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.
Some might say it does. I can see how they would say that, but I think Chicago is clearly the winner.
This seems to be the crux of your argument and I strongly disagree. Toronto has over 2,000 buildings over 300 ft in height, second only to New York City, which has over 5,000 such buildings in North America. Furthermore, this is almost like saying that San Diego's entire skyline is "largely irrelevant" since none of its towers are over 500 ft due to downtown height restrictions. Also, Toronto's landscape doesn't mute the presence of the shorter highrises like it might in other cities due to geography; they are still very much prominent fixtures in the skyline, particularly away from the main core. Look at how they do so; they seem to stretch on forever:
I don't see how the two can be separated. Those shorter buildings are still part and parcel of Toronto's massive skyline.
Toronto is only much more impressive than Philadelphia in terms of number of high-rises. Toronto's SKYLINE itself isn't that massive as the numbers say because Toronto does not have that many buildings over 500 feet. A massive skyline to me is a very large and a very tall skyline. I do not think sh*tloads of 300 footers around 16 500+ footers make an amazing unmatched skyline. Toronto does not blow Philly away in density, nor in height, or even in architecture. The reality is, Philadelphia may not have as many high-rises as Toronto, but it still has a large, tall, and dense skyline. From that perspective, Toronto doesn't blow Philly away.
The surprising fact isn't really that Toronto has 1,766 high-rises (or more) because that does not automatically equate to an amazing unmatched skyline. In fact, Chicago has only 1,098 high-rises, much less than Toronto. But the scary pants sh*tting fact is that Toronto has now 16 buildings over 500 feet, while Chicago has 94.
Let me repeat, Toronto...16, Chicago...94. Two words ffor that...NO COMPARISON! 94 500+ footers is scarier than 1,766 total high-rises (or more) because you know a skyline of 94 500+ footers will obliterate just about every skyline in world. Don't even get me started with New York.
My point is...Toronto has lots and lots of high-rises, but in the end Chicago obliterates it because size + height means a whole lot. Toronto's has size...but lacks in height, that is why it does not blow away Philly and that is also why Toronto is NOT in the league of New York and Chicago.
Last edited by Libohove90; 08-03-2009 at 06:51 PM..
In fact, I would still make a case that Philadelphia has a better skyline than Sao Paulo. # of high-rises doesn't equate to an amazing skyline...period.
Toronto blows Philadlephia completely out of the water in every single category, skyline being at the top of the list.
What you dont know about Philadelphia could fill volumes, what you do know about Philadlephia couldnt fill a 1"x3" sticky pad. Philadelphias GDP is the 8th largest in the world($312 B), Toronto comes in at 22nd ($190 B).
Philadelphias downtown is arguably the best 100,000 person urban neighborhood in the usa, 200,000 when school is in session. I'm not saying its better than Torontos but its a very subjective matter , the nonsense coming from your PC should get you dropkicked off the planet.
Toronto is only much more impressive than Philadelphia in terms of number of high-rises. Toronto's SKYLINE itself isn't that massive as the numbers say because Toronto does not have that many buildings over 500 feet. A massive skyline to me is a very large and a very tall skyline. I do not think sh*tloads of 300 footers around 16 500+ footers make an amazing unmatched skyline. Toronto does not blow Philly away in density, nor in height, or even in architecture. The reality is, Philadelphia may not have as many high-rises as Toronto, but it still has a large, tall, and dense skyline. From that perspective, Toronto doesn't blow Philly away.
The surprising fact isn't really that Toronto has 1,766 high-rises (or more) because that does not automatically equate to an amazing unmatched skyline. In fact, Chicago has only 1,098 high-rises, much less than Toronto. But the scary pants sh*tting fact is that Toronto has now 16 buildings over 500 feet, while Chicago has 94.
Let me repeat, Toronto...16, Chicago...94. Two words ffor that...NO COMPARISON! 94 500+ footers is scarier than 1,766 total high-rises (or more) because you know a skyline of 94 500+ footers will obliterate just about every skyline in world. Don't even get me started with New York.
My point is...Toronto has lots and lots of high-rises, but in the end Chicago obliterates it because size + height means a whole lot. Toronto's has size...but lacks in height, that is why it does not blow away Philly and that is also why Toronto is NOT in the league of New York and Chicago.
I don't want to drag Chicago into this, because as I said, I believe that Chicago's skyline beats Toronto's as well. But you just can't just easily brush off the myriad of shorter highrises in the 400 ft range in Toronto either. I'm sorry, but THEY COUNT--especially for increased density. Chicago's skyline is massive not just because it's big as hell and has a lot of tall towers, but because it has tons of mid-height and smaller towers as well for "fillers." This is why I'm not all that impressed with, say, Dubai's skyline: they live for height, and it's more of them every day, but they just look like a bunch of fingers jutting up from the ground.
At any rate, Toronto's skyline is much more extensive and more massive than Philly's and because of that, I do not see them being in the same league at all. Toronto might not be in NYC's league, but Philly isn't in Toronto's league either.
In fact, I would still make a case that Philadelphia has a better skyline than Sao Paulo. # of high-rises doesn't equate to an amazing skyline...period.
That's because Sao Paulo's buildings are bland and crappy. Number of highrises alone don't make for a great skyline, but it can be a contributing factor in some cases...not in Sao Paulo's though.
I don't want to drag Chicago into this, because as I said, I believe that Chicago's skyline beats Toronto's as well. But you just can't just easily brush off the myriad of shorter highrises in the 400 ft range in Toronto either. I'm sorry, but THEY COUNT--especially for increased density. Chicago's skyline is massive not just because it's big as hell and has a lot of tall towers, but because it has tons of mid-height and smaller towers as well for "fillers." This is why I'm not all that impressed with, say, Dubai's skyline: they live for height, and it's more of them every day, but they just look like a bunch of fingers jutting up from the ground.
At any rate, Toronto's skyline is much more extensive and more massive than Philly's and because of that, I do not see them being in the same league at all. Toronto might not be in NYC's league, but Philly isn't in Toronto's league either.
Yes, we have finally agreed on something. You didn't say Toronto's skyline blows Philly away, you just said it is much larger and more extensive, which I do agree. However, when you consider other factors like height, density and architecture, Toronto vs Philly doesn't become so lop-sided then.
And I voted Toronto here, I think it is the 3rd best skyline in North America. I just did not agree on Toronto blowing out Philly, only New York and Chicago would blow out Philly. Regarding to your statement on what league Toronto is in, Toronto in my opinion is not nearly on the level of NYC and even Chicago as well. Philly is on the same league as Toronto is and at the same time it isn't, depending how you look at it.
Toronto has a nice skyline, no question, but the needle was Seattles trademark. The needle tower is a little tacky to begin with but to blatantly ripoff another citys icon well thats just unacceptable.Toronto loses points and I'm going to have to go with Philadelphia on this one.
I think the Toronto needle is much more impressive than Seattle's.
Seattle had the needle first, but Toronto has a better one IMO.
What you dont know about Philadelphia could fill volumes, what you do know about Philadlephia couldnt fill a 1"x3" sticky pad. Philadelphias GDP is the 8th largest in the world($312 B), Toronto comes in at 22nd ($190 B).
Philadelphias downtown is arguably the best 100,000 person urban neighborhood in the usa, 200,000 when school is in session. I'm not saying its better than Torontos but its a very subjective matter , the nonsense coming from your PC should get you dropkicked off the planet.
I agree, but most of those comments are made because Philadelphia beat Atlanta in that other highly contested poll. This is some weird form of retaliation, but I really dont care because I know what the Philadelphia skyline is and also what the Toronto skyline is. Philly all the way
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.
