Worst skyline

[Phil McAvity]

^Well it's obviously not a field then if it has tall buildings

Originally Posted by Spocket

Yeah , what's so bad about Milwaukee's skyline ? It's not great , no , but it certainly isn't bad. I guess it's spread out a little too much but really , I can think of a lot of other places that are far stumpier , more spread out , and also in metros a lot larger than Milwaukee.

Besides , what's a skyline ? Is it defined specifically by the number of tall buildings it has ? It shouldn't be. I just spent seven hours on a train from Changchun to Tianjin. Every town here (and there are an awful lot of them....like , there is no place where a town isn't in sight) has a skyline. There are apartment towers absolutely everywhere including in the middle of what we in North America would think of as the countryside. I saw hundreds of construction cranes on my trip (I'm not exaggerating and I'm not even including the ones I would have seen from the other side of the train) Farmer's fields have "skylines" here.
The point is that if it's just a matter of saying that tall , densely-packed buildings define a skyline , there are cities of half a million in North America that can't compete with some farmer's field here in China.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

^Farmer' fields in China have skylines? What are you talking about?

Yup , they do.

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

^Well it's obviously not a field then if it has tall buildings

Yeah , actually , it is a field. It's a farmer's field with a tower in it.
This really isn't that complicated. Check out Wuxi in the supertalls thread if you can't wrap your head around the idea.
Not only that but they build elevated freeways here through the same fields. In about a week I'll show you this since you're having such a tough time absorbing it.

[mobyhead]

Originally Posted by MOTOR

I agree, LMich.

Indianapolis has an underwhelming skyline also. There are like three skyscrapers.

The JW Marriot that was just topped off with be #7 in Indianapolis in terms of height. 376 feet. However as it is on the western side of downtown it won't add much to the density. BTW that photo of Indy shown is almost 20 years old. One Indiana Square still has "Indiana National Bank" on top.

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by muppet

http://i0.sinaimg.cn

That hardly looks like a farmer's field to me.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

So it's not you that's strange, it's China that's strange. Why the hell would they build a tower in the middle of a farmer's field? Unless you mean a radio tower?

No , I mean an apartment tower. As I said before , check out Wuxi in the supertalls thread.
It's all very obvious when you're here. This place is packed Building one tower frees up all the space that would otherwise be taken up by a hundred homes. Cities here don't have houses (except the oldest parts that are in the process of being demolished and replaced by tower complexes) just apartments. It's not like it's common to just build an actual tower in the middle of some field but it's happening more and more. The center of the city is also not necessarily where you find the tall buildings. My city (Changchun) is building a new downtown in what , right now , is basically farmland on the edge of the city proper. They plan two supertalls and who-knows-how-many 100 m + towers to go along with it. Vancouver has the skytrain and we think it's really impressive. It is of course but here , nobody would think of building anything BUT an elevated high-speed corridor. Today I got on a train travelling between Tianjin and the coast. This thing was five storeys up the whole trip (must have been thirty or forty kms if not more) There was development on the side of the line and you could see towers off in the distance but otherwise , it was just fields (right now)
By North American standards , this entire country is just one big city.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

That hardly looks like a farmer's field to me.

Ugh...you just have to be difficult eh ?
Wuxi doesn't look like a farmer's field to you because you don't know what a farmer's field in China looks like.
That building is on the edge of the city. That IS what the countryside looks like here. JUST LIKE I TOLD YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE. No , they aren't building supertalls in the middle of nowhere but they are building 15 storey highrise clusters all over the place here in what you would consider farmer's fields. As I said , if you refuse to believe it , in about a week , I'll show you the damned pictures and you can see it for yourself.

But here , why wait.
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...05472&t=k&z=18
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...05472&t=k&z=18
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...21887&t=k&z=16
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...21887&t=k&z=16
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...05472&t=k&z=18
http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&l...10943&t=k&z=17

That's what I could find after a pretty quick search. If it doesn't satisfy you , look around some more , I'm sure you'll find whatever you might want to see. See if you can find a field that isn't close to a town (the definition of which, in China includes places with 200,000 people)

[MOTOR]

Originally Posted by mobyhead

The JW Marriot that was just topped off with be #7 in Indianapolis in terms of height. 376 feet. However as it is on the western side of downtown it won't add much to the density. BTW that photo of Indy shown is almost 20 years old. One Indiana Square still has "Indiana National Bank" on top.

