Mr. Leinberger was the same gentleman that raised the issue of ditching the Height Act in a Forum (last January)at the National Building Museum. His comments were then touted in the Post and there was a frisson of chatter around that topic for a couple of weeks.
If we don't develop some other major value-creating work here in the District, this is what the future is going to be.... lobbyists, lawyers, and paper pushers in a never-ending cycle.
As I posted here yesterday, we are in a period of fundamental change--throughout the globe, not just in the US--and there is no one at the helm that has any depth, scruples or experience to actually guide this change that is not self-serving.
The perfect demonstration of this is the festering boil over at the Office of Tax and Revenue, that has been going on for years. Does Gandhi get fired? Does Evans get booted off of his Chairmanship of the Financial Oversight Committee? Does anybody question the wisdom of putting John Hill on an investigatory panel?
Terry Gilliam's movie "Brazil" gives us a good look into a very possible future.
wow, I didn't read today's Post yet, or yesterday's Examiner article about the OTR review. John Hill huh? Pretty delicious. The level of incestuousness in DC approaches Appalachian like proportions...
"The level of incestuousness in DC approaches Appalachian like proportions..."
LOLOL!! Good comeback, R!
Today's headline in the Examiner is trying to blame it on BofA... I guess to deflect attention (which isn't hard in this city) from the real, aforementioned culprits and/or dodo birds.
Unfortunately, this rot is what is going on all over the country. There is no reality anymore--it's all marketing and PR.
The superbuilding problem is a big one. It's facing virtually everyone in the country and just about nobody has a solution.
Some of the New Urbanists have done well with places like Midtown Kentlands and Rockville Town Center, but they've still not conquered anything on the scale of Ballston.
I will note, though, that building height is not to blame. There is absolutely nothing anti pedestrian about a tall, narrow building. The problem is building width.
Dan, you're right about the height (cf NYC). It's all about how the buildings are "organized" at the ground level.
Oh and economically, I understand the points about the height restriction. As long as our buildings are smaller, the rents are higher compared to places like Arlington, Alexandria, and MoCo. So entities that can't afford to pay market rents, because immediate proximity to the government isn't absolutely necessary to their work, decamp.
This is an issue. So too are viewsheds.
Commenting by HaloScan
