daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers General news, discussion and announcement forum about skyscrapers, including the Skyscraper Living forum



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old October 20th, 2008, 08:15 AM   #21
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,635
Likes (Received): 10789

No they don't, but Ottawa would have been far better off enforcing a very strict urban plan, as happened in Washington, DC. A modern take on the Gothic style throughout the core, or something that complimented the architectural style of the Parliament Buildings would have created a stunning capital. Instead we have some stunning buildings surrounded by cookie cutter mid rise towers.

Capital cities are supposed to be special. Our Parliament is special, so is the Supreme Court and the Rideau Canal. Why couldn't it have looked like that for 3 km in every direction? Lack of foresight. Washington had the foresight and ambition to create something special and unique. Now they want to undo all that great work? What a disaster that would be.
__________________
World's 1st Baseball Game: June 4th, 1838, Beachville, Ontario, Canada
North America's Oldest Pro Football Teams: Toronto Argonauts (1873) and Hamilton Tiger Cats (1869)

I started my first photo thread documenting a recent trip to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Have a peek: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 20th, 2008, 08:32 AM   #22
Xusein
 
Xusein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 26,168
Likes (Received): 10215

I was there last week. As much of a skyscraper fan I am, it would be a terrible idea because it would overshadow the National Mall and destroy the vibe downtown. However, it wouldn't be a big deal if they put a new skyline in a different part of the city, like Canary Wharf or La Defense.

That, or they could just raise the height limits in the suburbs (like Arlington, Silver Spring...), don't see a point for height limits there.
Xusein no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 20th, 2008, 09:08 AM   #23
Zorba
Stadium Fan
 
Zorba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Athens
Posts: 827
Likes (Received): 2

I like the iconicness of DC as it is. I think that if height limits were raised in big urban areas around the city like Silver Spring and Bethesda then it would aleviate the problem for the most part.

Silver Spring is an ideal place to build scrapers. Already 30+ story buildings there and there is plenty of open space to continue building.
Zorba no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 20th, 2008, 04:47 PM   #24
WeimieLvr
Love me, love my dog...
 
WeimieLvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 3,085
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10ROT View Post
I was there last week. As much of a skyscraper fan I am, it would be a terrible idea because it would overshadow the National Mall and destroy the vibe downtown. However, it wouldn't be a big deal if they put a new skyline in a different part of the city, like Canary Wharf or La Defense.

That, or they could just raise the height limits in the suburbs (like Arlington, Silver Spring...), don't see a point for height limits there.
In my eyes and in many American's eyes, nothing could overshadow the icons of Washington D.C. A tall building would not diminish the Lincoln Memorial one iota.
WeimieLvr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 20th, 2008, 10:00 PM   #25
MDguy
Registered User
 
MDguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 3,671

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10ROT View Post

That, or they could just raise the height limits in the suburbs (like Arlington, Silver Spring...), don't see a point for height limits there.
Nova would be tricky like in Arlington. Regan is literally RIGHT there. raising the height in Arlington/Roslyn/etc wouldn't work. Maybe in Bethesda or Silver Spring or even Rockville though. Maybe they should just further develop the national harbor into a commercial district. Would bring lots of Money to Poor PG county
MDguy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 21st, 2008, 03:42 AM   #26
philadweller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,281
Likes (Received): 16

Paris does fine with skyscrapers. So does London and there are much older buildings that do not get compromised. Rosslyn is kind of like a La Defens but is merely an office park at street level. I think Southeastern DC along the waterfront would be a nice place for some towers. Philadelphia got rid of the Gentlemen's Agreement so should DC. Give the people what they want. Strategically place them and integrate them at street level with retail and pedestrian areas.

The National Cathedral is the highest point in DC what kind of message is that? DC is not exactly the Vatican. The government is corrupt in DC and the building codes are Puritanical. Has anyone seen the new Convention Center? It is a monster thrown in an intimate part of town. It is more shocking the Pompidou Center in the 1970s.
philadweller no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 21st, 2008, 03:49 AM   #27
MDguy
Registered User
 
MDguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 3,671

blehh

Last edited by MDguy; January 23rd, 2016 at 08:33 PM.
MDguy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 21st, 2008, 05:24 AM   #28
Canadian Chocho
Registered User
 
Canadian Chocho's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Managua/Toronto
Posts: 3,470
Likes (Received): 28

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
No they don't, but Ottawa would have been far better off enforcing a very strict urban plan, as happened in Washington, DC. A modern take on the Gothic style throughout the core, or something that complimented the architectural style of the Parliament Buildings would have created a stunning capital. Instead we have some stunning buildings surrounded by cookie cutter mid rise towers.

