HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 7:56 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 43,734
Why Are Skylines Roughly Conical?

Why Are Skylines Roughly Conical?


January 25, 2012

Read More: http://www.carfreeinbigd.com/2012/01...y-conical.html

Quote:
.....

Spatial integration began as a scientific examination searching for objective realities to urbanism. Why were cities and their patterns so similar? Where and when have we begun to go wrong? And is the aesthetic, subjective driven world of Modernist architecture partially to blame? Completely independent of this work, the Duany brothers saw similarities in the gradient of intensification of cities as you got closer to the core with various ecologies, particularly coastal regions.

- Likewise, cities have a similar hierarchy. The most connected places, have the highest degree of integration, which in turn means the highest degree of opportunity. Where there exists the greatest demand, to which the market responds with supply. Building space. Where demand is greater than supply exists the most opportunity for developers. Where integration is highest is the most opportunity for every citizen to meet their needs for social and economic exchange.

- This concept exists locally, within one city, as well as globally, amongst all cities. New York, London, Tokyo, Paris, etc., are global cities because they are the most connected, both locally and globally. Within a single city, you also have a hierarchy of centers. All cities are polycentric once they get above the scale of the tiniest of hamlets. This is what sprawl apologist hacks like Joel Kotkin fail to understand. When they talk of polycentric, sprawl-based cities as polycentric cities of the future, they fail to see that New York is also polycentric. Those centers just blur together rather seamlessly, except where geographic barriers (water bodies) or physical barriers (such as highways) divide and isolate them.

- What they found was that there is a correlation between traffic and value. Just like with any network, particularly the web. The most trafficked sites have the most value. Remember that traffic doesn't mean cars, but people. This is a direct relationship in what I call logical cities. High pedestrian areas have far more people moving past, and capable of interacting with you (economically or socially) in these high traffic areas than does car-based traffic, which has to turn, wait for lights, find parking, etc., all of which accounts for increasing degrees of disconnection, dislocation, and inflexibility.

.....



While this is Dallas and the exercise is admittedly abstract, I want to show why downtowns have the biggest buildings. And why severing the interconnectivity to them, is why many of Dallas's buildings in downtown are quite empty, for example. As I have written before, Dallas experienced a building boom (high-rises) at the exact same time that the city, state, and federal level were gorging on highway building. Supply was being added while demand was being undercut, shipped out towards the suburbs.

Compare our growth to say, L'Eixample neighborhoods in Barcelona and Valencia. These were rapidly expanding areas, literally doubling city size, but they did so aggregately. These are both now considered the "old money" areas of those particular cities, and very much still central city as growth then enveloped them.












__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 8:53 PM
wrab's Avatar
wrab wrab is offline
Deerhoof Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,660
Oddly, most of the height in Chicago's skyline is on the edges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 9:00 PM
THE BIG APPLE's Avatar
THE BIG APPLE THE BIG APPLE is offline
Khurram Parvaz
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 2,398
That's the case because MOST (not all) but most cities have a center (Downtown) where ALL the business happens and where all the MAJOR companies choose to settle and thus where all the tall buildings are.
__________________
One man with courage is a majority - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 10:23 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,365
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 11:37 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is online now
Trudeaupeopleiac
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 37,983
Why are all the threads in this subforum so stupid these days?
__________________
Toronto & HamiltonThunder Bayother photos | my geofiction | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2012, 11:55 PM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 1,801
I would argue that maybe the majority of typical U.S. and Canadian skylines are "roughly conical." And this obviously is not the case in the rest of the world (save for a few in Europe - Canary Wharf, Moscow IBC, etc.).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 12:17 AM
jd3189's Avatar
jd3189 jd3189 is online now
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Palm Beach/ Stuart, FL
Posts: 3,277
Agreed. Most of the best skylines in the world are obviously more linear than conical, although the conic shape can be seen in some parts of a skyline, like Lower Manhattan in the 30s and now.
__________________
There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self.
-Aldous Huxley

Continue improving until the end.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 12:25 AM
bryson662001's Avatar
bryson662001 bryson662001 is offline
BeenThere,DoneThat
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: A swanky suburb in my fancy pants
Posts: 2,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
Why are all the threads in this subforum so stupid these days?
It may be "stupid" to you but it's way over my head. I'm like W T F?
__________________
Forget it Jake ................it's Market East
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 12:42 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is online now
Trudeaupeopleiac
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 37,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryson662001 View Post
It may be "stupid" to you but it's way over my head. I'm like W T F?
You're harder on yourself than anyone else.
__________________
Toronto & HamiltonThunder Bayother photos | my geofiction | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 3:13 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,105
This would be the Manhattan skyline after 2016. Does it look conical to you?

