Among large U.S. metropolitan areas, Washington, D.C is unique in its height limit, enacted in order to preserve views of our nation's politically most important structures and national monuments. In November of this year, several members of Congress requested a study on the capital's height limit. There are some good arguments for and against keeping the height limit.
But I wonder to what extent the height limit impacts city-wide development. Sure, it prevents a central core from rising up beyond the artificially imposed limit, but perhaps that supports greater heights in other parts of the city. This spread density may actually benefit the city overall by reducing congestion in one part of the city and encouraging greater use of other parts. A multi-node paradigm like this is similar to Los Angeles, but on a much smaller scale.
Which brings me to an idea I want to call "density balance." Measuring cities by population density alone doesn't provide an accurate portrait of land use given that some cities have high concentrations of commercial and other non-residential uses. So what about the ratio of residential density (e.g., people per sq mi) to commercial density (e.g., commercial square feet per sq. mi.)? Such a comparison could help to measure an area's jobs-housing balance. The change in jobs-housing balance in a metropolitan area could in turn be an indicator of access to jobs for that area's residents.
No comments:
Post a Comment