Land scarcity sparks tower talk

As vacant land disappears in the District, concerns about high real estate prices are sparking a debate on whether to allow taller buildings, which is prevented under a century-old law.

Land scarcity and concerns about the need to curb suburban sprawl have even spawned talk of eventually bringing office towers to a city long known for its picturesque views, sunlit streets and compact buildings.

Within 15 years, according to one analysis, no more space will be available in a 3.5-mile stretch from Georgetown to Capitol Hill.

Christopher Leinberger, a land-use strategist and visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, warns that unless more room is found, the artificial cap on space will further increase downtown real estate prices, which rank second behind Manhattan’s.

As a result, only the wealthiest businesses and residents will be able to stay in the District, stunting the city’s tax base.

Contrary to popular lore, the city’s low skyline has nothing to do with preserving the prominence of the Washington Monument’s 555-foot stone obelisk.

In fact, Congress - which has oversight over the capital - passed the Height Act of 1910 in response to residents’ outrage over the 14-story Cairo apartment building erected in 1894 near Dupont Circle, towering over nearby row houses. Besides concerns about aesthetics, there also was a desire to prevent buildings from becoming too tall for fire-engine ladders.

The law limits building heights to the width of the adjacent street plus 20 feet. There have been several exceptions to allow for construction of the National Cathedral and Georgetown University Hospital. Otherwise, the Height Act has capped most buildings at 130 feet, though heights of 160 feet are permitted on sections of Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest.

For plenty of influential D.C. planners, the idea of altering the city’s skyline borders on blasphemy.

“I think it’s very important to recognize the real uniqueness of Washington’s physical character, certainly compared to any other American city,” said Thomas Luebke, the secretary of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts. He called the city’s skyline “a national symbol.”

Critics also include Marcel Acosta, executive director of the National Capital Planning Commission. He argues that unlike parts of New York and Chicago, the absence of tall buildings on D.C. streets allows for plentiful sunlight and a more welcoming experience for pedestrians.

“In a world of cookie-cutter cities, this is one of our great advantages,” he said.

Gerry Widdicombe, director of economic development for the Downtown D.C. Business Improvement District, said the city’s height restrictions will get increasing attention as space for new development continues to shrink.

The nonprofit group projects that 57 million square feet of space remains for offices, shops and apartments in the central downtown. Whether the space vanishes in 15 years, or perhaps 30, could depend on how badly the city is affected by an economic downturn, Mr. Widdicombe said.

The District wouldn’t be the first traditionally low-lying city to see its skyline go vertical. Many European cities have created high-rise districts, such as London’s Canary Wharf. And the Paris city council recently voted to consider erecting tall buildings on the edge of the French capital.

Story Continues →