U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which U.S. city has the best skyline?
Atlanta 31 4.45%
Dallas 34 4.88%
Houston 37 5.31%
Miami 26 3.73%
New York 214 30.70%
Boston 11 1.58%
Philadelphia 31 4.45%
Pittsburgh 23 3.30%
Chicago 206 29.56%
San Francisco 27 3.87%
Los Angeles 24 3.44%
Seattle 33 4.73%
Voters: 697. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-12-2012, 09:36 AM
 
65 posts, read 65,319 times
Reputation: 43

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
For a city that supposedly has a "tiny fraction" of skyscrapers vs NYC, you wouldnt know by looking at the poll results.

A 2% lead for a city that has "thousands more skyscrapers."
A City Data poll is hardly a scientific determination of relative number of highrises or size of skyline.

 
Old 09-12-2012, 09:41 AM
 
65 posts, read 65,319 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
Sure it ****ing does. Im from NY, and the first thing I noticed about Chicago's skyline was that it seemed bulkier, which was verified by those examples I posted from an article. The city blocks were built that way.
IMO a building has nothing to do with a block. I don't get the relationship you're trying to build.

A building can be built with insane bulk on a tiny block, or minimal bulk on a huge block.

Can you give me an example somewhere in Chicago where the block size means more bulk than otherwise? This makes no sense to me.

I look the Willis Tower, certainly the biggest tower in Chicago, and the size of the block doesn't seem to play any role. If anything, it may lower the bulk, because there's a lowrise parking garage and plaza on the rest of the block. If the block were smaller, maybe there would be no room for the surface garage or the plaza.

In NYC, the biggest building bulks are usually on smaller blocks, not larger blocks (East Midtown and Lower Manhattan have the smallest blocks of any commercial parts of Manhattan, and the highest densities).

Maybe what you're referring to is that Chicago has more standalone towers, so to you they're more bulky? It's true that Chicago has more buildings that don't touch other buildings, like in NYC.

Really only NYC and Hong Kong are the only places on earth where they build highrises directly adjacent to other buildings (both highrise and lowrise). In Chicago and most other places, highrises tend to be built with four sides, rather than one or two sides blocked by other buildings.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 09:50 AM
 
425 posts, read 285,294 times
Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
You can call it whatever you want, but the fact is that we are talking skylines, and NYC has more highrises than the next 10 cities combined, which is why it's foolish to say that a city with 10% or 15% as many highrises has a comparable skyline. Obviously a skyline consists of highrise buildings.

Chicago is more like 1/2 the size, and has less than 1/6th as many buildings. Obviously you go by metro size, and # of highrises.

No, NYC is taller based on the top 10 skyscrapers. One WTC is tallest now. 432 Park will be 1400 ft. Are you ignorant of 9/11 or something? But obviously that's a stupid way to measure top skyline or biggest skyline.

You measure by the total skyline, not the tallest building(s). You would say that Rapid City, South Dakota has the best skyline in the U.S., if they built a 2,000 foot toothpick? LOL! Obviously you go by the total skyline, so a city with thousands of highrises would be more impressive than a city with a couple very tall buildings, and then not much else.


This is absurd. Chicago's downtown skyline is quite dense and doesn't cover much space. There's a strip north into Edgewater, but it's a strip of one building-deep in most cases along Lake Shore Drive. And, according to you, this isn't even a "skyline", becuase they have to be at least 900-1,000 ft. tall, or they are apparently invisible, and don't contribute to a city's skyline!

NYC has highrises everywhere in Manhattan, everywhere in the West Bronx, reaching up even into Yonkers, and west into NJ, and east into Brooklyn and the Bronx.

Jesus tap-dancing Christ youre an idiot. We're talking about skylines, and you still insist on bringing up the number of skyscrapers, which you still dont know the definition of.

How is it foolish to think other cities have comparable skylines (ie: Chicago)?

Apparently 178 people on here are fools (still only 14 less votes than NYC as well).


The city of Chicago is 2.7, vs. the city of New York at 8.2.

