Page C1.1 . 05 December 2012   
ArchitectureWeek - Culture Department
< Prev Page Next Page >
  • On Washington, D.C. Building Height Restrictions

      Current Contents
      Blog Center
      Download Center
      New Products
      Products Guide
      Classic Home
      Architecture Forum
      Architects Directory
      Topics Library
      Complete Archive
      Web Directory
      About ArchWeek
      Subscribe & Contribute
      Free Newsletters


    [an error occurred while processing this directive]

    On Washington, D.C. Building Height Restrictions

    by Kaid Benfield

    I've been procrastinating this one for a long time. I generally avoid taking stands on controversial local issues in Washington, where I have lived for over four decades, and I am especially uncomfortable being at odds with people I respect and consider friends.

    That said, I can't sit on this any longer: the law that restricts the height of buildings in DC is under attack from all sorts of sources (many of them out-of-towners or relative newcomers to the city, probably not a coincidence). Some of the critics are indeed friends, but I disagree with them on this particular issue.

    I'm here to say that, although there are pros and cons to the height restrictions, the city and its residents are better off with them than without them. In my opinion, the restrictions should stay, pretty much as they are. (Be warned that, having procrastinated writing this for so long, I now have a lot to say. I hope this will be persuasive, but it will not be brief.)

    Before I get into the specifics, I want to state some caveats. First, I am not expressing an official position of the organization I work for, NRDC. As an organization we seldom get involved in local DC issues at all, and we haven't discussed this one. I'm speaking for myself only. Second, while I come out decidedly on one side of the issue, I think it is one on which reasonable people can differ according to their values and which values they weigh more heavily than others.

    Putting the Issue in Context

    The law governing building heights in Washington is somewhat more complex than many people realize. It restricts buildings to 20 feet (6 meters) taller than the adjacent street, up to a maximum of 90 feet (27 meters) on residential streets, 130 feet (40 meters) on commercial streets, and 160 feet (49 meters) on Pennsylvania Avenue downtown. (In many neighborhoods, zoning is more restrictive.)

    The effect is that, in downtown and other highly-valued commercial areas, new buildings in the city generally rise to 10 or 11 stories; developers max out their allowance, with the result that most new buildings in the hottest commercial parts of the city have the same height.   >>>

    Discuss this article in the Architecture Forum...



    This article originally appeared as "Why I support the DC building height restrictions" by Kaid Benfield, copyright 2010, and is published with permission of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

    ArchWeek Image

    At 555 feet (169 meters) tall, the Washington Monument, designed by Robert Mills, is by far the tallest structure in Washington, D.C. The city's Heights of Buildings Act of 1910 has helped the monument to keep its prominence in the skyline.
    Photo: Tech. Sargent Andy Dunaway/ United States Navy Extra Large Image

    ArchWeek Image

    Buildings along this stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue near the United States Capitol building can be up to 160 feet (49 meters) tall.
    Photo: Kevin Matthews/ Artifice Images Extra Large Image


    Click on thumbnail images
    to view full-size pictures.
    < Prev Page Next Page > Send this to a friend       Subscribe       Free Newsletters       Media Kit       Privacy       Feedback       Twitter       Facebook
    ARCHWEEK  |  GREAT BUILDINGS  |  ARCHIPLANET  |  DISCUSSION  |  BOOKS  |  BLOGS  |  SEARCH © 2012 Artifice, Inc. - All Rights Reserved