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.
Who said anything about connection or separation? I'm talking about spread.
The spread nature of a skyline is ultimately due to the distance b/w buildings. In other words, their amount of seperation.
Quote:
I have never argued that bigger equals better.
You implied it.
Quote:
Yeah right! Not even close to being correct. Even metroplex2003 can't argue that Houston metro is just as important as Dallas/Fort Worth metro.
I'm not denying that.
Quote:
The Houston metro is largely irrelevant to the city. It's mostly residential and there's practically no business there. Everything is centralized within the city. Dallas and Fort Worth have most things spread out all over North Texas. Not to mention, the City of Houston is about 1/3 of its metro. Dallas is about 1/6 of its metro.
Wait a minute..So the port offers no great benefit to houston? As opposed to the many statements i have seen regarding the" blessing" of an ocean/port you're suggesting that the landlocked city limits of houton are doing most of the work and deserve the most credit for its prosperity. Just as the landlocked DFW metro is prospering without the aforementioned.
Interesting.
Quote:
Well considering the fact that I had never heard of it before today, doing so seems to make perfect sense.
Data is instantly accepted upon introduction, so why not this? It is a website of interesting and quick information, and doesn't require fame to be given the chance to interpret. I don't look at it for its degree of familiarity but accuracy. Based on much browsing, it doesn't seem at all misleading, or biased.
Last edited by blockbuster; 06-27-2007 at 07:02 PM..
Your very pic showed how houston had numerous buildings seperated by a considerably significant distance.
I'm biased, and you're in denial to my statement. Fair trade.
I should have clarified...i meant *some* that are actually outside this thread.
What you don't understand however, is that Dallas is its own city,that doesn't plan on adding buildings for the sake of competition. It obviously doesn't require a port or more buildings to surpass houston in certain aspects.
Since when does bigger = better? If you've read the past few posts in this thread, you'd know why this question poses difficult in the context of this "dallas vs. houston" thread. A dallas without fort worth btw is like a houston without a port considering the bounderies of the houton metropolitan area: Image:Map of Texas highlighting Fort Bend County.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We couldn't care less about the mighty density of a city, when we're already a city earning its own share of prosperities/advantages. DW Dallas looks better than houston IMO period. Density doesn't make a downtown look more appealing. (take heed of the saying "quality over quantity")
Dallas may need "catching up", in building more structures, but such is at most, of little concern. Trust me.
Actually, Dallas and Houston areas do not differ much in density. Houston wins by a mere 5 people/sq. mile. So they're a/b the same. The difference is essentially not significant when talking on a more global scale.
The differences are DFW's business districts are spread out more. Houston's are within the inner loop. This leads to my hypothesis as to why Houston ranks higher (not by much) on the list of worst traffic cities.
Not to say DFW traffic isnt bad...b/c afterall, DFW has 500,000 more people to deal with....but the spread out business districts does help. I am looking forward to the completion of the high rises in Victory Park and the Arts District. I think those two areas will provide a relatively immediate impact on our skyline. Uptown's new highrises. will also impact, but they're at the foundation stage right now, and they're starting too...but it's exciting time to be in Dallas. The Woodall Rodgers park will provide the necessary connection b/t Uptown and Downtown. And the M line will be incorporated into the plans, which is our trolley railway that connects uptown with the central DART station in downtown.
Probably, but New York isn't one of them. Can't forget Downtown Brooklyn, Queens, and all other business buildings throughout the boroughs, not in CBDs.
Ok
You see that building that's in the background in the left that looks like Dallas' BOA tower? That's in Queens. So yes, New York is one of them. Not to mention that most of NYC's 5000 plus buildings are located in one area which is Manhattan.
Quote:
The left half. I can find you pictures of Houston that are just as lit as that if not more. Did you see that picture of Lower Manhattan I posted?
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. To me, Chicago and New York does a much better job of lighting up it's skyline than Houston does.
Quote:
It lights up perfectly, to me. Driving west on I-10, the gleam it projects is breathtaking.
