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.
Although the major high rise cities(NYC,Chicago,Miami) all have good water frontage, Chicago could fit your criteria, with its Great Lake location, protected from hurricanes and extreme wind.
Yes I need to check it out. I have found more than I expected in places like Cincinnati, Lexington, Louisville, etc. Climate wise, I cant handle Fla though just too hot one season like year around for me, much like Houston where I worked but left when I refried.
Regarding cities built on a lake, I was referring to cities built on midsize lakes or smaller, not the Great Lakes.
Ah, well you said the region's major body of water, and in the Midwest that would be the Great Lakes. But maybe the fact that it's easier to think of examples on the Great Lakes than the Atlantic points to tides/flooding/hurricanes as a big factor.
As for the PNW, the actual Pacific coast has never been suitable for major cities because (1) it's mountainous and would be difficult to build railroads along, and (2) it's dreary and cool for the entire year. The valley between the various coast ranges to the west and the Cascades to the east, which is now the route for I-5 and home to all of the western PNW's major population centers, is much flatter and gets a lot more sunlight and warmth for growing crops. There are a handful of towns on the actual coast, but they're all dependent on either logging or tourism and many of them aren't doing well economically.
Yes, because I am referring to cities built directly on the ocean, or with extreme proximity to it( SF,San Diego,Boston), those cities border the ocean and the bays and harbors which their CBD's are located, are close to the ocean.
For Great lakes, yes there are a lot of cities built on their shores, but I was thinking when it comes to midsized cities built on a lake, as I have earlielly noted, only Madison comes to mind.
Ah, well you said the region's major body of water, and in the Midwest that would be the Great Lakes. But maybe the fact that it's easier to think of examples on the Great Lakes than the Atlantic points to tides/flooding/hurricanes as a big factor.
As for the PNW, the actual Pacific coast has never been suitable for major cities because (1) it's mountainous and would be difficult to build railroads along, and (2) it's dreary and cool for the entire year. The valley between the various coast ranges to the west and the Cascades to the east, which is now the route for I-5 and home to all of the western PNW's major population centers, is much flatter and gets a lot more sunlight and warmth for growing crops. There are a handful of towns on the actual coast, but they're all dependent on either logging or tourism and many of them aren't doing well economically.
If I were to build a 3rd major city in Coastal California, I would build it in the Pismo Beach or Morro Bay area, even though the flat, buildable land in the area is far smaller than any I can think of, and would be immediately flanked with mountains.
Seattle isn’t within “extreme proximity” to the ocean. The open ocean is a several hour drive away. And if you’re going to include Seattle you would have to also include Baltimore.
Yes, the geography of the Tampa Bay area reminds me of a poor man's Bay Area and Miami fused together. I wish St. Petersburg and Tampa built more high rises while Florida is still habitable. Although I have seen a good development in Tampa next to the arena.
Seattle isn’t within “extreme proximity” to the ocean. The open ocean is a several hour drive away. And if you’re going to include Seattle you would have to also include Baltimore.
Yes, I debated putting on the list, I misjudged its location, but being reminded of Baltimore makes me now want to remove it altogether.
Yes, the geography of the Tampa Bay area reminds me of a poor man's Bay Area and Miami fused together. I wish St. Petersburg and Tampa built more high rises while Florida is still habitable. Although I have seen a good development in Tampa next to the arena.
St. Pete has a decent number of towers going up now. I’m not sure on Tampa, I think Water St is mostly complete so I’m not sure what else is going on.
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.
