Would you say that metro Detroit is "uglier" than other metro areas? (condos)

[magellan]

Originally Posted by STLCardsBlues1989

Anyway, it's easy to find beauty in just about any city when you look for it.

Detroit

Sorry, but I don't find Portman all that beautiful. But there definitely is some beauty in Detroit. It just needs a spit shine and some more PEOPLE:
Moderator cut: pictures removed, copyright protection
And wow, that St. Louis photographer needs to cut down on the HDR. Nice pics though.

I have to agree with Cato in that Chicago is overrated in many ways, but not in its architecture. And it's way too expensive. That's why I like living within a 3 hour drive/train ride.

[Tex?Il?]

Thanks for the pictures of ST. Louis and Detroit!

I guess what I was trying before.

I'm from the Chicago area and I have been around the Detroit and St. Louis a little, but not much.

Its just that when the pictures are posted I'm like "Well other cities within a days drive of Chicago have cool buildings too."

Seriously if you were to just look at the skyline of Detroit, you would never know about its problems,

To me, Detroit or St. Louis's skyline look like Chicago light to me. Thats where my wondering about the architecture comes from I guess.

[Bayzing]

Interesting conversation about skylines... I haven't spent too much time in Detroit... so I can't really say much about who it compares with most other cities... though in my opinion it doesn't seem any better or worse than St. Louis. I certainly think there is much beauty to be found in just about any urban setting... and if you look to close... your likely to find some very ugly things as well....

I personally think there are three different kinds of beauty when speaking about a city. 1- Architectural beauty 2-Skyline beauty 3-Natural beauty.

1- As far as architectural beauty.... I really think Chicago has to be high on the list. Washington DC is also high on the list... but I've got to tell you.... I lived in DC for a couple of years and while I loved the momuments and many aspects of DC... I really missed not having a skyline... there's something about having beautiful skycrapers in the background that gives a city a certain personality. New York also has to be considered for it's architectural beauty, so does San Francisco, Boston, ... even Philly has some cool architecture. Here are a couple great pictures of Chicago:



Moderator cut: pictures removed, copyright protection

2- Skyline beauty... once again Chicago has to be high on the list... so does New York... I even like Seattle, Atlanta, L.A., and Denver... each one has a unique skyline. One city of considerable size that I think has a very mediocre skyline is Phoenix... whereas I think Philly has one of the more beautiful skylines (but you never hear much about it). Compare the two: PHOENIX:
Moderator cut: pictures removed, copyright protection
PHILLY


3- Natural beauty is also a huge consideration.... possibly the greatest consideration in my opinion. This is what most of the big cities lack. Chicago, New York, Philly, DC, Atlanta... I personally don't think they have a post-card-like natural setting. Here are some of my favorite big cities with a beautiful natural setting: Pittsburgh, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, and Salt Lake City. Personally I think Salt Lake City in the fall and wintertime is my absolutely top pick with those 11,000 ft. mountains virtually on top of you... Denver has a better skyline... but the moutains are much further away... whereas in Salt Lake City... there's a good view no matter where you are in the city and no matter what direction you're looking. Here's a couple pictures of the mountains rising above Salt Lake City:





Overall.... my top pick is San Francisco... because it places high in all three.... architecture, skyline, and natural setting... toss in the golden gate bridge and (in my opinion) you absolutely have your winner.

Moderator cut: pictures removed, copyright protection

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Please tell me if there is something wrong with me!!!!

Why does everyone think Chicago is so beautiful?? I know from the area, I'm really not being a "grass is greener on the other side" but come on!

I don't get it.

Maybe I'm just too much of a nature and history guy who thinks if there aren't structures that pre-date the civil war, mountains, or rugged, natural ocean coastline, then the city has nothing unique enough that can't be replicated.

Am I ignorant about architecture? Why is anything Chicago have, architecture-wise so special. I've seen pictures. The older buildings of downtown Chicago look like what Detroit has. The newer ones look like what Houston or Dallas have.

Can someone please set the story once and for all why in the world Chicago would be considered so beautiful architecturally?? Am I just ignorant??

Chicago is, IMO, the most architecturally diverse city in the nation. Strolling around the city will drop the jaw. Im still awed to this day when I go to Chicago. So much diversity in architectural style, its simply amazing.

Maybe this will help?

http://www.perfectescapes.com/TheSui...lmer-house.jpg

http://www.sta-archive.com/GalaImages/JPEG/06B-01.jpg

http://www.dkimages.com/discover/pre...7/50474417.JPG

http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/6344/aqua44td.jpg

http://www.chicagoarchitecture.info/...Carbon-003.jpg

http://www.dkimages.com/discover/pre...7/50474608.JPG

http://updatecenter.britannica.com/e...8&rendTypeId=4

http://frankmcmahon.com/greathall/images/greathall.jpg

http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thu...ry_chicago.jpg

http://www.ganzelgroup.com/media/ph12.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...,_Illinois.JPG

http://www.pullman-museum.org/main/pfm.09.07.06.14.jpg

http://www.designbuild-network.com/p...cago-spire.jpg

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/...uide-ga-11.jpg

http://www.luc.edu/orgs/undergroundc...s/thomson1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...e_Building.jpg

http://chicagopictures.net/images/ch...ields_L005.jpg

http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicv/vfiles20781.jpg

[Bluefly]

I never found the iconic Renaissance Center pictures ever that appealing. I guess I see the Ren Cen as a disaster in urban revitalization - a self-contained fortress designed to protect itself from the outside city. It failed pretty miserably, but GM's done well to open it up. That, on the other hand, is a gorgeous picture. Imagine if craftsmen took the time to put that much archtectural detail into buildings that far from any close
Moderator cut: pictures removed, copyright protection

[STLCardsBlues1989]

Bayzing, I'm a little confused. You kind of blurred the line between architectural and skyline beauty by using skylines for both. Architectural beauty would include shorter buildings like homes, churches, and government buildings, no?

