US Capitol in Columbia, Pennsylvania

The city of Columbia, Pennsylvania (on the Susquehanna) was considered a potential spot for the capital of the United States. Wiki says it was just a few votes short of becoming the capital.

As a city just up river from the Chessapeake Bay (and thus the southern states of Maryland and Virginia) it seems like a decent compromise option between the North and the South. Not to mention its more western location would work out somewhat nicely in a nation pushing west at the time.

So what if Columbia had been where the capital was stuck?
 
It was also a plan George Washington favored
It wasn't just a few votes, when Congress voted in 1790, the final tally was one vote short, all you need is a single person to change their mind.

However the site of the capital was mainly picked to appease the southern states (mainly Virginia) as the northern states wanted Alexander Hamilton to build a federal building to take the burden of the Revolutionary War, rather than leaving them with the bill.

If James Madison (representative from Virginia at this time) decided that no compromise in the Residence Act, than the Capital could be in Pennsylvania, but leave the North being financially worse off.

Also if you look at the maps below apart from being slightly more west, the current capital is more central if not still a little too North, when you look at the top of Maine and the bottom of Florida. Where as Columbia, would be even more favouring the North.
Capital.png
 
Well, it would be a massive improvement for Columbia. As it is, the city is a bit of a joke in my home county.

It does have a nice ridgeline to the north that could be used for fieldworks and/or upper class housing. (My childhood best friend is buried on one of the hills, the view from that cemetery is quite pretty), but before the dams went up, how navigable was the Susquehanna? Would the capital being there butterfly away the dams downstream? Construction would proceed east, but with the Susquehanna rather wide at that point, building a bridge west would become an early expensive priority.

Going by the 10x10mi square used for DC, the fringes would abut Lancaster City, which likely would become the lesser twin over time. However, the remainder of the county was pretty much farms, mills, and quarries, with various light industries in places. I've thought about this idea quite a bit, and Columbia would likely grow up more organically as a city, a semi-gridiron following the ridge to the north and hemmed in against the river to the west, with also hills to the south and NE. At least the layout wouldn't be as frustrating to visitors, though TTL's National Mall mighg not be flat. Perhaps here we would have the Capitol on one hill, and the Executive Mansion on another, facing each other?
 
2018-01-06 02.54.38.png
As you can see, Columbia is in pretty much a bowl, a small city surrounded by hills. Thus, it may become more dense than OTL DC, and with the economy supporting Lancaster city, perhaps the two cities would de facto merge, particularly because that's the path of least resistance given the topography.
 
Funny how there's another current thread positing an alternate capital location at an OTL near-contender, Havre de Grace MD :biggrin:

I'll say here what I said there: I like the idea of the lower-most Susquehanna becoming a river-following "government metro" from Columbia to Havre de Grace. That way you could have the capital at one end, and whatever takes NoVa's place on the other!
 
Funny how there's another current thread positing an alternate capital location at an OTL near-contender, Havre de Grace MD :biggrin:

I'll say here what I said there: I like the idea of the lower-most Susquehanna becoming a river-following "government metro" from Columbia to Havre de Grace. That way you could have the capital at one end, and whatever takes NoVa's place on the other!
I am VERY glad this is not OTL. So many of my favorite places to drive and enjoy nature are in that swath. Building a capital out of boring near-swamp saved many many people a more aesthetic childhood
 
I am VERY glad this is not OTL. So many of my favorite places to drive and enjoy nature are in that swath. Building a capital out of boring near-swamp saved many many people a more aesthetic childhood

At the expense of others' aesthetic childhoods once the "political swamp" potentially overflows thanks to urban sprawl, like that of yours truly :rolleyes:

Besides, I've been to that part of Pennsylvania multiple times, y'all should be fine given the geography doesn't lend to much inland expansion AIUI, particularly since there's no guarantee that the Federal government would explode like in OTL's case anyway.
 
Last edited:
If the city can't expand due to it being a bit of a bowl geographically, perhaps we won't see the same sorts of height-restriction laws like we see in DC today.

I'm not sure the city would go about annexing other surrounding cities. Wouldn't that require approval from the state of Pennsylvania? DC hasn't absorbed Bethesda or re-annexed Arlington.

Geographic constraints developing an urban corridor from Harrisburg to Havre de Grace along the river would be interesting.

The Bos-Wash sprawl here would be more Bos-Balt, no?

DC as we historically know it might still develop into an urban area I'd think. The Potomac is a sort of viable shipping route. Maybe Harper's Ferry grows instead here. I think it'd be an Albany-sized city though.
 
It was also a plan George Washington favored
It wasn't just a few votes, when Congress voted in 1790, the final tally was one vote short, all you need is a single person to change their mind.

However the site of the capital was mainly picked to appease the southern states (mainly Virginia) as the northern states wanted Alexander Hamilton to build a federal building to take the burden of the Revolutionary War, rather than leaving them with the bill.

If James Madison (representative from Virginia at this time) decided that no compromise in the Residence Act, than the Capital could be in Pennsylvania, but leave the North being financially worse off.

Also if you look at the maps below apart from being slightly more west, the current capital is more central if not still a little too North, when you look at the top of Maine and the bottom of Florida. Where as Columbia, would be even more favouring the North.
View attachment 363987

Florida wasn't part of the union when the capital's location was chosen however, so it is still fairly central.
 
If the city can't expand due to it being a bit of a bowl geographically, perhaps we won't see the same sorts of height-restriction laws like we see in DC today.

I'm not sure the city would go about annexing other surrounding cities. Wouldn't that require approval from the state of Pennsylvania? DC hasn't absorbed Bethesda or re-annexed Arlington.

Geographic constraints developing an urban corridor from Harrisburg to Havre de Grace along the river would be interesting.

The Bos-Wash sprawl here would be more Bos-Balt, no?

DC as we historically know it might still develop into an urban area I'd think. The Potomac is a sort of viable shipping route. Maybe Harper's Ferry grows instead here. I think it'd be an Albany-sized city though.
The terrain isn't going to prevent construction uphill, rather it will funnel it, and without dams, there will be a flood threat. What I suggest, rather, is that there would be no room to be as geometric as DC. A large, centrally located park is still possible, but Capitol Hill ITTL would actually be a hill, and not a gentle rise. There would also be more of a premium on flat ground. I could see most of the low ground split between parks and administrative buildings, with the Capitol, Executive Mansion (some noteable quarries available in the county, so the name would likely be different), and Supreme Court all being on the hills. Given the lay of the land, the lowlands in the bowl would already be occupied before museums are constructed, so a museum district would likely follow terrain towards Lancaster. Meanwhile, the hills could easily become where residences are constructed, which, by 2018 ITTL likely would be worth over $2M.

Columbia doesn't have Pittsburgh-level terrain challenges, rather it limits where one would build the government core early on. The rest of the city would be able to develop normally. For the most part, it's rolling hills, farms, and woodland. Hard to make long grand avenues to make a statement, but it would force a mindset of concentrating the administrative buildings in a tighter space to start. Fortunately, the commuting nightmare this would create means that the mass-transit wanking opportunity would be too good to pass up.

Regarding annexation, there are plenty of small farming villages across Lancaster County by 1800, but the only significant town is Lancaster. Growth will be mor organic, and if we suppose 10 miles from the Susquehanna, it wouldn't be too much of a threat to Lancaster. More likely, the colonial road which already linked Philadelphia to Columbia (US 30 until it bypasses north of Lancaster, then PA 462) would feed much of the growth. Both would wind up growing towards each other.
 
Top