In the early years of the United States, the federal government was a moving target, as Congress met in Philadelphia, New York, and some other towns, until a capital could be built. The town of Washington was a planned city built from scratch with guidance from the Constitution and a design by Peter L’Enfant, who stuck to the guidelines but added interesting details.
Washington, D.C., though, is about as close to that square drawing as any real city gets. It was drawn as a perfect square, with unnervingly straight lines passing at unnatural angles through hills, waterways, and properties. Even stranger, it remains that way today, more than 200 years later—with the notable problem that the city gave away about a third of its land to some angry neighbors. “Of all the planned cities in the world, Washington is probably closer to the original plans than any other,” says Don Hawkins, an architect, historian, and expert on the history of the U.S. capital. But even today, if you look at a map of most cities and then you look at Washington, you think: Wait, does it really have three straight lines, at 90 degree angles, as borders? What the hell?
The plan seemed doable, since the area chosen for the District of Columbia was mostly empty. There were two small towns there, Alexandria and Georgetown, and there was plenty of room to fit the new city of Washington between them. Or there was at the time. While most cities begin small and their borders grow outward, Washington is restricted by its original plan, and by its political differences from other cities. Read how the city and the district started out as different spaces that became one at Atlas Obscura.
(Image source: Library of Congress)