Toronto's skyline -- a quantitative approach

[Mongo]

Sorry for the academic-sounding title.

One of the big debates among skyscraper enthusiasts is the question of 'which city has the best skyline'. Most people give the prize for best 'North American' (Canada + USA) skyline to either New York or Chicago, but after those two cities, everybody's list is different. There are many reasons why, including such hard-to-quantify reasons as symmetry, scenic background (mountains, etc.), architectural value, and density. What I want to do here is to present some quantitative information about 'North American' skylines, that can serve as a common starting point for debate on the subject. One side-effect was that the Top Three ranking, using these criteria, became very obvious, with New York a clear first, then Chicago, and finally Toronto, with no other city skyline even close to those three. Houston ends up number four on both scales, but other cities are close behind it.

The first metric is 'height'. This is simply the weighted average of the ten tallest structures (both highrises and towers), with the tallest structure weighted tenfold, the second tallest structure ninefold, down to the tenth tallest structure weighted singlefold. I include non-highrise structures (such as the CN Tower) because they have just as much impact on the city's skyline as an office or residential building. The CN Tower is the most well-known of these, but there are others among the top ten structures in other cities, i.e. Seattle (Space Needle) or Calgary (Calgary Tower). I am including only completed structures.

1 333m Chicago (100%)
2 308m New York (92.3%)
3 304m Toronto (91.1%)
4 262m Houston (78.6%)
5 247m Atlanta (74.0%)
6 246m Los Angeles (73.7%)
7 237m Dallas (71.2%)
8 225m Philadelphia (67.4%)
9 221m Seattle (66.3%)
10 208m San Francisco (62.2%)

16 189m Calgary (56.8%)
17 189m Montreal (56.8%)

As you can see, in height Chicago is a clear number one, followed by New York and Toronto, with a big drop to number four Houston.

The second metric is 'scale'. I simply use the Emporis Skyline ranking, which awards points to each building in a city based on its floor count. This ranking is only accurate for some cities, as it is incomplete in many areas of the world, such as China or Latin America. However, it is reasonably accurate for Canada and the USA.

1 36347 New York (100%)
2 15762 Chicago (43.4%)
3 7405 Toronto (20.4%)
4 3633 Houston (10.0%)
5 2822 Vancouver (7.8%)
6 2788 Los Angeles (7.7%)
7 2337 Dallas (6.4%)
8 2334 Atlanta (6.4%)
9 2230 Miami (6.1%)
10 2116 San Francisco (5.8%)

13 1751 Montreal (4.8%)
15 1663 Calgary (4.6%)

By this metric, New York is WAY in front, with Chicago second at a bit less than half of New York, and Toronto a clear third at a bit less than half of Chicago. Houston is once again fourth, at half of Toronto.

Combining the two lists (I simply multiplied the two percentages together), I have the following list of cities over 2%:

1 New York (92.3% x 100% = 92.3%)
2 Chicago (100% x 43.4% = 43.4%)
3 Toronto (91.1% x 20.4% = 18.6%)
4 Houston (78.6% x 10.0% = 7.9%)
5 Los Angeles (73.7% x 7.7% = 5.7%)
6 Atlanta (74.0% x 6.4% = 4.7%)
7 Dallas (71.2% x 6.4% = 4.6%)
8 Philadelphia (67.4% x 5.5% = 3.7%)
9 San Francisco (62.2% x 5.8% = 3.6%)
10 Miami (59.0% x 6.1% = 3.6%)
11 Vancouver (43.4% x 7.7% = 3.4%)
12 Seattle (66.3% x 5.0% = 3.3%)
13 Boston (59.8% x 4.6% = 2.8%)
14 Montreal (56.8% x 4.8% = 2.7%)
15 Calgary (56.8% x 4.6% = 2.6%)
16 Minneapolis (61.9% x 3.3% = 2.1%)

Bill

 

[gbelan]

no doubt about it.aside from new york and chicago no other city in na has a better skyline than toronto.and the rest have no chance of catching up to us based on our u/c,sales and proposed .