So there's been one new skyscraper in 20 years?

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by LMich

Count me as another not impressed with Jacksonville's skyline. Sorry, it can look pretty large when viewed from certain angles, as it's pretty strung out, but you really see it's lack of size and density from the air. It's just a generally sparse, spread-out kind of place.

I don't think it's all that impressive, either.

But trying to make a level comparison solely based on population with the Canadian cities, Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg is just useless. Those Canadian cities are basically all that is in Alberta and Manitoba, as far as urban settings go. That is where almost all of the population and the associated commerce, etc. is located, so they should have more impressive skylines than the 4th largest metro area in Florida which also has other larger cities in relative close proximity. Those 3 Canadian cities are among the most major cities in Canada... Jacksonville is far from that level in the US.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Lamario

I do agree that downtown is very small compared to cities of the same size such as Philadelphia, Dallas, and Houston. .....there's nothing going on in Central Phoenix.

Why is that? Where do people go? Is there high street shopping or is it all in malls?

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

I didn't see anyone comparing Erie to a larger city, although it's metro population of about 300k wasn't mentioned and it probably should have been but even for a city of 300k, that's a pretty weak skyline...

Also, saying that, "Erie knocked down 5 of its tallest buildings in the 70s and 80s, but Erie has always been more of a long, low manufacturing city than a tall, banking/headquarters city anyway" is obviously a contradiction but what I would like to know is, why? Did a lot of companies up and leave to Philly and Pittsburgh?

I wasn't responding to any comparison with a larger city. Just acknowledging that Erie does have a rather underwhelming skyline (even though that photo is probably the worst angle to showcase it), though I don't really expect a city with just over 100K/300K metro and whose economy has long been completely dominated by manufacturing to have an impressive skyline.

It's actually pretty typical for Great Lakes industrial cities. Buffalo, Cleveland, Milwaukee, and even Detroit have long had far less impressive skylines than cities of comparable sizes elsewhere.

And, it's not an obvious contradiction by any means. I'm not trying to imply that those knocked-down buildings were towering skyscrapers at all... more like 10-14 story buildings... on the tall side for smaller cities. Cities knock down buildings for any number of dumb reasons, especially in the 1960s-1908s. Erie replaced those buildings with 5-8 story "modern" buidlings or drive-thru banks/parking lots. Same story as everywhere else. So, it wasn't that businesses were picking up and moving to Pittsburgh or Philly... more like factories were closing down and moving to the US sunbelt, China, or Mexico.

[mobyhead]

Originally Posted by MOTOR

So there's been one new skyscraper in 20 years?

That's about right smart-ass. No there have been a few others, Simon Headquarters and the Conrad Hotel to name a few.

[MOTOR]

Originally Posted by mobyhead

That's about right smart-ass. No there have been a few others, Simon Headquarters and the Conrad Hotel to name a few.

Ha! Actually, I knew about Simon and the Conrad but I do think the skyline is underwhelming. Downtown Indianapolis is clean and attractive though.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I don't think it's all that impressive, either.

But trying to make a level comparison solely based on population with the Canadian cities, Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg is just useless. Those Canadian cities are basically all that is in Alberta and Manitoba, as far as urban settings go. That is where almost all of the population and the associated commerce, etc. is located, so they should have more impressive skylines than the 4th largest metro area in Florida which also has other larger cities in relative close proximity. Those 3 Canadian cities are among the most major cities in Canada... Jacksonville is far from that level in the US.

i know what you are getting at, but im not sure its totally valid....winnipeg is indeed the only city in manitoba, but the entire province doesnt even have the same population as metro jacksonville.....canadian cities are often regional hubs more than american ones are but they are hubs for much less population over huge distances.

is being the 4th largest city in a state of 18 million much different than being the 8th largest city in a country of 32 million?....

this thread is discussing cities with small skylines....one reason why jacksonville's is so small is because it is not a regional hub...but that doesnt change the fact that it has a small skyline.

i wont argue that canadian cities often have a different urban quality and layout compared with american ones for various reasons beyond population, so maybe you are right, the comparison does have flaws.

