[Obadno]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I don't see why you can't include natural settings (mountains, hills, rivers, bays, with accompanying bridges) as part of an evaluation of a skyline. Are you supposed to squint as if to ignore what was there for many years before humans settled and built on that land?

That being said, you have cities who have taken advantage of this, like Pittsburgh, Seattle, SF, Vancouver, HK. Whereas other cities haven't... like Phoenix. For the 5th most populous city in the US and 11th largest metro in the US it has a pretty woeful skyline, even after taking into account the beautiful surrounding scenery and sunsets.

Yeah I keep calling Phoenix and writing emails asking why it isn’t different than it is. Never get a straight answer out of that guy.