 

[Hipster Duck]

I can appreciate your attempt to quantify a skyline's general level of awesomeness but it's still something that's highly subjective.

If I had to choose between one of the two criteria, I'd weight the first one a little more. With the second one, cities like Sao Paulo probably end up on top even though it's just many square miles of 30-40 story apartment boxes ad infinitum.

Generally speaking, though, it's the architectural drama of the skyline that does it for me. Detroit - which is comparatively puny - is one of my favourite skylines of all time because it has one of the greatest collections of pre-war skyscrapers in a great big bundle outside of Lower Manhattan.

Toronto's skyline would be pretty boring without the CN Tower. Viewed from the side, it's the 7 or 8 towers of the MINT and then just countless undifferentiable condo towers and brutalist boxes of under 500 feet as far as the eye can see. It's like Houston surrounded by Sao Paulo.

 

[ganjavih]

Hipster's bang on with his analysis. Toronto could use some flamboyant signature towers.

 

[Mongo]

It's a good thing that the city is getting them, then. I think that the L Tower will be as 'iconic' as anything on Earth, and a number of other towers will not be that far behind -- Shangri-La, the Ritz-Carlton / RBC pair, 1 Bloor East (I assume that the built design will be at least as good as the most recent two concepts). Not to mention the already built Scotia Plaza, Royal Bank Plaza, New City Hall or 1 King West. What about the two Absolute World towers? And then there are the smaller buildings -- N-Blox, OCAD, ROM Crystal, etc.

We on this board tend to depreciate what we have in Toronto (and there certainly are more than enough crappy projects to complain about), but in reality there is a long list of 'world-class' architecture in the city as well.

Of course I would prefer to see the list of outstanding architecture in Toronto keep growing.

Bill

 

[interchange42]

Sorry for the academic-sounding title.

One of the big debates among skyscraper enthusiasts is the question of 'which city has the best skyline'. Most people give the prize for best 'North American' (Canada + USA) skyline to either New York or Chicago, but after those two cities, everybody's list is different. There are many reasons why, including such hard-to-quantify reasons as symmetry, scenic background (mountains, etc.), architectural value, and density.

No apology for academic-sounding required.

There is something to be said for that 'hard-to-quantify scenic background' in the ratings game.

During the daytime, a mountain range on the horizon really helps.

I'll throw in foreground too: Night or day a waterfront really improves the look with reflections, the glassier the water in the skyline shot, the better.I'd give more points for a wider body of water (a lake or bay) over a river.

Just a couple of examples: Calgary's daytime skyline with the Rockies behind it is very impressive, and Chicago daytime shots are helped by Lake Michigan, but I've never seen a Chicago nigttime shot that rivals Toronto's shots across the harbour from the islands - on a calm night we get amazing reflections.

42

 

[Archivist]

skylines

Toronto's and Chicago's patterns of development are quite different. Chicago has taller towers in the core, but they are somewhat less clustered than Toronto. Toronto has many more towers in the city than Chicago, but many of these are relatively low rise and they are scattered throughout the burbs. Once you leave downtown ChiTown, there are almost no highrises. I always felt the "Skyline Ranking" that Emporis did was a direct result of the work that I and some of the other (former) editors did with Toronto buildings. About three months after Toronto's total went past Chicago's, there was an added ranking feature. A lot of the people involved in Emporis are in Chicago.

 

[Edward Skira]

What was the added ranking feature? Extra points for taller buildings?

 

[Mongo]

I assume so. Here is the point system currently being used by Emporis:

Points per Building
12..19 floors = 1 point
20..29 floors = 5 points
30..39 floors = 25 points
40..49 floors = 50 points
50..59 floors = 100 points
60..69 floors = 200 points
70..79 floors = 300 points
80..89 floors = 400 points
90..99 floors = 500 points
100+ floors = 600 points

As you can see, it is strongly non-linear, with almost all the points being given for very tall buildings. Why is an 85-floor building worth four 55-floor buildings, or eight 45-floor buildings? Now that I look at it, it is clearly designed to give a HUGE boost to cities with relatively few, but very tall buildings (such as Chicago), compared to cities with many more, but slightly less tall buildings (such as Toronto).