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 3:31 AM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh and Wellsburg, WV
Posts: 11,420
Ugh the Dallas skyline is not conical like shown. Depends on where you view it from.
__________________
Look around at how lucky we are to be alive right now, history is happening in Manhattan and we just happen to be in the greatest city in the world.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 4:00 AM
AviationGuy AviationGuy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
Ugh the Dallas skyline is not conical like shown. Depends on where you view it from.
Very good point. In fact, that's true of many cities. Some views of Houston show a conical shape, but other views, especially from the east, show a shape that's way out of balance, largely because of Chase Tower. The best seems to be from the north coming south on I-45, or coming in from the west on Allen Parkway. Austin is similar, in that some views are just great, while others are not.
__________________
Texas GOP mantra: Keep 'em poor, sick, and uneducated, and we'll continue to prevail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 4:36 AM
photoLith's Avatar
photoLith photoLith is offline
Ex Houstonian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pittsburgh and Wellsburg, WV
Posts: 11,420
Not conical skyline shot of Dallas.


http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&c...12&tx=65&ty=77

If the writer of this article had any smarts they would map whether a skyline was conical or not by using a map and determining on the map where the highest and lowest points of a skyline were and then view it three dimensionally and then put a 3-d pyramid over the map. I can assure you that if they did it this way, the right way, than they would find most skylines are not conical or pyramidal. And many cities like Houston have more than 1 skyline. Here in Houston, we have the downtown skyline, the Medical Center skyline, and the Galleria area skyline; which has a very spread out skyline and is suburban in nature.
__________________
Look around at how lucky we are to be alive right now, history is happening in Manhattan and we just happen to be in the greatest city in the world.

Last edited by photoLith; Jan 26, 2012 at 4:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 4:38 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith View Post
Depends on where you view it from.
Bingo. /End Thread.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 5:12 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,105
Neither is Boston's skyline.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 5:54 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 16,356
Dallas sure looks short with that neon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 6:09 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrab View Post
Oddly, most of the height in Chicago's skyline is on the edges.
Chicago.



Detroit.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 2:22 PM
The_Architect's Avatar
The_Architect The_Architect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 3,387
The Toronto skyline has 3 "peaks", the CN Tower, the Financial district, and Uptown (Yonge-Bloor).



__________________
Hope is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of our greatest strength, and our greatest weakness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 3:41 PM
Nowhereman1280 Nowhereman1280 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pungent Onion, Illinois
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrab View Post
Oddly, most of the height in Chicago's skyline is on the edges.
Uhhh no. Chicago's skyline is three cones. Actually Chicago's skyline might be the purest example of market forces at play in the world. Each of the three "peaks" of Chicago's skyline are centers of economic critical mass where you have a cluster of supertall buildings with shorter buildings declining from there. These represent the logical epicenters of downtown (Michigan Ave/Water Tower, Michigan Ave/Chicago River, and The Loop. Everything trails down from these peaks where landvalues are highest.

Then you also have the lake where you can clearly see the rising land values as one gets closer and closer to the lakefront the buildings get taller and taller until the tallest have unobstructed views. Chicago's skyline is almost like a bar graph of land values.

You don't think this looks conical:


travelpod.com

or This:


photoshelter.com

or This:


flickr.com


Sure some larger cities start to take on a "Dome" shape as they hit the ceiling of where current engineering limits the price effectiveness of going higher (see the loop where you have many buildings peaking out around 700-800' or Manhattan where it's essentially a giant loaf shape of buildings), but as a rule skylines tend to take on certain shapes as a result of market forces.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2012, 8:07 PM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Desert Dweller
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,575
^Win.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:13 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.