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.
Pound per pound it has to be Phoenix or DC. However, this has little to do with what makes a city good or not. By and large cities in the US have much better skylines than Europe but are much inferior as cities.
Phoenix, San Jose, and maybe DC come to mind, but more so the first two. I don't care how you look at it, both San Jose and Phoenix are cities with a population of over 1 million. In yet not only are their skylines short and small, but the architecture isn't very impressive either. They both have bland skylines, and them both being some of the largest cities in the US puts their skylines to shame even more.
Location: Moved to Gladstone, MO in June 2022 and back to Minnesota in September 2022
2,072 posts, read 5,061,874 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam
It's really laughable that some of you are so obsessed with trying to one-up each other and finding a city inferior to your own. No, Phoenix isn't immune from having a "sub-par" skyline compared to others, but the facts remain that it IS a new city, it DOES have height restrictions, and considering that many other cities have their hotels located in their downtowns which of course adds to the skyline, I think it would look quite ridiculous to see hundreds of golf courses located next to hotels in downtown Phoenix. Despite its "sub-par" skyline, its bad economy, etc..., it still hasn't kept people from wanting to move here.
Yea, exactly, I still wanna move there even though it has all those problems. Just because it has height restrictions and such doesn't make the skyline good, its still a pathetic subpar skyline, doesn't matter if theres height restrictions or not. But that isn't making the city bad or preventing me from wanting to move there.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
What's with all the Phoenix haters? It's skyline outdoes San Jose's and that's a pretty big city. My cousin lives there in SJ, and I give a hard time about his skyline being puny. Hahaha it ticks him off.
Ok.... Phoenix and San Antonio's skylines are NOT that bad.
Phoenix may not have spectacular architecture overall, and San Antonio's may not be very tall, but they're still pretty dense. And the way I see it, a skyline should be ranked like this (from most important to least):
1. Density
2. Height
3. Archietcure
4. Tall & short building ratio/comparison
5. Natural surroundings
Phoenix does well in 3 of those 5 categories, and so does San Antonio. I'd score it...
Phoenix:
1. Good
2. Decent
3. Below Average
4. Good
5. Great
San Antonio:
1. Good
2. Average
3. Great
4. Good
5. Bad
I think density is important, but architecture is the most important. That is basically what makes the skyline. I am sorry, but I wouldn't want a skyline full of 1970 box looking buildings dotting the cityscape.
I think density is important, but architecture is the most important. That is basically what makes the skyline. I am sorry, but I wouldn't want a skyline full of 1970 box looking buildings dotting the cityscape.
I agree i like diversity in skyline, wonder what's going on with building in many cities (oh wouldn't want to turn this into a building thread by accident)
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.
