> you can see it practically from everywhere

That's why a lot of people, myself included, like it. It's always there if you live here (unless Karl's swallowed it again), but doesn't feature on postcards or travel brochures. We love our tourists, but it's nice for citizens to have an icon of their own that people who don't live here don't really get or even notice.

> you can see it practically from everywhere

Kind of the point for a comms tower, no?

to be heard, not seen

ever heard the phrase 'line of sight'?

Is that why its so ugly? No.

I grew up with Sutro Tower as part of the SF skyline so I don't really hate it. As the title states, I don't appreciate it as much as the rest of SF's landmarks because it's so different from everything else such as Coit Tower, the Transamerica pyramid, or even the Golden Gate Bridge. It looks ugly compared to modern structures like the new bay bridge. Compared to the rest of SF's landmarks, Sutro Tower doesn't seem to fit in.

To each their own. I find the new bay bridge ugly. I much preferred the old one and would have preferred it had been replaced with something more classic. I also find the Sutro Tower beautiful.