My mother (New Yorker) summed it up in one word, "beautiful." I love the
skyline at night, not really impressive during the day, though.
to each his/her own. I find Houston's skyline much much more impressive during the day than at night. I'll tell you this. Coming south on I-45 or south on I-10. You don't even see the skyline until you reach 610. But with Chicago (don't know about NY myself), you can see the skyline from Ohare.
Ok
You see that building that's in the background in the left that looks like Dallas' BOA tower? That's in Queens. So yes, New York is one of them. Not to mention that most of NYC's 5000 plus buildings are located in one area which is Manhattan.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. To me, Chicago and New York does a much better job of lighting up it's skyline than Houston does.
to each his/her own. I find Houston's skyline much much more impressive during the day than at night. I'll tell you this. Coming south on I-45 or south on I-10. You don't even see the skyline until you reach 610. But with Chicago (don't know about NY myself), you can see the skyline from Ohare.
Actually I've seen that building many times on my travels to NYC and Yes, that thought has crossed my mind on more than one occasion...it looks like the BOA tower of Dallas. It's right across the river on the UN side of Manhattan.
By the way, I think that photo that you took pretty much verifies what I've been saying all along...that NYC is not just America's largest skylines, but it's still to this day one of the world's largest skylines. It's the flagship skyline of North America, it's one of the flagships of the world. Chicago also compares nicely on the world stage as well.
But I dont think we should all forget that everything is a/b relative height...Queens has many skyscrapers that would be called high rises. It's just that Manhattan has so many tall buildings it makes Queens and Bronx's high rises look short. My grandparents used to live right off the Major Deegan in the Bronx, their highrise apt was 30 stories...but it didnt seem that tall from a relative standpoint. It's kind of like Reunion Tower in Dallas. It supposedly rises 500 ft, but it looks short compared to the BOA next to it.
OH and one more foot note, NYC highrises have a shorter ceiling height per floor, so they pack more stories into a Dallas BOA equivalent. So height is important. However, NYC clearly has lots of height to their buildings, especially in Manhattan.
The spread nature of a skyline is ultimately due to the distance b/w buildings. In other words, their amount of seperation.
Equally spread, nonetheless.
Quote:
You implied it.
That's your opinion, but it's not a fact.
Quote:
Wait a minute..So the port offers no great benefit to houston? As opposed to the many statements i have seen regarding the" blessing" of an ocean/port you're suggesting that the landlocked city limits of houton are doing most of the work and deserve the most credit for its prosperity. Just as the landlocked DFW metro is prospering without the aforementioned.
Much of the port is within the city limits. It's called the Port of Houston. Not the Port of Houston Metro. Besides, as I said before, 98% of business is in the city versus Dallas being thrown all over North Texas. Less than half of your area's F500 companies are located in the city of Dallas. All but one F500 companies in the Houston area are located in Houston. You're called Dallas-Fort Worth. We're called Houston. That says it all.
Quote:
Data is instantly accepted upon introduction, so why not this? It is a website of interesting and quick information, and doesn't require fame to be given the chance to interpret. I don't look at it for its degree of familiarity but accuracy. Based on much browsing, it doesn't seem at all misleading, or biased.
Because it's data that I'm sure is debated and disputed. I could probably find other websites that rank cities differently.
Since houstoners love to bring up fort worth and surrounding areas as vital to dallas's size. (an apparent downplay) it is only obvious that there is a subtle concept of bigger = better. It would have never seemed implied if not as much emphasis was placed on houston's size.
Quote:
Much of the port is within the city limits. It's called the Port of Houston. Not the Port of Houston Metro. Besides, as I said before, 98% of business is in the city versus Dallas being thrown all over North Texas. Less than half of your area's F500 companies are located in the city of Dallas. All but one F500 companies in the Houston area are located in Houston. You're called Dallas-Fort Worth. We're called Houston. That says it all.
That has nothing to do with the fact that Dallas/the metroplex is prospering without the bodies of water, people love to point as a determining factor for what makes a great city and why a city is successful.
Also why does it show houston as a landlocked city on wikipedia? I know that the port is owned by houston, but wiki suggets otherwise in terms of geographic location.