Capital cities are supposed to be special. Our Parliament is special, so is the Supreme Court and the Rideau Canal. Why couldn't it have looked like that for 3 km in every direction? Lack of foresight. Washington had the foresight and ambition to create something special and unique. Now they want to undo all that great work? What a disaster that would be.
A capital city is a city first and foremost. Have big open spaces for museums and memorials would be terribly boring.
__________________
Colonial Cities

1 2 3
Canadian Chocho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 21st, 2008, 06:25 PM   #29
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,635
Likes (Received): 10789

Yes, but I'm not proposing museums and memorials from one end to the other. What I'm suggesting is that the architectural style of the core could have respected to a far greater degree than occurred. Tight regulation and control could have been enforced so that the resulting building stock produced something unique in the country, and the world.

If Ottawa had forced all post war buildings to take cues from Canadian Chateau style architecture and gothic, the city would have ended up with possibly a stunning modern and functional architectural style that offered something fresh and special.

Many of Washington's new buildings are modern and beautiful, but took cues from the Capitol, the White House, and many of the other neoclassical structures. Even the new Canadian Embassy which was built less than 20 years ago, took cues from the established built form in Washington. Washington is grand and spectacular for many blocks in every direction because of this foresight. Ottawa isn't, because we didn't think it important.

The modern built form in Ottawa isn't one I'm eager to show off to foreigners in the same way that I would if Washington were my capital. The Parliament, Supreme Court, Chateau Laurier, the Rideau Canal, and some of the museums are fabulous, but beyond that? The City of Ottawa disappoints as a capital. As just another city, it looks great.

The City of Ottawa isn't special in the way many capitals around the world are. Ottawa has a number of stunning buildings. Big difference! I like Ottawa, but it doesn't impress the way Washington does.
__________________
World's 1st Baseball Game: June 4th, 1838, Beachville, Ontario, Canada
North America's Oldest Pro Football Teams: Toronto Argonauts (1873) and Hamilton Tiger Cats (1869)

I started my first photo thread documenting a recent trip to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Have a peek: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898

Last edited by isaidso; October 21st, 2008 at 06:43 PM.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 12:24 AM   #30
philadweller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,281
Likes (Received): 16

MDGuy I totally agree with you and did not read your previous thread. Pentagon City too can use some tall ones. The mall is very sacred and there is nothing like being on it on a sunny Spring day with all that sky.

Rossyln is no Dupont Circle. It feels a bit sterile even though there are restaurants and cafes.
philadweller no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 12:28 AM   #31
Xusein
 
Xusein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 26,168
Likes (Received): 10215

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeimieLvr View Post
In my eyes and in many American's eyes, nothing could overshadow the icons of Washington D.C. A tall building would not diminish the Lincoln Memorial one iota.
Maybe not, but DC sure would feel different to me if there were a bunch of skyscrapers that dwarfed the size of the monuments to me.

MDguy, what do you think of building a skyline in Southeast?
Xusein no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 12:40 AM   #32
whatever...
Registered User
 
whatever...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vilnius
Posts: 2,090
Likes (Received): 836

Some cities and skyscrapers are just not meant to coexist. Weather it is Washington or Rome, Athens, Munich, Budapest, Krakow... it doesn't matter as the fact stays the same - they are better of without them towers ruining their distinct skylines.

Prague is a sad example of bad decisions.
whatever... no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 03:02 AM   #33
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,635
Likes (Received): 10789

Dude! That's the best nic, ever.
__________________
World's 1st Baseball Game: June 4th, 1838, Beachville, Ontario, Canada
North America's Oldest Pro Football Teams: Toronto Argonauts (1873) and Hamilton Tiger Cats (1869)

I started my first photo thread documenting a recent trip to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Have a peek: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 07:46 PM   #34
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,436
Likes (Received): 53

Ease the building heights restriction in the inner suburbs like Tyson's Corner, Alexandria, Rockville, Bethesda, Silver Spring, etc. Problem solved.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 09:54 PM   #35
theevilcube
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 13
Likes (Received): 0

Arlington, which includes the Rosslyn, Courthouse, Clarendon, and Ballston neighborhoods (there are others but they dont really have the density to support a skyscraper) are all restricted in height by the FAA due to the vicinity to Regain National Airport and it's flight paths. Places like Crystal City and Pentagon City that can definately handle larger buildings are also constrained by the flight paths. This isnt something that is going to change. They would need to move the airport out of the city and that isnt going to happen, considering Reagan is the jet setting airport for the corporate lobbyist and defense contractors.