Why in the hell would you include the metro population?


One WTC is not the tallest. It topped out, but its still not the tallest. It also has the smaller roof height in comparison to Willis Tower. Spires are counted in height, antennas arent.

Lemme guess, you think Chrysler is taller here, huh:




The Chicago skyline actually goes 10-15+ miles up the coast. Its much longer in pure length.

NYC's does not.


Also, why the **** are you including NJ in the NYC skyline?

Your entire concept of a skyline is shot.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 09:54 AM
 
425 posts, read 285,294 times
Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
NYC has highrises everywhere in Manhattan, everywhere in the West Bronx, reaching up even into Yonkers, and west into NJ, and east into Brooklyn and the Bronx.

How the hell are you seeing the skyline from Midtown and Downtown Manhattan stretching into Yonkers?

Might as well include White Plains while we're at it.


Jersey City is not included in the NYC skyline.


Nobody goes to ****ing Co-op City for a skyline shot of NYC.


Are you on bath salts? Meth?
 
Old 09-12-2012, 09:58 AM
 
425 posts, read 285,294 times
Reputation: 138
Chicago's skyline has diversity, balance, color, size, etc., its amazing from every angle, and a beautiful backdrop on the lake that NYC does not.

Its simply laid out perfectly. This is obviously something you cant grasp because.... "NYC has 6 timez as many skyscraperrrrz!111!!"

Number has absolutely nothing to do with it.


The only shot of the NYC skyline thats best IMO is from Jersey, because the view from Queens isnt nearly as good as that.

There is no rhyme or reason to the NYC skyline. Its simply just a mass of buildings. The only thing aesthetically pleasing about its lay-out is that the ESB is separate from the Midtown cluster. Its very chaotic and sporadic. Lets not forget all those spires that are basically cop-outs for height and ruins the Midtown skyline. BOA, NYT and Conde Nast look like **** with their spires/antennas.

Chicago's is simply laid out much better, with more peaks. Its great from every angle.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 10:09 AM
 
425 posts, read 285,294 times
Reputation: 138
Its a shame the Chicago Spire never went through.

Chicago seems to build taller with much more ease and less red tape than NYC does.

Everything in NYC now is NIMBYs, zoning restrictions and spire cop-outs.

How long did it take for the mess at Ground Zero to come through? Silverstein and the PA battling over seemingly everything.

Most of the best skyscrapers these days are being built outside NYC and outside the US in general because its too much of a hassle in NYC.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 10:29 AM
 
65 posts, read 65,319 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
Jesus tap-dancing Christ youre an idiot. We're talking about skylines, and you still insist on bringing up the number of skyscrapers, which you still dont know the definition of.
There is no official definition of skyscrapers, so I don't even know what that means.

Yes, we are talking about skylines, which is my entire point! NYC has a bigger skyline than the next 10 cities combined!
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
How is it foolish to think other cities have comparable skylines (ie: Chicago)?

Apparently 178 people on here are fools (still only 14 less votes than NYC as well).
No, that's not what the poll says. It asks "which American city has the best skyline". It doesn't say "which skyline is comparable to NYC".

Many people apparently think Pittsburgh and Boston and Seattle and Miami have the best skyline too, so you agree, correct? Pittsburgh has the best skyline, because many anonymous voters at C-D said so!

Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
The city of Chicago is 2.7, vs. the city of New York at 8.2.
Why in the hell would you include the metro population?
Huh? Would you say that San Jose should have a bigger skyline than San Francisco because it has a bigger city population?

Would you say that Jacksonville should have a bigger skyline than Boston, or Tempe, Arizona should have a bigger skyline than Miami, because city proper is bigger? I don't understand your point.

Obviously skyline size is relative to the metro size, not where the city boundaries lie. Are you claiming that Sydney, or Melbourne, Australia should have no highrises, because they're technically small towns (by official city boundaries)?