[mobyhead]

Originally Posted by MOTOR

Ha! Actually, I knew about Simon and the Conrad but I do think the skyline is underwhelming. Downtown Indianapolis is clean and attractive though.

If you were to look at photos of Indianapolis in the 1970's you would see a drastic difference between then and today.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by trueviking

i know what you are getting at, but im not sure its totally valid....winnipeg is indeed the only city in manitoba, but the entire province doesnt even have the same population as metro jacksonville.....canadian cities are often regional hubs more than american ones are but they are hubs for much less population over huge distances.

And that's the thing... Canadian hubs are far fewer in number, but therefore contain a much higher percentage of a region's population, commerce, etc. than what you have in the states. Really, what other city is in Manitoba aside from Winnipeg? Is there even one close to 100,000 people? When you have that greater concentration, a more impressive skyline should result.

Originally Posted by trueviking

is being the 4th largest city in a state of 18 million much different than being the 8th largest city in a country of 32 million?....

Well, yes, based on the above reason, it's very different... considering Canada has very few major urban areas in comparison (especially in the Prairie provinces). As stated before, Jacksonville is really not one of the States' major cities. Winnipeg, Edmonton, and Calgary are and have that far greater concentration than a place like Jacksonville does.

Originally Posted by trueviking

this thread is discussing cities with small skylines....one reason why jacksonville's is so small is because it is not a regional hub...but that doesnt change the fact that it has a small skyline.

I agree that Jacksonville's skyline is not terribly impressive. But it does function as a regional hub - a regional hub for north Florida and southeastern Georgia... but that's about it. It is eclipsed by Atlanta not too far to the north and Orlando/Tampa/South Florida not too far to the south. Those Canadian cities are NATIONAL hubs.

Originally Posted by trueviking

i wont argue that canadian cities often have a different urban quality and layout compared with american ones for various reasons beyond population, so maybe you are right, the comparison does have flaws.

That's all I was really saying... that population figures alone do not a skyline make. Those Canadian cities certainly have more impressive built environments and skylines than Jacksonville does, it being a relatively young, sunbelt sprawler.

[brickell]

Even though it's a suburb Hialeah, Florida deserves a mention. It's the 4 most populous Florida city and one of the densest in the state.

There's a ton of ugly apartment buildings but nothing approaching a skyline


src: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11021489@N07/2500535835

[pj3000]

^ But Hialeah is really a city in name only... just part of the endless sprawl of Miami. It doesn't have what could really be considered a downtown anyway.

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Really, what other city is in Manitoba aside from Winnipeg? Is there even one close to 100,000 people?

How DARE you insult the mighty metropolis of Brandon Manitoba!?!?!?!? Why it's Manitoba's second-largest city!

Population:about 40,000.


Spocket, I look forward to seeing your pics but why do we have to wait a week?

Originally Posted by Trantor

many big european cities also dont have 600 footers.

That's the thing though, there isn't a city in Europe that comes close to Sao Paulo's population and the three largest European cities all have 600+ footers so what are you talking about?

[Don B.]

Phoenix doesn't have any skyscrapers over 500 feet tall, but it has a goodly number between 200 and 400 feet. It also has a really long T-shaped skyline, over 5 miles long, and then there are tall buildings in other places, particularly downtown Tempe, a handful of mid-rises at 24th & Camelback (Biltmore), and in downtown Scottsdale:









--don

[TAZ4ate0]

Originally Posted by Don B.

Phoenix doesn't have any skyscrapers over 500 feet tall, but it has a goodly number between 200 and 400 feet. It also has a really long T-shaped skyline, over 5 miles long, and then there are tall buildings in other places, particularly downtown Tempe, a handful of mid-rises at 24th & Camelback (Biltmore), and in downtown Scottsdale:

--don

Don, pics 3 and 4 (and even #1 after reviewing), are waaaayyy outdated. Missing are several of the new towers and projects, done or underway in the past 3 years. In the last pic (#4), the biggest glaring flaw as to what Phoenix looks like today, doesn't show the light rail line running down Central Ave. I know you have better and newer pics. Why not show those?