WASHINGTON — No skyscrapers jut from this low-lying federal city, allowing iconic buildings like the Washington Monument and U.S. Capitol to dominate the horizon.
However, the historically sparse skyline might not stay that way.
As vacant land disappears in Washington, concerns about high real estate prices are fueling debate on whether developers should be allowed to build taller, 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 think tank, warns that unless more room is found, the artificial cap on space will inflate already soaring downtown real estate prices, which rank second behind Manhattan.
As a result, only the wealthiest businesses and residents will be able to stay in Washington, stunting the city’s tax base.
Contrary to popular lore, the city’s low-lying 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 rowhouses.
Besides concerns about aesthetics, there also was a desire to prevent buildings from becoming too tall for fire-engine ladders.
