One skyline or as it is? (Houston, Baytown: airports, beach, architecture)

[jfre81]

A "downtown" is not the same as a wide, continuous cluster of tall buildings. A downtown technically doesn't have to have any tall buildings, nor does a city for that matter. This is a fairly common discussion on the DC forum, with the height restriction in the District.

Under the "downtown = distinct, large cluster of tall buildings" rationale, DC's "downtown" is across the river in Arlington.

[Gunion Powder]

The thing about New York's tallest buildings is that they are all concentrated in one section of the urban area. They all sit right across from each other and are only separated by bridges. Even Queen's tallest building One Court Square in Long Island City is directly across the East River from the Manhattan skyline cluster. So from the right angle, it all looks like one big skyline. This is hardly the same concept of different skyline districts separated by miles and miles of suburban development a la Houston and Atlanta.

[westhou]

I'm ok with multiple skylines but it would have been cool if they would have all been within the loop. If you pushed all the northern skylines into the Heights, and push all the western skylines into Greenway Plaza.

[Gunion Powder]

Originally Posted by jfre81

A "downtown" is not the same as a wide, continuous cluster of tall buildings. A downtown technically doesn't have to have any tall buildings, nor does a city for that matter. This is a fairly common discussion on the DC forum, with the height restriction in the District.

Under the "downtown = distinct, large cluster of tall buildings" rationale, DC's "downtown" is across the river in Arlington.

I'm aware. The same is true of cities like Paris and London. Even New Orleans. My point is that the entire cluster of Chicago's major skyline which includes the Loop (downtown proper) and the Gold Coast is colloquially referred to as downtown. I'm sure the same would be true of Houston. That's my point.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by westhou

If you pushed all the northern skylines into the Heights

And lose your one (mostly) intact historical(-ish) section of the city? Forget about it.

There's more to what makes a city than buildings. This is a concept Houston will learn in time.

[StuddedLeather]

Originally Posted by mega man

The thing about New York's tallest buildings is that they are all concentrated in one section of the urban area. They all sit right across from each other and are only separated by bridges. Even Queen's tallest building One Court Square in Long Island City is directly across the East River from the Manhattan skyline cluster. So from the right angle, it all looks like one big skyline. This is hardly the same concept of different skyline districts separated by miles and miles of suburban development a la Houston and Atlanta.

I see your point. With Brooklyn it's right across from Lower Manhattan because that's where The City Of Brooklyn (before 1898) was building it's "Downtown" - now it's the 3rd largest CBD in NYC. Also the waterfront for the most part is where a lot of industrial areas/warehouses were in the past and now are being used for more commercial and higher residential. Though some areas are landmarked historic districts and can't be built upon.

I also agree that New York is an exception when discussing this because it's not separated by any suburbs within the city.

[westhou]

Originally Posted by jfre81

And lose your one (mostly) intact historical(-ish) section of the city? Forget about it.

There's more to what makes a city than buildings. This is a concept Houston will learn in time.

Well I don't mean they should demolish The Heights. I'm saying in a fantasy world The Heights would be in a different location in Houston (maybe just outside the loop) and the Greenspoint/Woodlands buildings would be in it's place.

[SouthernBoy205]

I think Houston's set up with multiple skylines is way more similar to LA than to Atlanta. Riding on 610 through Uptown is set up similar to riding through downtown Atlanta to an extent.

[timtemtym]

Houston's setup is just fine and the skylines are slowly growing together. It actually has more "skyline" than LA. Out here we have a ton of restrictions due to earthquakes so the whole big tower build is just starting to kick off here since not much skyscrapery has been built in a long time. Also, our downtown, "DTLA," is filling in with all sorts of crazy apartment and condo projects since that's the new hip place to live.

Houston is doing that too. An article recently on a Houston Real Estate blog had a map of all the crazy new projects opening or under construction inside the loop and through the western urban corridor.

So it may not be NYC, but Houston ranks third to NY and Chicago for skylines and it's quite impressive.

LA has a lot of mid rise buildings and block after block of 4-6 story condo buildings. There isn't an inch of wasted space, but now those are being torn down to build 10-15 story condo buildings, that's the new thing to do... And rents still aren't going down.

[Gunion Powder]

This is where the core of Houston should have been centered. Just imagine large urban districts surrounding these waterways and connected by Fred Hartman Bridge.

http://goo.gl/maps/9oRND