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.
I voted San Francisco. L.A.'s skyline is taller and has my beloved Library Tower, but there's better flow between the office towers/mid and low rises in SF. It looks like one big uniform mass, whereas L.A.'s skyline is almost too tall--it sticks out like a sore thumb and dominates the skyline, making L.A.'s dense collection of lowrises in Westlake and the Historic Core seem smaller than they are.
I definitely agree with the 'too tall' sentiment. Sometimes I look at the skyline from afar and it looks like a few sticks poking out of the ground.
Not surprising that people think its just a few towers surrounded by suburbia.
I definitely agree with the 'too tall' sentiment. Sometimes I look at the skyline from afar and it looks like a few sticks poking out of the ground.
Not surprising that people think its just a few towers surrounded by suburbia.
Yeah, and as awesome as the views are from Runyon/Griffith Park at night, those are some of the worst angles to view the DT skyline. It looks like you said--a few sticks poking out of the ground, haha. From the 110 North, or 10 East, much better. Looks dense and full.
Edit: Turns out I voted for L.A. by accident. Oh well, I meant San Francisco. Why is Seattle so far ahead?!
Driving south on the I-5 in Seattle at night a couple weeks ago, I don't know how any of these cities could be more impressive. SF comes the closest though.
The skyline of San Francisco has more variety and buildings than Seattle. Seattle is just a small town in comparison. They have built by now (June, 2012) more than a dozen new buildings in SF,with a new downtown in SOMA to be completed around 2017,and another area with lot of new housing and buildings by the AT&T park. The new SF Transbay Terminal will have the tallest building in the West Coast, which will add a few more towers around it. How can Seattle even compare to such a magnificent city like SF. Yet, I respect that Seattle is a pretty city but not as impressive as SF.
1)San Francisco
2)Seattle
3)San Diego
4)Los Angeles
5)Portland
The skyline of San Francisco has more variety and buildings than Seattle. Seattle is just a small town in comparison. They have built by now (June, 2012) more than a dozen new buildings in SF,with a new downtown in SOMA to be completed around 2017,and another area with lot of new housing and buildings by the AT&T park. The new SF Transbay Terminal will have the tallest building in the West Coast, which will add a few more towers around it. How can Seattle even compare to such a magnificent city like SF. Yet, I respect that Seattle is a pretty city but not as impressive as SF.
1)San Francisco
2)Seattle
3)San Diego
4)Los Angeles
5)Portland
I'm with you that SF has a better skyline, but there's a reason people like Seattle's as well:
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,499 times
Reputation: 1028
San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles in no particular order, although Mount Rainier really magnifies Seattle, as does the GGB for San Francisco.
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.
