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.
Hmm last I checked Carson was not in the city of Los Angeles. Yes parts of Los Angeles are flat, but for the most part I would consider it to be a hilly city. Even Hollywood is not flat - it gradually goes downhill as you head south towards Wilshire.
As far as your skyline shots, all one has to do is look at the residential in the foreground to instantly rule out Los Angeles.
LA is twice the density with a metro area twice the size of Houston. I would hope it has at least some residential in & around its mediocre CBD.
Houston has its downtown neighborhoods too (Midtown/Little Saigon, NoDo, East End/Old Chinatown, etc.) they are just hidden by all of the trees & greenery which LA does not have. Houston is more similar to Atlanta in that regard.
LA is twice the density with a metro area 3 times the size of Houston. I would hope it has some residential in & around its mediocre CBD.
Houston has its downtown neighborhoods too (Midtown/Little Saigon, NoDo, East End/Chinatown, etc.) they are just hidden by all of the trees & greenery which LA does not have. Houston is more similar to Atlanta in that regard.
That view was taken in the opposite direction of the CBD, so no skyscrapers.
LA has more low rise density than Houston, but Houston hands down has LA beat on sheer amount of skylines & skyscrapers. No if's, and's, or but's about it.
Houston has an extensive (7 mile long) underground network of air conditioned tunnels its 9-5 utilizes to escape the brutal heat & humidity on the Gulf Coast.
LA has more low rise density than Houston, but Houston hands down has LA beat on sheer amount of skylines & skyscrapers. No if's, and's, or but's about it.
I'm pretty sure LA has more skyscrapers. Houston may have more height to their skyscrapers.
Either way I would take LA's mid-rise high-density 11 times out of 10 over what Houston has.
LA has more low rise density than Houston, but Houston hands down has LA beat on sheer amount of skylines & skyscrapers. No if's, and's, or but's about it.
That's true, though I wasn't thinking of skylines or skyscrapers when I brought up the photos or elsewhere in the thread. In combined height of buildings > 100 m, Houston comes out slightly higher than Los Angeles.
Los Angeles does poorly considering its metro size; San Francisco and Atlanta come out slightly ahead. So does Honolulu! Honolulu is probably better than any other American city in amount per person. Interestingly, Chicago and New York City come out the same person.
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.
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.
Yes parts of Los Angeles are flat, but for the most part I would consider it to be a hilly city. Even Hollywood is not flat - it gradually goes downhill as you head south towards Wilshire. 
Honolulu is probably better than any other American city in amount per person. Interestingly, Chicago and New York City come out the same person.
