the Metropolitan area History

  
Washington DC History

Founded in 1791, the District of Columbia is the world's first planned national capital. Frenchman Pierre L'Enfant and black American Benjamin Banneker designed the city in 1800, though few buildings were actually constructed until near the end of that century. D.C. is a city of magnificent architecture, a place where the image of the Washington Monument is never far from sight. The District's attractions are more than just governmental, though; visitors will find excellent theaters, gorgeous parks and gardens, and the many museums of the Smithsonian Institution. You can spend your days gazing at fine art, cycling past cherry blossoms or contemplating the country's past. D.C. has a monumental presence in cyberspace, too. Sneak an online look at the city's monuments, museums and the action on Capitol Hill.

The 1901 Plan

The 1901 Plan for Washington D.C. was the first expression of the City Beautiful movement in the United States, influencing the emerging profession of city planning and the subsequent beautification projects in Chicago, Cleveland, and San Francisco, among other cities. Building on the core of government and monumental buildings, supervised by the Commission of Fine Arts headed by Burnham and Olmsted, was interrupted during WWI, and resumed in the 1920s. The initial plan was
completed in May1922 with the erection of the Lincoln Monument.

Reaction to the plan, from the beginning, was mixed. Middle class residents of Washington D.C. were glad to be rid of the railroad tracks on the Mall, considered a park for city residents before the 1901 plan, but were concerned with the price tag and "fears of its excessive formalism were still being voiced as late as 1910." (Gutheim, 36) On a purely cultural and aesthetic level, critics were quick both to praise and criticize the use of the European Beaux-Arts idiom. Montgomery Schuyler,
a noted architectural critic, enthused in May 1902, "We can have nothing but praise for the magnificent scheme of Messrs. Burnham, McKim, Olmsted, and St. Gaudens. Their part in the making of a beautiful city has been so well done that they already deserve to be ranked with L'Enfant in the gratitude of Washingtonians and of all Americans who wish to be justified of their pride in the capital." (qtd. in Craig, 254). Yet the WashingtonEvening Star held quite a different opinion two years later: "It was a sad day for the city of Washington and all the people of the country interested in the welfare of the National Capital when Charles F. McKim was sent to be educated at the Ecole des Beaux Arts." (qtd. in Craig, 254)

In general, the goals of the Commissioners were met in the implementation of the 1901 Plan. They succeeded in providing a national sacred space, an area on which the nation could focus its pride and point to as its cultural authority and heritage, drawing on the classical forms which gesture to Athenian democracy and the founding fathers. They succeeded in legitimizing their own place in the social structure, demonstrating the power they possessed and their usefulness to society. They succeeded in legitimizing a growing governmental structure through the symbolic relationships (the North-South and East-West axes of which the Capitol, the White House, and the Washington Monument are the foci) and the sacralization of their placement in the monumental core. And they succeeded in setting a standard for urban beautification.

Yet in many ways the plan did not live up to the expectations of the Commissioners or the public.
The opportunity to rectify an omission in L'Enfant's plan--providing an appropriate space for the
Supreme Court in the Mall's axis of power--was missed. Instead, the Commission planned a
Supreme Court building in the Capitol grounds complex, to balance the group with a monumental
structure paralleling Burnham's Union Station. Further, the emphasis on the core of monumental and
government buildings was an exclusive, rather than inclusive, construction. "Government buildings
designed to complement the neoclassicism of Jefferson's and L'Enfant's era were to line the Mall and
encircle Capitol Hill and the White House...tending to seal off official Washington from the
neighboring commercial and residential districts." (Hines, 92)

However, the most important element that did not seem to succeed in the plan was the amorphous
goal of civic idealism leading to moral and economic improvement. The center of the city had been
beautified and became a focus for national pride. Yet the impoverished living in the shadow of the
Capitol's dome were not necessarily inspired with civic loyalty, and were certainly no better off
economically for the expensive monumental plan. Boyer points out that effective "socialization
through the civic ideal was an unproveable proposition at best, tenuous or nebulous at worst." (90) How could the urban poor, the largest population in Washington's city center, be "made to realize their abstract obligation to promote the 'ethical well-being of the whole community' when their individual preoccupations were so much more tangible and compelling?" (254) The idea that the poor would be somehow morally rejuvenated, and therefore more apt to succeed economically, through proximity to a beautiful city center was unproven and unproveable. Ultimately, in the 1901 plan for Washington D.C., the City Beautiful movement was unsuccessful only in the one thing it expressly allied itself with--Progressive moral and economic reform in the urban center.

