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.
Flat is pretty boring. Thats another reason I like Milwaukee. It's just hilly enough to add to the cityscape and countryside, but not hilly enough to make you winded while walking down the street.
I am from the East Coast, so it's difficult to be "weirded out" by the flatness of East Coast cities. There is so much to do in East Coast cities that I don't find myself thinking about the lack of mountains. Even if New York was surrounded by 7,000 foot tall mountains, buildings are so close together that you wouldn't see any of them.
The two times I have been back to NJ since moving to AZ, I have chuckled at the hills in Northwestern New Jersey that I used to consider mountains. In Tucson I can see 9000+' mountains on a daily basis. It has definitely changed my perspective.
I don't agree at all. The steep hills of San Francisco are precisely what's wrong with it. Every time I'm there, the thought is in the back of my mind of they had no business building a city on this terrain. And as LINative said, what makes those cities beautiful also makes them geologically unsafe. I'd hate to be there when the fault slips.
I also don't understand your need to be above the city, like you need to escape it.
As far as east coast cities go, NYC is actually pretty hilly. There are exposed cliffs as high as 200 or so feet along the Harlem River. Going from Manhattan into the Bronx on Fordham Rd is like anything you would see in San Fran and the Palisades across the Hudson rise over 600 feet above the river.
Boston has Beacon Hill, Mission Hill, Fort Hill, Dorchester Heights, etc.
Eh I guess it's not a big deal to me, when I've been in LA it might as well be flat... Even if it really wasn't it didn't stick out to me, what stuck out was it looked like a giant sprawling neighborhood with a small downtown. That's not a knock at LA cuz the city is fricken awesome.
Pittsburgh ? I don't think anyone would call it flat. Kansas City is far from mountainous but built on and around bluffs. Honestly tho the only cities where they stuck out as not flat to me are Denver and Vegas and actually Vegas looks very flat just has mountains on the horizon
no, i like it in scenery, but its honestly a chore to walk up and down hills if you are on foot. you also don't get massive tunnel effects with this and urban canyons...
flat also allows for urban planning like this
and this
Which is why it's great for the city to be flat, but the suburbs more hilly. That's pretty much how Chicago his.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mayor of Mil-Town
Flat is pretty boring. Thats another reason I like Milwaukee. It's just hilly enough to add to the cityscape and countryside, but not hilly enough to make you winded while walking down the street.
This is how Dallas and Fort Worth are, but they can be downright hilly (Atlanta-like) in many places.
I'm not a West Coaster but most East Coast and Midwestern cities I've been to weren't flat at all, I mean they weren't resting upon mountains but what major city is lol, even Orlando wasn't totally flat. When people think of NYC they think of the flat 2/3rds of Manhattan (which is unnatural flatness) which makes up like 1/20th of the city, there's a ton of hills (some very steep) in NYC, there's even cliffs.
Eh I guess it's not a big deal to me, when I've been in LA it might as well be flat... Even if it really wasn't it didn't stick out to me, what stuck out was it looked like a giant sprawling neighborhood with a small downtown. That's not a knock at LA cuz the city is fricken awesome.
Pittsburgh ? I don't think anyone would call it flat. Kansas City is far from mountainous but built on and around bluffs. Honestly tho the only cities where they stuck out as not flat to me are Denver and Vegas and actually Vegas looks very flat just has mountains on the horizon
Are you kidding? The far western suburbs like Golden and Morrison are in the foothills, but for the most part the terrain in the city of Denver is flatter than it is here in Milwaukee.
I agree about LA. It didn't strike me as being very hilly or rugged. Sure you have gigantic Mt. Wilson off in the distance, but the places where people actually live are pretty flat.
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.