Or are you saying that Manhattan should have no highrises if it never consolidated with the Outer Boroughs in 1898? Brooklyn and Queens should have bigger skylines than Manhattan because of higher population?
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
One WTC is not the tallest. It topped out, but its still not the tallest. It also has the smaller roof height in comparison to Willis Tower. Spires are counted in height, antennas arent.
One WTC has a spire, not an antenna. It will be tallest. And what does this have to do with skylines? A skyline consists of one building? If there were no Willis or One WTC, Chicago and NYC would have small skylines? LOL. Obviously you look at the totality of the skyline, not one building, not 10 buildings, not 100 buildings. You look at everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
The Chicago skyline actually goes 10-15+ miles up the coast. Its much longer in pure length.

NYC's does not.
You're just making up stuff. Your definition of "skyline" is now "at least one 10+ floor building randomly interspersed along a street."

By this definition, the NYC skyline goes to Westchester County. It goes up the Hudson River through 100% of Manhattan, 100% of the Bronx, and much of Yonkers, and, to the south, goes into Brooklyn down to Prospect Park. It also extends east along Queens Boulevard all the way to Kew Gardens, and is rapidly filling in all the way to Jamaica.

Prospect Park to Yonkers is 25 miles. This entire stretch has 10+ floor buildings everywhere. There's no break.

Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
Also, why the **** are you including NJ in the NYC skyline?
Because it's obviously part of the NYC skyline! Have you never been to NYC? Why would you not include the Hudson River towers? Is it because there's a river in between, and you're making some arbitrary boundary?

So the Hancock Tower and Trump Chicago aren't in the Chicago skyline? Hong Kong is only HK island? Pudong isn't part of Shanghai skyline? And you make no sense anyways, because you just said the "Chicago skyline extends to Evanston", but now you say you have some crazy rule that only municipal boundaries or one side of bodies of water can be counted.

And that's like 5% of the overall NYC skyline. You could look at Manahttan alone, and that would be 5x the entire Chicago skyline. You could look at Midtown alone, and that would destroy Chicago.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 10:33 AM
 
65 posts, read 65,319 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
How the hell are you seeing the skyline from Midtown and Downtown Manhattan stretching into Yonkers?

Might as well include White Plains while we're at it.


Jersey City is not included in the NYC skyline.


Nobody goes to ****ing Co-op City for a skyline shot of NYC.


Are you on bath salts? Meth?
I have no idea what you're ranting about. Coop City is in the East Bronx! The skyline obviously extends into the West Bronx!

You have never been to Upper Manhattan or Riverdale? That's mostly midrises and highrises. Certainly far more midrises and highrises than that narrow corridor you're referring to along Lake Michigan.

And White Plains is obviously nowhere near Yonkers, Coop City, or anything under discussion.

If Jersey City isn't part of the NYC skyline, then nothing outside of the Loop is in the Chicago skyline. It's the exact same (very weird) principle. It's the same skyline, and you can't even tell where Jersey City (for example) begins and Manhattan ends, when viewed from most angles. It's even more tied into the Manhattan skyline than Brooklyn or Queens (the buildings are physically closer).
 
Old 09-12-2012, 10:37 AM
 
65 posts, read 65,319 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by resuelppA View Post
Its a shame the Chicago Spire never went through.

Chicago seems to build taller with much more ease and less red tape than NYC does.

Everything in NYC now is NIMBYs, zoning restrictions and spire cop-outs.

How long did it take for the mess at Ground Zero to come through? Silverstein and the PA battling over seemingly everything.

Most of the best skyscrapers these days are being built outside NYC and outside the US in general because its too much of a hassle in NYC.
Yet NYC has dozens of 1000+ tower planned or u/c, and Chicago has none.

So if it's true that Chicago has no red tape, and NYC has tons of red tape, but Chicago is building almost nothing, and NYC has possibly the greatest boom in its history (perhaps the greatest skyscraper boom in world history), I guess that NYC has far, far more demand.

In NYC, there are $100 million apartments. In Chicago, there are almost empty highrises. So this probably means the giant gap between the cities will grow much wider, as more towers are built in NYC, and Chicago struggles with demand.
 
