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)
 
Old 09-11-2014, 04:23 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,026,386 times
Reputation: 14811

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvdxer View Post
The hilliest major city east of the Mississippi is Duluth, Minnesota.
Hillier than Pittsburgh?!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2014, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
3,451 posts, read 3,403,262 times
Reputation: 2896
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Hillier than Pittsburgh?!
First of all, a town of 80,000 with a plummeting population is in no way "a major city."

Technically, since bascially the whole of Duluth sits on a giant hill (though a chunk of it is at Lake Superior level), I could see (again - using stats or whatever) Duluth winning for average incline or some such measure, but in no way is it hillier than Pitt for anyone using common sense. Pittsburgh has many hills throughout, Duluth is built right on a single hill.

For some reason, I always have to include this disclaimer whenever disagreeing with Duluth boosters (who feel they can just rattle off claims because it's remote and no one ever goes there): I love Duluth/Superior and visit every year. Apostle Islands, MN's north shore, beautiful nature surrounds it and Duluth has a more urban feel than you would expect for its population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2014, 01:09 PM
 
546 posts, read 567,430 times
Reputation: 635
Phoenix isn't flat.
There are hills and mountains within city boundaries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2014, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Elk Grove, CA
110 posts, read 70,704 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by LagunaMom View Post
Phoenix isn't flat.
There are hills and mountains within city boundaries.
There are mesas in the city but the vast majority of the populated areas are dead flat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 10:11 AM
 
Location: Phoenix metro
20,005 posts, read 69,444,268 times
Reputation: 10117
Quote:
Originally Posted by LagunaMom View Post
Phoenix isn't flat.
There are hills and mountains within city boundaries.
A few, yes. But the vast majority of the Valley is extremely flat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
3,145 posts, read 2,832,710 times
Reputation: 2858
Hilliest...Pittsburgh.

Last edited by bluecarebear; 09-19-2014 at 11:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Who Cares, USA
2,343 posts, read 2,755,923 times
Reputation: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by LagunaMom View Post
Phoenix isn't flat.
There are hills and mountains within city boundaries.
I lived in Phoenix for 8 years, and had a job that took me all over the valley, daily. The thing about Phoenix and it's suburbs is that they are in a pancake-flat valley, surrounded by and peppered with small mountain "islands", like Camelback, North Mountain, South Mountain, Papago bluffs, and Squaw Peak. For the most part, these "mountain islands" are preserves, and there is no residential development on them. There are a few small neighborhoods at the base of some of them that are on a grade, but they only make up a very tiny and insignificant fraction of the city. Most of Phoenix is perfectly level and very flat.

The incorporated town of Paradise Valley is the only real exception, but it isn't Phoenix-proper.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Chicago
589 posts, read 618,804 times
Reputation: 450
Chicago is the biggest flat city. i would think that Omaha or Des Moines is the flatest
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 05:03 PM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,223 posts, read 13,843,916 times
Reputation: 3545
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder View Post
Chicago is the biggest flat city. i would think that Omaha or Des Moines is the flatest
Omaha isn't that flat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2014, 10:50 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 25 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,017 posts, read 102,674,652 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae713 View Post
Omaha isn't that flat.
Agreed. When I first went to Omaha, I was expecting a smaller version of Chicago. But Omaha has its hills, and lots of trees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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