scan the papers there and tell me how often you hear about random violent crime there. It's very rare. That's not the case in the District, namely those "up-and-coming" neighborhoods of NE and SE.
