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.
newness is subjective, i wouldn't consider something built during the last 20 years, "new". Anything built in the last 10 years, is new to me, and even 10 is stretching it.
So Charlotte's tallest and Atlanta's tallest both opened in 1992.
I consider buildings built in the past 20 years to be newer buildings in relation to the overall built environment. Of course a 20 year old structure isn't "new", but it is newER in the overall scheme of things and will have a more modern appearance than a 50 year old building.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,491 posts, read 15,055,859 times
Reputation: 7367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akhenaton06
But proportionally speaking, Charlotte has more newer buildings. There are some angles at which to view downtown Atlanta's skyline where the older stuff shows up a little more prominently; that's not the case for Charlotte simply because we don't have a lot of older buildings (still standing) and the ones we have are overshadowed by the newer buildings at just about all angles. By "older," I mean anything pre-1980 for the purposes of this discussion. It also usually tends to show how more developed downtown Atlanta is on the ground level than uptown Charlotte. Here's one such angle:
I'm not ragging on your post as your point is well made, but there is still a lot of the older structures in downtown Atlanta that obscured from any angle unless you are at street level. Fortunately, there is a pic from 1962 from the same angle you posted above that highlights this:
I'm not ragging on your post as your point is well made, but there is still a lot of the older structures in downtown Atlanta that obscured from any angle unless you are at street level. Fortunately, there is a pic from 1962 from the same angle you posted above that highlights this:
A good number of those buildings are still standing.
Oh yeah, definitely. I'm not disputing that at all. But all angles don't obscure those older buildings. Pretty much every angle obscures them (the few that are still standing that are even tall enough to have a presence in the skyline) in Charlotte.
Atlanta doesn't look like Charleston sc, But its not a new city like Charlotte. I don't think anyone will even try to dispute that, because you can't. Charlotte looks even newer in person. More newer than what the pictures show on line. It would take so many new skyscrapers to hide the old ones and change Atlanta Skyline, to make it look newer.
Atlanta doesn't look like Charleston sc, But its not a new city like Charlotte. I don't think anyone will even try to dispute that, because you can't. Charlotte looks even newer in person. More newer than what the pictures show on line. It would take so many new skyscrapers to hide the old ones and change Atlanta Skyline, to make it look newer.
Not really. Most angles where the more historic buildings show up prominently in downtown Atlanta's skyline are from the south. A couple of strategically placed towers on that side would obscure those buildings, but I doubt that would happen (nor would I want to see it happen).
Also, realize that while we're comparing the skyline of downtown Atlanta here with uptown Charlotte, midtown Atlanta and Buckhead are just as "new" as uptown Charlotte.
Atlanta can't compete in the newness catergory. Atlanta just isn't as New as Dallas, Houston, And ( Charlotte ) Atlanta's Architecture is just not as nice, yeah there's a lot of tall Sky scrapers, but most of all the top 40 cities in the us have tall Sky scrapers these days. Even Atlanta's new buildings look old. seriously!
Atlanta can't compete in the newness catergory. Atlanta just isn't as New as Dallas, Houston, And ( Charlotte ) Atlanta's Architecture is just not as nice, yeah there's a lot of tall Sky scrapers, but most of all the top 40 cities in the us have tall Sky scrapers these days. Even Atlanta's new buildings look old. seriously!
OK, you're just sounding very uninformed right now. Stop while you're ahead. Atlanta has just as many newer buildings as Houston and Dallas, and even more than Charlotte; they have also retained more of their historic buildings also (compared with Charlotte). And what's wrong with older buildings anyway? I wish we had kept most of ours in Charlotte! The most active and vibrant cities have retained a good bit of their historic stock. Why do you think cities like Charleston, Savannah, New Orleans, etc. are so popular? Once upon a time we truly valued the art of city-building and those buildings constructed back then have stood the test of time. Some of the new stuff going up here in Charlotte and elsewhere is cheap crap that will fall apart in 30 years or so.
Its been in the Charlotte vs Atlanta threads people have made that claim. Charlotte people say stuff like.... Southpark, Charlottes Buckhead, etc Everything I see people type about charlotte they try and compare it too what Atlanta has done.
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.