It is NOT the scoring system that I would have chosen, if I wanted to compare city skylines impartially. I would have used a polynomial such as (floors minus eleven) times square root of (floors divided by twelve), as an example. This would still give a value of 1 for a 12-floor building, but a 24-floor building would be worth 18 points (versus 5 points), a 36-floor building would be worth 43 points (versus 25 points), a 48-floor building would be worth 74 points (versus 50 points), a 60-floor building would be worth 110 points (versus 200 points), a 72-floor building would be worth 149 points (versus 300 points), an 84-floor building would be worth 193 points (versus 400 points), a 96-floor building would be worth 240 points (versus 500 points), and a 108-floor building would be worth 291 points (versus 600 points). With no endpoint, a building like the proposed Al Burj (200 floors) would be worth 772 points (versus the same 600 points).

Bill

 

[wyliepoon]

A "quantitative" approach to skyline ranking (Emporis) is very interesting for those of us who like statistics and number crunching, but it certainly has its flaws and limitations. The number one flaw is the definition of "skyline". The Emporis one seems to be based on skyscraper heights and numbers in a given municipal political division (which is why Toronto and Mississauga are listed separately). However there are skylines that appear to cross political boundaries, while some cities have multiple skylines which cannot be viewed all at once. For example, from some vantage points (especially high ones that look over a large part of the city) Toronto and Mississauga's skylines seem to merge together, while in Hong Kong, which has the world's #1 skyline (which myself, being from there, am very proud of), not all the skyscrapers can be seen in one view since so many are hidden away in suburban satellite cities and by tall mountains.

I prefer to rank skylines by their visual appeal, and I think Toronto is doing a good job at that. I really like the tall buildings going up west of the CN Tower, which really help to create "symmetry" in the skyline.

 

[Pep'rJack]

I'll be the first to say it, and take ass-loads of heat:

Chicago's skyline is overrated, and Toronto's is more aesthetically pleasing taken as a whole. (NY is clearly still tops.) People can describe Chicago as "the belle of the ball" and whatnot as many times as they please, but it doesn't necessarily make it so. The gap is only gonna get bigger, imo, over the next 5 years or so, 2000ft needle thing or not.

Game on...

 

[Tuscani01]

I'll be the first to say it, and take ass-loads of heat:

Chicago's skyline is overrated, and Toronto's is more aesthetically pleasing taken as a whole. (NY is clearly still tops.) People can describe Chicago as "the belle of the ball" and whatnot as many times as they please, but it doesn't necessarily make it so. The gap is only gonna get bigger, imo, over the next 5 years or so, 2000ft needle thing or not.

Game on...

I know I'll get ass loads of heat for this:

I think New York's skyline is overrated and would put Chicago over it any day.

 

[Archivist]

Skyline preferences

To some extent, New York's skyline depends on where you are looking at it, no? From the tip of manhatten, it's fairly incredible. I also think, aesthetically, that Boston has a great skyline, and punches above its weight. Toronto's is really pretty good, however, no matter how you rank things.

 

[Bogtrotter]

"I always felt the "Skyline Ranking" that Emporis did was a direct result of the work that I and some of the other (former) editors did with Toronto buildings. About three months after Toronto's total went past Chicago's, there was an added ranking feature. A lot of the people involved in Emporis are in Chicago."

That's hilarious- I guess coming second to hundrum old Toronto would just not be acceptable to them But for me when it comes to skylines and cityviews there are more subjective factors that are just as important as well.

 

[interchange42]

Maybe we should be creating our own skyline rankings then - why let Emporis' formula be the undisputed ruler by which all are measured? Let's set a fairer standard and then promote it. I'm sure a couple of newpaper types around here might be interested enough to write up a story on it all - it's got syndication written all over it.

42