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.
You know they build buildings that can withstand earthquakes. California has minor earthquakes but Texas has tornadoes and hurricanes. < this is getting off point
You know they build buildings that can withstand earthquakes. California has minor earthquakes but Texas has tornadoes and hurricanes. < this is getting off point
SKYLINES people
Actually, we were talking about WHY some cities don't build as high, and it's legitimate to say it's because of the location. We haven't seen that many "BIG ones", but there's still a chance for it as long as those cities are on fault lines.
We're not really talking about the buildings themselves, but the location of the buildings in a city center. Tornadoes and hurricanes can brake glass, but earthquakes are IN the ground, where the base of the building can be damaged.... that's much worse. Some of those buildings aren't or may not be well built for earthquakes as we think, so one can fall and do major damage to another building, creating a chain reaction.
Both states have skylines to be proud of. Architecture style does not phase me, impression of how powerful skyline is does. Tall, wide, ever extending. SF and Houston are skyline gems for both states in different ways. SF with new 1200 ft tower planned will easily become 3rd most impressive skyline in US but Houston also easily top 5 skyline in US. Height of Houston and multiple skylines Houston has is rather impressive. I wish both cities SF and Houston may have beautiful projects in future, I look forward to nice powerful skylines outside of NY and CHI. Miami is almost to NY and CHI level but still lacks 1000 ft+ building.
Dallas has decent skyline but I do not like how the city needs to focus attention on light show to show it off rather than actually building tall or wide. That imo feels like fake mentality and LAs skyline is nothing one would expect from 2nd largest city. Both cities are decent but nothing to write home about compared to their in state competitors.
Imo skylines show how powerful a city truly is relative to its size, I base off only buildings and skyline not natural setting, it makes appreciation of creation hard to do that. Skyline is a lining of buildings that tower the sky, other perceptions are mediocre when including unrelative criteria. NY, CHI, SF, Houston, Miami, Phila, ATL all look very powerful, all other cities are decent. That is an attractive feature for me and those who have same thought process.
Here are pictures of best skylines from both states
I agree,a skyline is a skyline, I don't know why people try to add things that have nothing to do with the height or beauty of the actual buildings.
Both are impressive. SF would still be impressive if it was set in Houston without the hills, and Houston would still be impressive if it was set withing the hills in the bay
Only NYC, Chicago, Houston, & maybe Miami are what I'd truly call massive skylines in the United States.
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.
Atlanta is massive...........