Old 09-12-2012, 10:49 AM
 
425 posts, read 285,294 times
Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
There is no official definition of skyscrapers, so I don't even know what that means.

Yes, we are talking about skylines, which is my entire point! NYC has a bigger skyline than the next 10 cities combined!
There are loose definitions, you just need to look around. (ie: 150m) Supertalls are 300m, which is what I confused them with before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
No, that's not what the poll says. It asks "which American city has the best skyline". It doesn't say "which skyline is comparable to NYC".

Many people apparently think Pittsburgh and Boston and Seattle and Miami have the best skyline too, so you agree, correct? Pittsburgh has the best skyline, because many anonymous voters at C-D said so!
Sure, theyre entitled to it. Seattle and San Francisco I think also have skylines that are better than NYC in ways.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
Huh? Would you say that San Jose should have a bigger skyline than San Francisco because it has a bigger city population?

Would you say that Jacksonville should have a bigger skyline than Boston, or Tempe, Arizona should have a bigger skyline than Miami, because city proper is bigger? I don't understand your point.

Obviously skyline size is relative to the metro size, not where the city boundaries lie. Are you claiming that Sydney, or Melbourne, Australia should have no highrises, because they're technically small towns (by official city boundaries)?
Dude, you ****ing lost me here.

I have no idea what youre trying to do by including the metro?

What the flying **** does a metro area have to do with the CBD skyline?

In other words, what the **** does Yonkers have to do with the Midtown and Downtown Manhattan skyline? We are comparing CITIES, NOT METROS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
One WTC has a spire, not an antenna. It will be tallest. And what does this have to do with skylines? A skyline consists of one building? If there were no Willis or One WTC, Chicago and NYC would have small skylines? LOL. Obviously you look at the totality of the skyline, not one building, not 10 buildings, not 100 buildings. You look at everything.
Yeah, no **** Sherlocke. What do you think I was saying before? Are you just repeating what im saying to make it look like you had knowledge of it before me? Im not sure.

You're just making up stuff. Your definition of "skyline" is now "at least one 10+ floor building randomly interspersed along a street."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
By this definition, the NYC skyline goes to Westchester County. It goes up the Hudson River through 100% of Manhattan, 100% of the Bronx, and much of Yonkers, and, to the south, goes into Brooklyn down to Prospect Park. It also extends east along Queens Boulevard all the way to Kew Gardens, and is rapidly filling in all the way to Jamaica.

Prospect Park to Yonkers is 25 miles. This entire stretch has 10+ floor buildings everywhere. There's no break.
Dude, I have no idea why youre bothering to include these in this. I really, ****ing dont.

What the **** does Yonkers have to do with the Manhattan skyline, again? Nobody says "Wow! Look at that NYC skyline!" from Yonkers. Nobody THINKS of Yonkers either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MI_OH View Post
Because it's obviously part of the NYC skyline! Have you never been to NYC? Why would you not include the Hudson River towers? Is it because there's a river in between, and you're making some arbitrary boundary?

So the Hancock Tower and Trump Chicago aren't in the Chicago skyline? Hong Kong is only HK island? Pudong isn't part of Shanghai skyline? And you make no sense anyways, because you just said the "Chicago skyline extends to Evanston", but now you say you have some crazy rule that only municipal boundaries or one side of bodies of water can be counted.

And that's like 5% of the overall NYC skyline. You could look at Manahttan alone, and that would be 5x the entire Chicago skyline. You could look at Midtown alone, and that would destroy Chicago.

I USED TO ****ING LIVE THERE. I HAVE FAMILY FROM THERE.


When you think of the NYC skyline (to most people with a room temperature IQ), you dont think of ****ing Jersey City. IT IS NOT PART OF THE SKYLINE OF NYC. PERIOD. THATS MY POINT.

Where did I even mention Evanston? Please, find it and quote me on it. Im waiting.


Midtown alone doesnt destroy Chicago, because the area from 59th to 34th and from the Hudson to the East river IS ACTUALLY COMPARABLE IN SIZE.



You are one thick-headed individual.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top