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.
Is that the infamous grassy knoll at the bottom of this pic?
Good pics btw
That would in fact be Dealey Plaza with the infamous Book Depository. There's something about standing less than 10 feet from where Kennedy was killed that makes me feel...like...heck i dunno what word to use but you guys get my point right?
San Francisco's skyline is really bland since most buildings are short and brown boxes. Dallas skyline has more to it and has more modern and attractive buildings than San Francisco's skyline. I still voted for San Francisco because it does have a much bigger and denser skyline which is why I think it is more impressive and plust the location and scenery helps out too.
SF looks good if you don't zoom in to street level.
This makes no sense. SF's skyline is far better at street level than it is from a distance (the opposite of Seattle, by the way). At street level it is easily the 3rd best skyline in the country. From a distance it's debatable.
SF has the kind of skyline, when people are in it, they say "Wow, this is far more impressive than I imagined". I honestly have no idea where you got the idea that it's worse at street level.
This makes no sense. SF's skyline is far better at street level than it is from a distance (the opposite of Seattle, by the way). At street level it is easily the 3rd best skyline in the country. From a distance it's debatable.
SF has the kind of skyline, when people are in it, they say "Wow, this is far more impressive than I imagined". I honestly have no idea where you got the idea that it's worse at street level.
I understand where Lake Wooder is coming from. If you get a up close look at SF skyline it is very bland and boring. The building have no flavor to them. All I see is a bunch of concrete boxes. The only thing that SF has on Dallas is scenery. Other than that Dallas winds hand down. Wish my home town of Fort Worth had at least half the skyline of Dallas.
I understand where Lake Wooder is coming from. If you get a up close look at SF skyline it is very bland and boring. The building have no flavor to them. All I see is a bunch of concrete boxes. The only thing that SF has on Dallas is scenery. Other than that Dallas winds hand down. Wish my home town of Fort Worth had at least half the skyline of Dallas.
I dont think you actually understood where Lake Wooder was coming from. He said zooming in on STREET LEVEL. And you think he just meant zooming in, as in on the buildings. Or maybe, i dont understand, but Lake Wooder is wrong either way. SF is pedestrian-friendly, and actually has people walking in it and doing things, something im sure Dallas doest posses. Zooming in on the streets, its clear there is more to see and do, than there is in Dallas.
And based on street level activity, SF crushes Dallas.
This makes no sense. SF's skyline is far better at street level than it is from a distance (the opposite of Seattle, by the way). At street level it is easily the 3rd best skyline in the country. From a distance it's debatable.
SF has the kind of skyline, when people are in it, they say "Wow, this is far more impressive than I imagined". I honestly have no idea where you got the idea that it's worse at street level.
Fast forward to 2009 and SF owns the category when it comes to neighborhoods:
America's Favorite Cities 2009 - Categories - Quality of Life & Visitor Experience - Noteworthy neighborhoods - Travel + Leisure (http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2009/category/16/subcategory/80 - broken link)
Dallas ranks third to last.
And comes away with top 3 billing in the skyline/views category:
America's Favorite Cities 2009 - Categories - Quality of Life & Visitor Experience - Skyline/views - Travel + Leisure (http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2009/category/16/subcategory/83 - broken link)
Dallas came in second to last.
Top 4 in people watching:
America's Favorite Cities 2009 - Categories - Quality of Life & Visitor Experience - People-watching - Travel + Leisure (http://www.travelandleisure.com/afc/2009/category/16/subcategory/90 - broken link)
Whereas, Dallas comes in dead last.
The street scene in SF is absolutely electric, 2nd only to Manhattan in the US. That's precisely what density offers, and it'll only get better.
I can't see how Dallas is or can be perceived by anyone (even die hard boosters) as better at the street level.
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.
