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.
Oakland due to better density and number of buildings. The setting is nice as well.
Richmond, VA or Salt Lake City, UT?
I prefer Richmond for its density. Mountains are great but if you need them to justify a "better skyline" we have different definitions of what downtowns should look like.
I prefer Richmond for its density. Mountains are great but if you need them to justify a "better skyline" we have different definitions of what downtowns should look like.
Tucson AZ or Tulsa OK?
Tulsa due to the height and architecture of buildings.
Fort Worth--more dynamic and looks bigger. Needs density, but I'm sure that will happen in the future.
Raleigh, NC or Louisville, KY?
Louisville. More impressive in my opinion, and has the river setting that Raleigh just can't match. Love the view of it driving on 65 South from Indiana.
Louisville. More impressive in my opinion, and has the river setting that Raleigh just can't match. Love the view of it driving on 65 South from Indiana.
Dallas or Pittsburgh.
They're both good skylines, but I like the look of Pittsburgh's better. It looks so good, from the look of the 2 rivers merging into one river. Plus the older bridges over rivers and the 2 inclines up the hill, add to the look of Pittsburgh's skyline.
They're both good skylines, but I like the look of Pittsburgh's better. It looks so good, from the look of the 2 rivers merging into one river. Plus the older bridges over rivers and the 2 inclines up the hill, add to the look of Pittsburgh's skyline.
San Antonio, or Tulsa?
Tulsa. I think San Antonio could use more tall towers. Tulsa's art deco and clean lines are impressive.
Tulsa. I think San Antonio could use more tall towers. Tulsa's art deco and clean lines are impressive.
Ft. Worth, TX or Orlando, FL?
I like Fort Worth's blend of old and new buildings, myself. And it looks more dense in its core with all the taller buildings to me, vs. in Orlando. Despite that Lake Eola (IIRC its name) and the waterfall in the middle of that lake does make Orlando look very photogenic, I can't help but prefer Fort Worth's skyline. Orlando could use a little bit, more density.
I like Fort Worth's blend of old and new buildings, myself. And it looks more dense in its core with all the taller buildings to me, vs. in Orlando. Despite that Lake Eola (IIRC its name) and the waterfall in the middle of that lake does make Orlando look very photogenic, I can't help but prefer Fort Worth's skyline. Orlando could use a little bit, more density.
Norfolk, or Jacksonville?
Jacksonville due to better architecture and more attractive setting. Both are underwhelming for their size.
Knoxville, TN or Greenville, SC?
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.