I would say it would be in poor taste to change the way Washington looks in respect to building height. I would say, put them at the National Harbor or at the SE waterfront.
theevilcube no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2008, 08:18 PM   #36
robb01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 47
Likes (Received): 0

Nicely written, and amazing photos

robb01 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2008, 04:00 AM   #37
MDguy
Registered User
 
MDguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 3,671

Quote:
Originally Posted by philadweller View Post

Rossyln is no Dupont Circle. It feels a bit sterile even though there are restaurants and cafes.
yea thats true, rosslyn isn't a dupont circle, bus its no suburban office park either

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10ROT View Post

MDguy, what do you think of building a skyline in Southeast?
yea, of course, like i said, the area would probably have a ripple effect in southeast and make a lot of blighted areas extremely nice and make land values really high. I think it would be really successful
MDguy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2008, 11:43 AM   #38
cachen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: honolulu
Posts: 64
Likes (Received): 2

"bulldoze those shitty monuments to imperialism and genocide, build over the wasteful "mall" and overly common parks, situation fixed."

thats what i should be seeing here. whats with all the right wing jingoist rhetoric being tossed around? is everybody scared of change and progress? washington dc isnt anything "special" get over yourselves. london, berlin, moscow, mexico city, tokyo: all these cities can embrace change and progress, but no, not the quaint provincial capital of the usa, oh no.

as for the guy who called it "sacred": authoritarian much?
cachen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2008, 05:35 PM   #39
WeimieLvr
Love me, love my dog...
 
WeimieLvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 3,085
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachen View Post
"bulldoze those shitty monuments to imperialism and genocide, build over the wasteful "mall" and overly common parks, situation fixed."

thats what i should be seeing here. whats with all the right wing jingoist rhetoric being tossed around? is everybody scared of change and progress? washington dc isnt anything "special" get over yourselves. london, berlin, moscow, mexico city, tokyo: all these cities can embrace change and progress, but no, not the quaint provincial capital of the usa, oh no.

as for the guy who called it "sacred": authoritarian much?
Wow...where do we begin...D.C. is a very impressive world capital. It was planned and layed out much like European cities (original plan by Pierre Charles L'Enfant), with a grid of grand central avenues and diagonal state-titled streets...with circles and plazas centering on important governmental structures such as the Capitol and the White House. The classic monuments and memorials throughout the city are timeless with broad appeal, with expert contributions from the likes of Frederick Law Olmsted and Daniel Burnham. The museums are among the best in the world.

D.C. has changed A LOT over the past couple of hundred years, so it's not that change can't be embraced. But there is also the ultra-important aspect of historical preservation, and D.C. was built to be preserved - hence the many marble and granite structures. Aesthetic beauty and value is most definitely in the eye of the beholder, but there are some structures and places that are so widely accepted as beautiful that there isn't much room for debate. I would bet that anyone who holds the opinion that Washington D.C. is ugly or needs to be bulldozed has never actually been to the city to see the impressive architecture, the grandeur of the +-50 monuments and memorials, the historically significant structures, locations and artifacts, the well-maintained plazas and parks, and the countless public sculptures and works of art.
WeimieLvr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2008, 04:53 AM   #40
cachen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: honolulu
Posts: 64
Likes (Received): 2

oh right, its so significant and historic. being a fake city constructed barely over 200 years ago and all.

its kind of funny that a website filled with hatred towards alleged "nimbys" has all these posts. but mostly its just pathetic.

and considering this: on this forum there are some political "facts" that are so widely accepted as truth that there isn't much room for debate, like "the united states is the ultimate country of evilness, backwardsness and badness." given that, how can so many people think that the monuments and government buildings of this evil empire are worth preserving?

you hate the country and the government, but you like the monuments and buildings that represent that same country and government? what?
cachen no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu