Give your opinion of the top 10 skylines in the U.S. & top 10 in the world

[MolsonExport]

Best set on this thread: Chongqing, no doubt.

Phoenix? GTFOH.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Actually, for the U.S., I don't think there's any plausible argument for Chicago not at #2 too. Chicago has depth and breadth that's completely unmatched, outside of NY. Chicago has a skyscraper heritage that's easily #2 on the planet, and the numbers that put it easily #2 in the U.S.

NYC and Chicago are indisputably #1 and #2 in the US for skyline size and their full-spectrum historical skyscraper catalogue.

but when we dive deeper into the 100% subjective realm of "beauty", not everyone thinks that they're neseccarily the prettiest skylines around.

and as the old saying goes, there's no accounting for taste.....

Originally Posted by homebucket

Right, and I think you can make a strong case for SF/LA being 3/4 or 4/3 depending on your preference for water/hills vs mountains/palms.

Overall the top 4 spots are fairly unanimous.

from perusing the responses in this thread, i don't think those top 4 are "fairly unanimous" at all. forumer's responses to this topic have been all over the place.

now, if you're talking about a more objective measure of skyline size or "impressiveness", NYC and chicago are unquestionably #1 and #2, respectively.

after that, things are nowhere near as clear cut. the tabulations below (from SSP database) include all completed and U/C towers.




skyscrapers >300m:

NYC: 19

Chicago: 7

LA: 2
Houston: 2
Philly: 1
SF: 1
Atlanta: 1
Austin: 1
Miami: 1




skyscrapers 250m - 300m:

NYC: 20

Chicago: 11

Philly: 3
Miami: 3
Seattle: 2
Dallas: 2
LA: 1
Houston: 1
SF: 1
Atlanta: 1
Austin: 1
Cleveland: 1
Pittsburgh: 1
Charlotte: 1
Oklahoma City: 1
Jersey City: 1




skyscrapers 200m - 250m:

NYC: 69

Chicago: 20

Houston: 14
LA: 10
Miami: 8
Atlanta: 8
Boston: 6
Austin: 4
Dallas: 4
Minneapolis: 4
Philly: 3
SF: 3
Jersey City: 3
Denver: 3
Seattle: 2
Cleveland: 2
Detroit: 2
Charlotte: 2
Sunny Isles Beach: 2
Pittsburgh: 1
Cincinnati: 1
Indianapolis: 1
Mobile: 1
Atlantic City: 1
New Orleans: 1
Las Vegas: 1
Tulsa: 1

[iheartthed]

I think SF has a strong case for the top 5 in the US. LA is a nice looking skyline, but doesn't belong in the top 5.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Not really, though. All opinions aren't equally valid, and subjectivity doesn't mean absence of logic.

If I say Indy has the top tech scene on the planet, or Argentina has the most stable currency, it isn't really a valid opinion. Similarly, if we're talking about ranking skylines, with no consideration of actual buildings, it doesn't make sense.

Skyline and individual buildings are not the same. One might not like Hong Kong or New York's shape, for instance. And as BillM pointed out, skylines change a lot depending on where the observer stands.

That's a matter of opinion.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Skyline and individual buildings are not the same. One might not like Hong Kong or New York's shape, for instance. And as BillM pointed out, skylines change a lot depending on the observer's angle.

That's a matter of opinion.

No. That's like saying a person's appearance changes if I close my eyes or take a lot of drugs. The person is the same.

A skyline doesn't change bc someone looks at it from a different angle. It's the same skyline.

[badrunner]

When it comes to overall shape, aesthetics, balance and scenic beauty it's hard to top LA's skyline.

It's a very natural skyline. It's not all intense or in your face. It's just... at ease. Not in a hurry. Just relaxed and sitting comfortably in harmony with its natural environment.
Bonus points for looking great from multiple angles and lighting conditions. Also note that unlike a lot of pics in this thread none of these are aerials or drone shots. These views can be seen with your own eyes.


L.A. Winter by Brandon velasco, on Flickr


Los Angeles by Chris Valle, on Flickr


Ascot Hills by Joits, on Flickr


Untitled by Kelvinkccheng, on Flickr

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by Crawford

No. That's like saying a person's appearance changes if I close my eyes or take a lot of drugs. The person is the same.

A skyline doesn't change bc someone looks at it from a different angle. It's the same skyline.

The actual view is important for evaluating skyline aesthetics. That's why I mentioned aerials and drone shots because those can be deceptive, showing you views you can never get in real life. It can be quite difficult to get a clean skyline view in some cities. Without significant topography or open water, it can be damn near impossible.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

from perusing the responses in this thread, i don't think those top 4 are "fairly unanimous" at all. forumer's responses to this topic have been all over the place.

Actually, it is fairly unanimous. Also keep in mind this skyline ranking is not necessarily based purely on height, as the OP has specified certain subjective parameters like beauty and balance.

If you look at the average "draft" position rankings, out of people that had some specified order, here is the ADP for cities that had at least 5 mentions. And the top 5 on this list have been mentioned in most, if not all lists. Starting with 6 and on, the mentions become more sporadic.

1. NYC 1.3
2. Chicago 1.8
3. LA 4.1
4. SF 4.7
5. Philly 5.6
6. Miami 5.7
7. Houston 6.1
8. Seattle 6.2
9. Pittsburgh 6.3
10. Atlanta 8.4
11. Dallas 9.2

[Maldive]

In the future I'd like to suggest a thread called "Top 10 Neighbourhood Skylines" in the world.

I think the Bloor/Yorkville neighbourhood skyline will eventually be a solid Number 2 in North America and should find it's way into the top 10 nabe skylines world-wide.


The just announced AS+GG-designed 280 metre tower at 645 Yonge is the tallest pink tower left of centre in steveve’s future model.


steveve

^ in addition to what’s already built, there are more than a dozen u/c, approved and proposed 200 metres+ towers in that neighbourhood rendering above.


645 Yonge is right of centre in this rendering looking north-east up Yonge Street.


steveve

645 Yonge by AS+GG


UT

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by homebucket

If you look at the average "draft" position rankings, out of people that had some specified order, here is the ADP for cities that had at least 5 mentions. And the top 5 on this list have been mentioned in most, if not all lists. Starting with 6 and on, the mentions become more sporadic.

1. NYC 1.3
2. Chicago 1.8
3. LA 4.1
4. SF 4.7
5. Philly 5.6
6. Miami 5.7
7. Houston 6.1
8. Seattle 6.2
9. Pittsburgh 6.3
10. Atlanta 8.4
11. Dallas 9.2

interesting data.

still, LA and SF are much further away from "fairly unanimous" at 3/4 than NYC and Chicago are at 1/2. those two are the only real "locks" that i'm seeing here as far as specific ordering.

FTR, i'm not at all saying that LA and SF don't belong among the top skylines in the nation, just that the ordering after NYC & Chicago gets way more scattershot, likely because the more objective measures of building height and # of buildings get far more nebulous after the clear-cut #1 and #2 on those scores.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by homebucket

For the next 6, I actually did consider Boston but it just didn't have the top end height or sheer scale (Philly/Houston/Miami/Atlanta) or a beautiful enough natural setting (Seattle/Pittsburgh), nor does it have an iconic/signature tower or structure that is instantly recognizable by the masses to elevate it into the top 10. It's probably sitting right at 11 on my list, although you could make compelling arguments for Dallas and Austin as well.

US:
NYC
Chicago
SF
LA
Seattle
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Miami
Houston
Atlanta

This is a weird comment. I'm not Boston fanboy but its natural setting is very beautiful, set right on the harbor. I'd say it's among the best settings in the US after Seattle, San Francisco, and Miami.

I've always loved the interplay of the red brick buildings and glass towers next to the water. The shape of the city on something of a peninsula also provides more opportunities for interesting views, compared to say, cities like Philly (which I love btw) which is on a river, or Chicago, which although on a massive lake, has a straight shoreline.

There are a lot of nooks and crannies in Boston's shoreline and it creates an intimacy IMO that is lacking among other skylines on this list.

[Zapatan]

Boston has a ton of potential,

Is there a height limit due to the airport?

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

This is a weird comment. I'm not Boston fanboy but its natural setting is very beautiful, set right on the harbor. I'd say it's among the best settings in the US after Seattle, San Francisco, and Miami.

I've always loved the interplay of the red brick buildings and glass towers next to the water. The shape of the city on something of a peninsula also provides more opportunities for interesting views, compared to say, cities like Philly (which I love btw) which is on a river, or Chicago, which although on a massive lake, has a straight shoreline.

There are a lot of nooks and crannies in Boston's shoreline and it creates an intimacy IMO that is lacking among other skylines on this list.

Lots of skylines on the list have beautiful settings though.

If you want to bump up Boston to the top 10, which one are you taking off?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Boston has a ton of potential,

yeah, boston has good skyline bulk, a nice setting, and an utterly top-notch urban vernacular fabric, but IMO, purely from a skyline silhouette perspective, it desperately needs more top-end height before it breaks into the top 10 nationally.

a distinctive exclamation point or two to set it apart from the crowd would do wonders, skyline-wise.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

yeah, boston has good skyline bulk, a nice setting, and an utterly top-notch urban vernacular fabric, but IMO, purely from a skyline perspective, it desperately needs more top-end height before it breaks into the top 10 nationally.

Exactly. Other places have more or as beautiful natural settings, bigger and more iconic skylines, or both.

If you want to put Boston in the top 10, you're going to have to make a more compelling argument.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Lots of skylines on the list have beautiful settings though.

If you want to bump up Boston to the top 10, which one are you taking off?

I mean. I love Atlanta but there's nothing particularly noteworthy about its Skyline. Houston has an impressive skyline but a terribly bland setting.

I'd put Boston above both of them.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

I mean. I love Atlanta but there's nothing particularly noteworthy about its Skyline. Houston has an impressive skyline but a terribly bland setting.

I'd put Boston above both of them.

Fair enough. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that commentary, although I think the BofA Plaza in Atlanta is pretty noteworthy. As I said, Boston was in the running for me to get in there, and while I agree it does have a beautiful natural setting, it just doesn't seem enough to overcome the relative lack of top end heft or signature towers, IMO.

[iheartthed]

The view of Boston's skyline from the tarmac at Logan is one of my favorite views of any skyline but... still hard for me to justify putting Boston in the top 10.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The view of Boston's skyline from the tarmac at Logan is one of my favorite views of any skyline but... still hard for me to justify putting Boston in the top 10.

I don't disagree. I think really there is consensus among say the top 7 or 8 and then the shuffling begins from there.

For me it's hard to separate the height of a skyline from the city's actual urbanity. I know, for example, Houston has a more prominent skyline than Boston, but I also know that on the ground below that impressive skyline are completely dead streets with almost no urban fabric. I also know that the opposite is true in Boston. On top of that, height is really only relevant in context with other buildings. If you were plopped on the ground outside of Boston looking at the skyline from afar, how would you really know if the buildings were 400 feet or 600 feet or 800 feet? You wouldn't really.

I mean that charade of a building that was built in Oklahoma City that made everyone's d*ck hard a few years ago is a complete waste off effort. It would have been so much more impactful for 5 or 6 400 foot tall buildings to be built in its place. Forever, OKC's skyline will be a joke because of that building.

[LAsam]

1) Cincinnati (Can't beat that view approaching the city from the airport)
2) Cleveland (3 iconic towers in one skyline... Terminal, Key, and BP... plus lakefront setting)
3) Columbus (Highlighted by Leveque Tower and beautifully curves around Scioto River)
4) Dayton (Punches above its weight as the 4th biggest MSA in Ohio)
5) Toledo (Old Owens Corning tower adds height along the banks of the Maumee River)
6) Akron (In the shadow of Cleveland but respectable in its own right)
7) Canton (In the shadow of Akron but respectable in its own right)
8) Youngstown (Running out of skylines...)
9) Cedar Point (Beautiful lakefront setting and roller coasters count, right?)
10) Kings Island (It's no Cedar Point, but it is home of The Beast)