Why are so many hotels near airports round or cylinder shaped?
I didn’t ask this question in GQ because it seems too stupid and I’m not even sure it’s true. It’s just something I’ve noticed.
Got me. One question comes to mind: Define “near”.
And what airports are you thinking of?
Tripler
Cylinder? That’s just an extension of a round foundation. . .
Maybe you mistook oil holding tanks with hotels. 
Well, the Toronto Airport Sheraton is cylindrically shaped, and I’ll look for more at work tomorrow.
The reason, I think, is that they fit in between the terminal they’re attached to, the parking garage, and the ramps around both.
Could be wrong, though.
The airports I was thinking of are in Austin and Houston, Texas. There doesn’t seem to be any reason for the hotels to be “round” other than to appear more modern or something.
And I agree with you in that the architecture isn’t really driven by something other than aesthetics.
There’s too darn many airports to see. I’ve seen quite a few, but not enough to give a legitimately scientific observation. Sorry . . .
Tripler
Hell, now I have to ask: define “hotel”. 
The cylindrical hotel at Austin Bergstrom International was originally an office buidling, and was remodeled into a hotel when Bergstrom AFB was converted into a civilian airport. It used to be known as “The Donut.”
Just a WAG; circular mid- and high-rise buildings were a popular architectural trend in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This might have also been the time when large hotels began to crop up around airports. It’s also the same time airlines became the dominant form of intercity transportation in the US, and office development outside of urban downtowns became increasingly common.
Basically, market forces made it worthwhile to build big hotels near airports starting in the mid-1960s. Tall circular buildings were cool then, because every architect wanted to copy Marina Place in Chicago, and their design reflected the “jet age.” The result: a lot of circular hotels near airports,
The Regency, a round high-rise hotel just north of downtown Denver, was built in the late 1960s. By the mid-1990s, it became a jet-age flophouse. The Regency isn’t near an airport, but it was built during the heydey of circular buildings.
Did anyone else think while reading the title that maybe it might have something to do with safety? I mean, in a very close call it might stop a major accident.
Though the 60’s style buildings seem much more probable.
I’ll second the WAG about 1960s style. I grew up not far from O’Hare airport and its hotel is IIRC, not cylindrical, but rounded, and elsewhere in a nearby shopping center was (still is?) an early 60s cylindrical office building - mostly medical offices - skinned to resemble the surface of a golf ball.
If an airport does anything as a concession to safety, it would be short.
It doesn’t have anything to do with being near an airport, but a cylindrical building has a round “footprint,” thus ensuring that it encompasses the maximum floor space with the minimum exterior surface–aside from a sphere, of course. This would be useful in terms of climate control (less surface area = slower heat transfer) and possibly economical construction, since glass windows are probably more expensive than interior walls.
Just my uneducated guess.
Back in the 1840’s , there was quite a vogue for octagonal houses in new England. most of them are gone now (of course) but i always thought that they were cool…imagine how much room you had! I also saw a cylindrical house (in Somerville, MA)-unfortunately, its in bad repair.
Have any modern housebuilders done cylindrical houses?