Worst skyline - Page 2

MolsonExport · #21 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 3:11 AM**

does pyongyang even have 5+ million in the metro?

Dan Denson · #22 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 3:13 AM**

Really bad thread. No doubt it will result in city vs city and some hard feelings.

LMich · #23 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 8:57 AM**

I agree that it's far too broad a subject to discuss properly (it is a yellowboy thread, after all), but I'm not sure how it's any more dubious a question than "best skyline" that seems to get discussed ad naseum, or anymore result in a city vs. city thread than "best skyline."

cabasse · #24 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 9:58 AM**

i say jacksonville's skyline is decent, even good, considering its a metro just over a million.

urbanlife · #25 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 8:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cabasse

i say jacksonville's skyline is decent, even good, considering its a metro just over a million.

cool, shot of the Jacksonville skyline, I have never seen that shot before.

John Hinds · #26 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 8:24 PM**

UlaanBaatar (Capital of Mongolia)
Source: Wikipedia

Not a single notable building in the whole city.

This is what the new Hilton hotel is going to look like.

Poor Mongolians

vid · #27 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 8:37 PM**

It's -40 for half the year and they have to look at all that?

meh_cd · #28 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 8:49 PM**

Seeing some of these just makes me realize how fortunate Minneapolis is to have the skyline it does. The city is less than 400k and it has one of the best between Chicago and the West Coast.

TonyAnderson · #29 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 9:27 PM**

Any city in Florida besides Miami.

village person · #30 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 9:35 PM**

Ah, skylines.... kind of like judging people by the roundness of their fingernails. "Charlotte's are getting rounder! Did you see?! But Austin's are sooo flat."

All of these cities look fine to me. Ulaan Baatar actually looks quite nice.

Well, except Fresno.

vid · #31 Posted **Dec 23, 2009, 9:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by meh_cd

Seeing some of these just makes me realize how fortunate Minneapolis is to have the skyline it does. The city is less than 400k and it has one of the best between Chicago and the West Coast.

Minneapolis is in the middle of an urban area with over 3 million people.

meh_cd · #32 Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 5:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vidilicious

Minneapolis is in the middle of an urban area with over 3 million people.

You don't say? But the city itself is 390 some thousand. Phoenix is a city with 4x the population and a larger metro and the skyline there is less than adequate.

I'm not even from the Twin Cities if that's what you're thinking.

Lecom · #33 Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 5:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGII

subjunctive.net

Well, even NK's capital beats Phoenix's skyline.

http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/image...+pyramid+2.jpg

Individual building designs may be worse, but scale-density wise it blows Phoenix out of the water.

Surrealplaces · #34 Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 6:59 PM**

Kind of reminds me of Irvine, California. I don't think it's that bad. 3 or 4 good sized office buildings in the 400-600' foot range would turn Phoenix into a nice skyline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick

(Wikipedia)

fishrose · #35 Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 7:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by meh_cd

You don't say? But the city itself is 390 some thousand. Phoenix is a city with 4x the population and a larger metro and the skyline there is less than adequate.

I'm not even from the Twin Cities if that's what you're thinking.

Phoenix has a terrible skyline for its size. That doesn't make Minneapolis "fortunate," it just means their skyline is actually proportionate to the size of the metro area.

wrab · #36 Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 10:32 PM**

^ How does one determine if a skyline is "proportionate" to its metro? Minneapolis has an especially tall, dense skyline for an American city in the under-500k set. If it Minneapolis is proportionate, then the majority of American cities under 500k have disproportionately small skylines. That seems like a very disproportionate way of measuring things! Maybe both skylines are disproportionate.

In any case, I agree with meh-cd that Minneapolis is fortunate to have such a great skyline.

Lakelander · #37 Posted **Dec 25, 2009, 4:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cabasse

i say jacksonville's skyline is decent, even good, considering its a metro just over a million.

Good shot from the Dames Point Bridge. One thing people forget about DT Jax is that its on both sides of the St. Johns River. Most who aren't familiar with the area assume that the Northbank shot (shown on page one) is the DT skyline.

Here is another angle:

another shot from another angle: http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/8817746.jpg

Imo, Jax's skyline is equal to its true peers (ex. Nashville, Louisville, Buffalo, Memphis, Birmingham, etc.)

hammersklavier · #38 Posted **Dec 25, 2009, 4:12 AM**

Phoenix's skyline is awful. Pyongyang and Athens, btw, seem built in much the same way, lots and lots of ugly Brutalist buildings melding into a handsome whole. If there is any better proof that the whole is better than the sum of its parts, I've yet to see it.

Phil McAvity · #39 Posted **Dec 25, 2009, 4:58 AM**

Sao Paulo Brazil.

Density Shmensity. How can you take one of the worlds largest cities (with a a metro population of around 20 million people) seriously when it doesn't even have a 600 footer?!?!?! Des Moines has a 600 footer!

Buckeye Native 001 · #40 Posted **Dec 25, 2009, 6:25 AM**

Phoenix's buildings suck, but lets not forget the giant fucking airport three miles east of Downtown. Lets also not forget that the aforementioned downtown lies directly in the airport's flight path, and that the FAA has mandated a 520' height limit on all buildings constructed within the boundaries of said flight path.

And given our shitty economy, no more highrises are likely to be built anytime in the near future.