Are city skylines becoming too cluttered?

Started by papaT10932, February 13, 2010, 06:34:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SSOWorld

The best place to get a shot of Chicago is from the Museum Campus - preferably from by the Planetarium.
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.


Mr_Northside

Quote from: njroadhorse on February 17, 2010, 06:25:19 PM
The best view is definitely up on top of the hill on Federal Street.  Trumps Mount Washington any day of the week.

It is a really great view.... of downtown.
If you're at the top of Federal street and looking anywhere else than downtown, the view is pretty crappy.
I don't have opinions anymore. All I know is that no one is better than anyone else, and everyone is the best at everything

Stephane Dumas

For the best views of Montreal skyline is from the Mount-Royal and coming from the Champlain and Jacques-Cartier bridges.

I spotted a good pic of Quebec City skyline, the skyline from the area known as "Vieux-Quebec" 

I also found a interesting stuff from the following blog http://criticaldetroit.org/unbuilt-detroit/ about Detroit unbuilt buildings, A good article from the Detroit Free Press magazine from 1991
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3674043/Unbuilt-Detroit-Detroit-Free-Press-Magazine-October-27-1991

english si

Quote from: Chris on February 14, 2010, 04:27:13 AM
I also think NYC's skyline is too massive with not enough tall buildings that accentuate the skyline like Chicago's skyline does. So yes, I would also vote for Chicago. There is a huge amount of buildings in NYC between 500 and 800 feet, but only like 5 which are significantly taller.
Watching Spiderman last night, I thought "Is any other city suitable for him?" I can't think of a western city where he can shoot web up nearly indiscriminately and it stick to a building, giving him a long pendulum.

There's worry about London's skyline becoming more cluttered. Most buildings are 4-5 storey affairs, and there were few places where there were taller buildings - church spires, St Paul's Dome, 'Big Ben', Lloyds Building, the BT/GPO tower. Now there's Canary Wharf a couple of miles downriver (like Paris' La Defence, it's where there's a large amount of skyscrapers all next to each other), the Gerkin and some others. Plus you have the Bishopsgate development, London Bridge shard, etc in the pipeline. The skyline will have gone from a couple of things breaking out of the low rise, to clumps of skyscrapers (at least they mostly won't be similar looking, with the exception of the slightly smaller ones in Canary Wharf).

Bickendan

Portland has largely deliberately averted this, by preserving line of sight to Mt Hood from the Rose Garden in Washington Park and of Mt St Helens from I think OHSU. Downtown could stand to gain a few more towers, IMO, and still preserve the iconic views.

On the other hand, with the towers going up in the North Macadam/South Waterfront District, that could possibly become too cluttered, even though none of those towers comes close to challenging the Wells Fargo Tower as the tallest in Oregon.

It's interesting how the view works coming into Portland on I-5 from the south. Literally the first thing you see on the skyline coming out of the Terwilliger Curves is OHSU; the freeway corrects out of the curves and the Wells Fargo peers over the hill in front. As the freeway descends toward river-level out of the West Hills (Tualatin Mountains) and arcs to the northeast under Corbett Ave, the towers of the North Macadam District fill in the view, almost more majestically than the entirety of the Downtown proper skyline, which comes into view as the freeway begins the approach into the Ross Island Interchange.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.