23 Comment

  • brookland_rez

    I do. The new building isn’t much different than the old. Tell me again why the old NPR building was torn down?

    • I think the building has a much larger footprint than the old NPR building – maximizing the lot. Plus it will be configured for ground floor retail which the NPR building was not.

    • I’m no architect, but I bet the old NPR building was torn down so they had space to erect this one. Looking closely at these pictures its hard to see how they would both fit on the lot simultaneously.

      • Zing!

        Arnold & Porter is moving into this building and I’d imagine had some input on the layout on the inside. My understanding is they were downsizing total sq footage they were using at their current offices, while making it more efficient use of space. Chances are that was not cost effective to do in the old building, which was pretty heinous if you ask me. The new NPR building is pretty amazing, so I think everyone is happy. Except maybe the landlords of Arnold & Porter’s old building that has not found a new tenant yet. ESPN Zone space still empty after 3+ years.

  • It is so ugly! I know a lot of DC buildings don’t have character, but more and more of them are looking distinct. Like, it’s neighbor housing the AAMC. This one is just dull and bleh.

  • Looks good. Is this the new Arnold & Porter building?

  • Boring, boring, boring. Hopefully, the ground floor retail will at least be something better than a sandwich shop or a faux-trendy small plates place with a long dead street presence. Ideally this building will be broken up into several small retail fronts to created an intimate pedestrian experience like that found on 7th street or 14th street. Although, the deep setbacks don’t leave me optimistic. I fear we are probably looking at another NOMA-esq clunker.

  • All those windows for birds to smash into.

  • orderedchaos

    I like it. Nothing fancy, but an improvement over the old building and a few nice touches to prevent it from being totally boring.

  • The old building was far better looking.

  • The only difference is the year built. They took the same design and updated it with more windows. No improvement and no diminishment.

  • I like the new building. It only resembles the old one because of the footprint really. I’m guessing the inside is vastly improved. It’s a nice little sister to the neighboring building.

    • The inside is empty right now. The 10th and 11th floors still need to be closed in with glass before they start any major interior work.

      • I am guessing the inside *will be* vastly improved. Happy now?

        • Sorry wasn’t trying to be rude. I stare at the building all day so I just wanted to share there is no updates on the interior space yet. Just big empty floors without any walls yet.

  • Random – When we were clubbing downtown in the mid 90’s someone would always need to stop at that ATM on the corner before or after club.

    NPR to Arnold and Porter sounds about right for DC 2015. The other big firm is in City Center, no?. I guess it is cheaper for Firmsto move a little North and a little East AND they get new space.

    • Covington moved into City Center from their building between 12th and 13th on Pennsylvania Avenue. Pillsbury also moved into a new building on the corner of Rhode Island and 17th (or are moving, depending on if it is yet finished). I think all of this is more of a reflection of the fact that DC is full of law firms and not a trend among law firms really. And as most law firms have support staff and even lawyers, many have entirely too much space for their needs and so it’s easier to pick up and move into new space you have a hand in designing to fit your needs than try to make existing space work.

  • I actually like this building, and particularly the two buildings together. It really links the development around City Vista with downtown. Honestly, I think this is a huge improvement.

  • Definitely much better than the corporate blandness of the old building.

Comments are closed.