Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 01-05-2011, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
5,464 posts, read 5,710,417 times
Reputation: 6098

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
Why isn't it a fair comparison?
The list doesn't include WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 towers which "should" be there but aren't. So your list is taking advantage of a temporary gap in NYC's height because the current WTC towers are still under construction. You should come visit NYC by the way, the new towers already look pretty awesome in person. WTC1 is only half way done and its already huge.

 
Old 01-05-2011, 10:53 AM
 
Location: Chicago
3,569 posts, read 7,199,361 times
Reputation: 2637
Sears tower will technically be taller then the new wtc. Roof to roof.
 
Old 01-05-2011, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
5,464 posts, read 5,710,417 times
Reputation: 6098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alacran View Post
Sears tower will technically be taller then the new wtc. Roof to roof.
New wtc's height is symbolic though. They were supposed to keep the original roof height as the old wtc and the total height equal to the year of DOI.
 
Old 01-05-2011, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
4,515 posts, read 9,700,741 times
Reputation: 5641
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
i dont know how anyone could say chicago. ny is definately the winner. and i dont see the fascination about chicago's skyline. yes its tall, modern, and lakefront, but ny is denser, larger, has more diversity, and is in all around better city. if i were to move to one it would definately be ny:better weather, more fun, more variety of food, and it would the most amazing thing walking around at midnight with no less people on the streets.

this is ny's skyline. just beautiful with the ocean and islands:
http://abodenyc.com/images/New%20York%20City%20Images/New-York-Skyline-Night%20-%20Fixed.jpg (broken link)

and chicago. yes its also beautiful but nothing like new york:
http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/19550...ht_skyline.jpg

los angeles with its mountains, san diego with the beaches and mountains, miami with its islands and beaches, and seattle and portland with mountains also havemagnificent skylines thanks to the natural beauty of the area, although the actual skylines are not comparable

los angeles:
http://mk23.image.pbase.com/u14/jazzmaster221/large/38725847.LosAngelesSkyline.jpg (broken link)

san diego
https://www.goclubexe.com/clubportal...03/skyline.jpg

seattle
http://www.seattleplace.com/images/S...l_Postcard.jpg

portland:
http://www.georgefox.edu/about/gallery/images/Image3.jpg (broken link)

miami:
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/r21/images/Miami2.jpg (broken link)

the most underrated of all cities i think is Honolulu:
http://lodging4vacations.com/ko-olin...lu-skyline.jpg

maybe they are in denial?
 
Old 01-05-2011, 11:32 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,384 posts, read 28,515,553 times
Reputation: 5884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
The list doesn't include WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7 towers which "should" be there but aren't. So your list is taking advantage of a temporary gap in NYC's height because the current WTC towers are still under construction. You should come visit NYC by the way, the new towers already look pretty awesome in person. WTC1 is only half way done and its already huge.
Well I certainly wasn't intending to take advantage, just giving out stats. NYC is still double Chicago in skyscrapers. I have seen pics of the construction, looking good.
 
Old 01-05-2011, 03:07 PM
 
370 posts, read 1,010,393 times
Reputation: 323
Maybe I'll start a thread titled "Why do some posters get offended when people prefer other cities to NYC?".
 
Old 01-05-2011, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
5,464 posts, read 5,710,417 times
Reputation: 6098
Quote:
Originally Posted by ric75 View Post
Maybe I'll start a thread titled "Why do some posters get offended when people prefer other cities to NYC?".
The thread starter is not from NY, just to clear that up.
 
Old 01-05-2011, 03:47 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,384 posts, read 28,515,553 times
Reputation: 5884
Quote:
Originally Posted by ric75 View Post
Maybe I'll start a thread titled "Why do some posters get offended when people prefer other cities to NYC?".
Not sure, U.S. has a lot of good cities. I would have no qualms about living in a bunch and don't necessarily think one is "better" than the other. Who knows, I might end up in NYC. I'm not really "stuck" on any city, I get bored after awhile anywhere and need a change of scenery.
 
Old 01-05-2011, 08:31 PM
 
758 posts, read 1,961,888 times
Reputation: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew61 View Post
Um, maybe because the tallest building in North America is located in Chicago...?
Um, is this Chicago Public Schools "New Math"?

NYC has 6 times as many tall buildings as Chicago. Obviously it has more tall buildings than Chicago.

If I build a 2000 foot toothpick in Fargo, North Dakota, would you say Fargo or Sao Paulo has more tall buildings? I mean, one city has tens of thousands of highrises, and the other has a 2000 foot toothpick?
 
Old 01-06-2011, 12:46 AM
 
Location: In the heights
37,153 posts, read 39,404,784 times
Reputation: 21247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio248 View Post
Um, is this Chicago Public Schools "New Math"?

NYC has 6 times as many tall buildings as Chicago. Obviously it has more tall buildings than Chicago.

If I build a 2000 foot toothpick in Fargo, North Dakota, would you say Fargo or Sao Paulo has more tall buildings? I mean, one city has tens of thousands of highrises, and the other has a 2000 foot toothpick?
Taller buildings can go either way, it depends on what metric you want to use (number of tall buildings after a certain height and tallest building overall are two metrics by which Chicago could win and it wouldn't be some kind of semantic cheat). Though in any case we're not talking about giant toothpicks or even antenna towers/monuments. It's pretty disingenuous to mention that when we're talking about skyscrapers.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:17 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top