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)
View Poll Results: US Cities with Most Dense Overall Downtown Skylines
Seattle 84 40.78%
Honolulu 15 7.28%
Portland, OR 3 1.46%
Phoenix 3 1.46%
Los Angeles 26 12.62%
San Diego 8 3.88%
Denver 6 2.91%
Dallas 14 6.80%
Houston 25 12.14%
Austin 11 5.34%
Atlanta 20 9.71%
New Orleans 5 2.43%
Nashville 10 4.85%
Minneapolis 20 9.71%
Detroit 9 4.37%
Boston 61 29.61%
Philadelphia 93 45.15%
Pittsburgh 31 15.05%
Charlotte 15 7.28%
Jersey City 15 7.28%
Other City 17 8.25%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 206. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2019, 12:52 PM
 
8,856 posts, read 6,846,043 times
Reputation: 8651

Advertisements

Boston and Philly get credit for narrow streets (curved in Boston's case) that bring buildings closer together, plus awesome midrise/lowrise density between the larger buildings. They also have pretty good highrise clusters, though Boston bats a little lightly in that regard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2019, 01:23 PM
 
Location: OC
12,805 posts, read 9,532,543 times
Reputation: 10599
Quote:
Originally Posted by UserNamesake View Post
Yeah that was weird.
Seriously. One of the least dense skylines I think
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2019, 03:09 PM
 
828 posts, read 647,325 times
Reputation: 973
Charlotte's uptown area is not that dense, although the buildings there are quite tall. Jersey City is probably the most dense, with Philly in second. Boston's is quite dense though too, and I'd argue you can throw Baltimore on the list for pure density (not for height). New Orleans feels decently dense but the actual area of the CBD is not that big.

Downtowns that don't feel dense from this list:
Charlotte
Atlanta (yes and no, but it's patchy, which detracts)
Phoenix
Houston
Dallas
Detroit
Austin

Seattle's downtown is really nice (top 10 in the country easily) but doesn't feel that that dense IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2019, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Odenton, MD
3,524 posts, read 2,314,811 times
Reputation: 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by tocoto View Post
Boston is already very dense and extensive and its built environment is growing rapidly. It's much closer to SF than Baltimore.
Boston's skyline growth is hindered by it's height zoning laws... SF doesn't have this issues, hence the reason it has 2x as many 150m+ buildings, and is buildings high-rises at a substantially faster rate

Baltimore is a black sheep... it's high-rise built environment is just as large as either city but because the city is bleeding population and it's horrific loopholes developers use, skyscraper construction is once in a blue moon and downtown is littered with parking lots/stalled projects.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2019, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NY
10,054 posts, read 14,418,692 times
Reputation: 11234
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
Boston and Philly are far ahead of the other cities on this list

Honestly I don’t know why SF is separated from those two.
SF has a significantly more dense and larger skyline than either Boston or Philly. SF has 56 towers over 400 feet high itself, and appears more dense than either Philly or Boston. Philly has 33 or so towers over 400 and Boston has about 32 or so--significantly behind and not as dense.

SF appears much more dense and has many more tall buildings than either Boston or Philly. That's why San Fran is not on this list, and both Boston and Philly are.

I like Boston and Philly's skylines, but Philly's is better and more dense of the 2 right now, imo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2019, 11:29 PM
 
8,856 posts, read 6,846,043 times
Reputation: 8651
Interesting...Seattle in this decade has built or recently started site prep for more 400'+ towers in greater Downtown than the sum total of what Boston or Philly has...34. Those cities are building some, but nothing like Seattle.

PS, many are closer than the 60' separation requirement I talked about earlier. Some areas don't have that requirement, and some areas didn't when they were built.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2019, 02:00 AM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
2,985 posts, read 4,882,037 times
Reputation: 3419
Seattle, handily.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2019, 03:28 AM
 
Location: Odenton, MD
3,524 posts, read 2,314,811 times
Reputation: 3769
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz View Post
Seattle, handily.
Seattle may have more proper skyscrapers, but Boston & Philly are denser as they're streets are significantly narrower

Last edited by Joakim3; 09-08-2019 at 03:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2019, 06:51 AM
 
Location: Boston, MA
14,480 posts, read 11,273,359 times
Reputation: 8996
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz View Post
Seattle, handily.
Nope, not even a top 50 world city.

https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?s=1&c=3&p=0&r=50

Last edited by Mr. Joshua; 09-08-2019 at 07:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2019, 08:15 AM
 
14,010 posts, read 14,995,436 times
Reputation: 10465
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjbradleynyc View Post
SF has a significantly more dense and larger skyline than either Boston or Philly. SF has 56 towers over 400 feet high itself, and appears more dense than either Philly or Boston. Philly has 33 or so towers over 400 and Boston has about 32 or so--significantly behind and not as dense.

SF appears much more dense and has many more tall buildings than either Boston or Philly. That's why San Fran is not on this list, and both Boston and Philly are.

I like Boston and Philly's skylines, but Philly's is better and more dense of the 2 right now, imo.
I’d like to point out in most US cities not named NYC or Chicago the “filler” is more in the 250-350 range than the 400-500 range. What that captures is the peaks of the skyline.

So when you see a “dense” skyline it’s largely those smaller buildings that fill in the gaps to make it seem full.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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