I also find cities beautiful when you can see them in every season (sunshine, rain, snow, thunderstorm), which is one thing you can find in Chicago, Detroit, and St. Louis.

As far as architecture, you also have to think of homes. I'm not sure about Detroit or Chicago, but St. Louis' historic homes are typically made of brick, and rowhouses (such as you'd see more in the east) are fairly common.
St. Louis also has flounder houses. They are houses that have one short wall and one much higher wall, making them look like they're half of a flounder
Rural & Urban House Types in North ... - Google Book Search

In fact, some historic buildings in St. Louis and Chicago were designed by Albert Kahn.

Anyway, I would just think that architectural beauty would apply to all kinds of buildings, whereas you pretty much just used it for the skyline, which is skyline beauty.

Here's some churches as well.
Christ Church Cathedral

St. Roch Church

Temple Israel

And schools:
Beaumont High School

Central Visual and Performing Arts High School

Hamilton Elementary


Some typical homes on the North Side


Those are just some examples, but you get my point.

[Cato the Elder]

Originally Posted by Bayzing

whereas I think Philly has one of the more beautiful skylines (but you never hear much about it).

Much of it has to do with the fact that the public got caught up in the taller-is-better craze. Philadelphia had the gentleman's agreement that they would not build higher than Penn's Statue on City Hall. So Philadelpha did not have a modern glass skyscraper until after the late-80s. People are less motivated to build modest skyscrapers like the TransAmerica Building in SF. Look at the original Rocky vs the sequels. You get a straight shot into downtown along the Ben Franklin Parkway from the step of the Art Museum. There is no modern skyline in the first one. Ultimately, it's about scale, which is why SF works even without towering skyscrapers.

The beauty of Philadelphia has to be the melding of old and new. There is no city I know of in the country where you can get a comprehensive lesson in US architecture by just walking. You start at the Delaware River and see the 17th century Swedish churches and log cabins further downriver. Then you see all the great 18th century architecture like at Elfreth's Alley which then leads to master colonial buildings such as the Georgian Christ Church. You then see all the nice early 19th century buildings such as the first banks of the US, followed by Burnham's Wanamaker Building (12 Monkeys) and MacArthur's City Hall (National Treasure). Then all the glorious Victorian era architecture is a sight to behold followed by Art Deco, 30th St. Station (Trading Spaces), Trumbauer's masterful Art Museum, English manors, Wright's Beth Shalom in Glenside, and the postwar bungalows. Don't forget the wondeful architecture on Penn's campus like Furness' library (Philadelphia with Tom Hanks) and the important PSFS Building.

I personally don't think NY is a "pretty" city - a vibrant, exciting city - yes. As a famous architect said, you once exited Penn Station like one of the gods, but you now exit like a rat. The demolition of the old Penn Station has to be the biggest crime against architecture ever committed.

[Bhaalspawn]

Wouldn't much of this depend on what part of the suburbs you're in? I don't regard Novi, for example, as being ugly. Oakland County looks like other suburban regions that I've seen in other cities.

[detshen]

Originally Posted by Coldjensens

I guess you see what you are looking for. Detroit metro is far prettier than many other cities. It is very green here. Most cities and towns have streams, lakes or rivers that actually have water in them. Wildlife is everywhere. Trees are everywhere. The area is filled with quaint small towns with old fashioned downtowns.

Yes there are a lot fo suburbs that are just sprawl. However that are a lot of suburbs that are beautiful. It depends on which ones you look at. Even the sprawl suburbs are prettier than most other City's sprawl suburbs because of the trees, grass, and water everywhere.

I agree with this. I lived in SoCal and all there is for greenery is palm trees and a few shrubs. When you do see a patch of green look for the water pipes, which I find ugly because it's such a waste of water to pretend an area isn't a desert.

I like to walk around the Ford mansion area in Dearborn, there is a paved walking and biking path with footbridges over the Rouge river and thick trees, it's beautiful.

[Tex?Il?]

Thanks for the pictures Seve-O.

OK, I I'll take back stuff I said.

Chicago can be beautiful for how its all put together I suppose. Individual buildings and structures in Chicago, do have, in my opinion have equivalents in other cities.

I suppose its the whole is more than the some of the parts.

I will say that the Hyde Park area is beautiful. With the University of Chicago there, and Jackson Park, it DOES feel like Europe. Theres more old brownstone mansions with big yards. Unlike Lincoln Park, which used to be like that in the old days, are nearly all gone.

Because I prefer a little more space, I would say that the nice, safe neighborhoods of the southside have the most character and are the most attractive in Chicago.