The legacy of the 1901 Plan is still felt throughout the United States. The profession of city planners is well established, the prominence of the Mall in national pride is unquestioned, and the legitimacy of government as expressed in Beaux-Arts style can be found in every state. The debate over the role of city beautification versus economic redevelopment still rages, and in Washington D.C., the aims and uses of the Plan of 1901 are being renegotiated. Architect Kent Cooper recently wrote, "Our
foremost problem is not the placement of new monuments and museums. They can wait. Rather, the
issue for today is how best to restore the balance of fiscal resources, economic opportunity, and
social and racial diversity across the spectrum of the metropolitan area so that all may prosper and
the monumental core will not strangle."

Washington, D.C. is a very young city by American standards. It is neither a state nor territory, but has a government that resembles both. It is unique in that it operates simultaneously as a city, a state, and is the seat of the federal government.

Each year over 20 million visitors from around the world come to the District of Columbia to see one of the world's greatest democracies, its museums, historical landmarks, and residential neighborhoods rich in history and culture. Washington, D.C. is a great community and the hometown to more than 609,000 people , a population larger than those of the states of Vermont, Wyoming, and Alaska.

As the capital of the United States, the city has several official symbols which characterize the local
government. The corporate seal depicts President George Washington on a pedestal and a woman,
blindfolded to symbolize justice. The official flag, approved on October 15, 1938, was patterned after George Washington's Coat of Arms.
The District History

Washington, D.C., located along the Potomac River, was chosen as the permanent site for the capital of the United States by Congress in 1790. It was President George Washington, however, who was given the power by Congress to choose the exact site – an area ten-miles square, made up of land given by Virginia and Maryland.

The city was governed by commissioners who chose Andrew Ellicott to survey the city and to complete the plan left by Pierre Charles L'Enfant. Benjamin Banneker, an African American from Maryland well known for his contributions as a scientist, astronomer, and skilled mathematician, assisted Ellicott in laying out the Capital city.

As the new city took shape, Washington became the official home of the federal capital in 1800. The city continued to develop, and in 1802 the city of Washington was incorporated and a local government was established. The President of the United States appointed a mayor and a twelve-member city council, but as time progressed, the government structure changed as often as did Congress. In 1804 Congress authorized the election of two houses of the city council, and in 1812 the city elected their first mayor.

In 1917 a Constitutional amendment was introduced in Congress granting District residents voting representation in Congress. While this amendment did not pass at that time, District residents were
eventually given the right to vote in time for the presidential election of 1961.

In 1967 President Lyndon Johnson established a presidentially-appointed Commissioner-Council government. Many municipal functions were transferred from federal agencies to the Commissioner.
Walter Washington was the first Commissioner elected by District residents, and a school board and local court system were elected in 1968. Residents gained tremendous representation in Congress in 1970 with the election of a non-voting delegate, Walter Fauntroy, in the House of Representatives.

The first measure of self-government in almost 100 years came in 1973 with the signing of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act of 1973, "the Charter," by President Nixon. The Charter was approved by the electorate on May 7, 1974 along with the election of the Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners.

The Home Rule Act established for the first time an Office of the Mayor which is a unique institution in American government. Although the title is "Mayor," the executive responsibilities include those of a combined city mayor, a county executive, and a state governor who deals directly with the chief executives and other officials of the fifty states and territories.

The District electorate approved a statehood initiative in 1980 with 60% of residents voting. The delegates were elected in 1981 and convened a statehood Constitutional convention to draft a constitution for the State of New Columbia. A bill was introduced in 1983 into Congress for the admission of the State of New Columbia, but did not pass. Today, the District of Columbia is a unique governmental unit in the federal system as, under the Constitution, Congress has exclusive legislative power over the District.