Quote:
Because it's data that I'm sure is debated and disputed. I could probably find other websites that rank cities differently.
Disputed data doesn't usually go out for public view unless settled. Especially when you're dealing with data that involves cities. It definitely appears to be a peer reviewed source, that took lots of time to compile.
Go ahead and look although you shouldn't be surprised to see relatively similar stats that rank dallas higher. The margin is too great for any miraculous win in some other green website. Have you even checked out the website? It looks pretty accurate to me..
google "green city ranking", and you will see that it is the first entry.
I still think you have to look at the overall metropolitan area to get a good reflection of the city.
What makes Dallas a great place is that it is a vibrant city with a large area population...6.1 million people live in the DFW MSA.
I still think that city proper populations are not always reflective.
Again, Atlanta is considered a major US city, but its proper population is at only 483,000 people. That's less than Milwaukee, WI, San Antonio, TX, etc.
No one thinks of Atlanta as less major or smaller than Milwaukee.
Yes Houston proper is 4th largest City proper, but its metro is 6th largest behind Philly #5 and DFW #4.
Believe me, Omaha is no St. Louis. Milwaukee is no Atlanta.
That's why America's largest airline is based at DFW airport and not at San Antonio, which only has a/b 30 gates.
AS for fortune 500 companies, etc, so what if they're not all in the Dallas City limits, regionally DFW is outpacing any other metro area in Texas. IN 2005, they were #1 for most number of corporate HQ relocations. In 2006, they were #2 behind Chicago.
This is important, b/c it's fueling growth. And if more people move to the region, more people will use the urban core for entertainment, eating, and culture, and hence the urban core grows.
Congrats to Houston proper, which I would remind everyone has a much large sq. mileage than Dallas proper for having lots of companies. But I still think of the region. And the DFW area has a lot to offer: lots of companies, the lowest unemployment rate in the State of Texas in at 3.9%, the largest and busiest airport of the state, the highest rated football team in the state (had to throw that in), affordable housing, great retail, great restaurants.
So Houston proper has more skyscrapers than Dallas Proper. Regionally, I think DFW stacks up quite well to its southern rival MSA, Houston.
And many people think regionally, otherwise, we start talking a/b how Milwaukee is so much better than Atlanta b/c it has more people within its city limits, or how Omaha, NE has more people than St. Louis.
I still think you have to look at the overall metropolitan area to get a good reflection of the city.
If you want, we could add in Dallas and Fort Worth together (cities only), to Houston and compare that. They come out larger in square milage, but smaller in population/business.
Quote:
Yes Houston proper is 4th largest City proper, but its metro is 6th largest behind Philly #5 and DFW #4.
Houston is probably ahead of Philly by now, and if not now, then next year.
Quote:
That's why America's largest airline is based at DFW airport and not at San Antonio, which only has a/b 30 gates.
Yet, American handles more traffic out of O'Hare than DFW.
Quote:
AS for fortune 500 companies, etc, so what if they're not all in the Dallas City limits, regionally DFW is outpacing any other metro area in Texas. IN 2005, they were #1 for most number of corporate HQ relocations. In 2006, they were #2 behind Chicago. This is important, b/c it's fueling growth. And if more people move to the region, more people will use the urban core for entertainment, eating, and culture, and hence the urban core grows.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but Houston is right up there in business growth and corporate relocations. DFW is not even close to outpacing Houston in that.
Quote:
Congrats to Houston proper, which I would remind everyone has a much large sq. mileage than Dallas proper for having lots of companies. But I still think of the region. And the DFW area has a lot to offer: lots of companies, the lowest unemployment rate in the State of Texas in at 3.9%, the largest and busiest airport of the state, the highest rated football team in the state (had to throw that in), affordable housing, great retail, great restaurants.
Houston has the state's fastest job growth (in raw numbers). Houston has the state's lowest unemployment rate at 3.8% according to this (http://www.houston.org/blackfenders/10CW001.pdf - broken link). Houston has the state's largest and busiest port, as well as the state's highest rated soccer and baseball team. It is less expensive, has great retail, and was named Texas' #1 restaurant city.
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.
