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.
I'll speak up for Oklahoma City. It's true that the new tower downtown throws the overall set of buildings out of balance visually. However, I drove through there recently and was stunned at how nice OKC is at the street level. Clean, clean, clean.
Once you've driven around and seen all the brand-new buildings and all the unique little neighborhoods near downtown and midtown of Oklahoma City, the vibe given off by skyline changes.
Most places have tall buildings but are sterile at the street level, and this is one place that actually feels clean, safe and charming right in the heart of downtown. So now when I see the skyline, it just reminds me of how much I liked that city.
Considering how quite highly undesirable Oklahoma City is to outsiders as a city to move to, city leaders since the 1990s have realized they had to do something substantial to present Oklahoma City as a more attractive place to live in to newcomers ever since they got voters to approve the first MAPS project for civic improvements. Since then, voters have always opted to keep the city sales tax up to finance the next MAPS. The latest MAPS project will cost nearly $1 billion. MAPS stands for Metropolitan Area Projects.
With a city population of 471,000 per the 2020 census count and a metro total of 755,000, I'd offer that Colorado Springs has a pitifully small skyline and downtown.
A more recent in-personal observation of mine suggests that San Jose is the winner here for having a skyline that punches in FAR lower than it's population size and economic power suggests that it should have.
I understand that local ordinances, including at least one prompted by downtown's location in regard to air flight traffic, are the major skyline-suppressing factors at work there.
Honorable mention should also go to St. Louis which seems to have stagnated in many ways including in terms of downtown construction and anything resembling a 21st century version of it's skyline.
Telling for that city is the fact that as a junior high aged student (circa 1968) I was wowed by a National Geographic issue story on that city and a riverfront photo that impressed me. A view from that same spot today is basically unchanged.
The gorgeous mountain scenery in Colorado Springs, led by Pikes Peak, makes up well for the lack of big skyscrapers.
I think a lot of people would be shocked to see the new development and vibrancy St. Louis has in the central corridor West of Downtown. I definitely was. Not sure if I see that development moving Downtown anytime soon though.
Surprised Huntsville (AL) hasn't been mentioned in the "underwhelming" category. It is now Alabama's largest city, but the tallest building downtown is 12 stories / 200 feet.
Interesting. In contrast, in Oklahoma, tiny Bartlesville's tallest skyscraper is the Phillips Petroleum Building at 19 stories and 292 ft. From there, 3 more buildings are taller than 12 stories. Bartlesville is easily one of the most unusual towns in Oklahoma. Fortunately, Bartlesville isn't just another small Oklahoma town slowly fading away. Photo of downtown Bartlesville. On the lower left corner is part of the community center:
Surprised Huntsville (AL) hasn't been mentioned in the "underwhelming" category. It is now Alabama's largest city, but the tallest building downtown is 12 stories / 200 feet.
It's nowhere near the largest metro area in Alabama though. Birmingham has been bleeding people from the city limit for decades. It's one of the only cities in the country that hasn't gone through some type of gentrification process. Most of the really larges ones have at this point.
I think a lot of people would be shocked to see the new development and vibrancy St. Louis has in the central corridor West of Downtown. I definitely was. Not sure if I see that development moving Downtown anytime soon though.
To clarify here, I'm not saying STL is devoid of development. I'm saying I don't think STL is about to see some kind of Nashville/Austin building boom in the post I was responding to originally.
Worcester, MA. Very unimpressive skyline for a city that is constantly reminding everyone it is the second most populated city in New England (mainly due to it having far more land mass than many other cities in the region). Providence, RI and multiple Connecticut cities (Hartford, Stamford, and New Haven) have far better skylines.
Worcester, MA. Very unimpressive skyline for a city that is constantly reminding everyone it is the second most populated city in New England (mainly due to it having far more land mass than many other cities in the region). Providence, RI and multiple Connecticut cities (Hartford, Stamford, and New Haven) have far better skylines.
Would you consider Springfield, Massachusetts as having an underwhelming skyline or do you think it’s suitable given its size?
Worcester, MA. Very unimpressive skyline for a city that is constantly reminding everyone it is the second most populated city in New England (mainly due to it having far more land mass than many other cities in the region). Providence, RI and multiple Connecticut cities (Hartford, Stamford, and New Haven) have far better skylines.
I will say I looked up Worcester now, and to me its skyline(in pics I found) didn't seem that bad. Honestly I was suspecting Worcester would have less of a skyline, and the pics I found when I did an image search beat my expectations of it. Like it seemed like a smaller version of Portland, ME's skyline. Or for that matter, also Wilmington, DE. Btw these are images I found here: https://www.istockphoto.com/photos/w...usetts-skyline
Worcester seemed about what I expected it'd be like(not too big of a skyline, but that it'd have a small one), per its population. I'll be honest after seeing this comment, but not yet looking up it's skyline for now, that I worried it'd be less impressive of a skyline. Say, like South Bend, IN. Which btw is a city I like, but I won't deny South Bend's skyline doesn't stand out to me. Glad that wasn't the case, about Worcester.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thirdiii94
Would you consider Springfield, Massachusetts as having an underwhelming skyline or do you think it’s suitable given its size?
Not that particular poster, but I think Springfield's skyline(albeit VERY small) isn't bad. I'd put Worcester's skyline ahead of the one in Springfield, IMO. Although that older bridge over a certain river flowing through downtown Springfield, looks really nice. In my head I'd like to think South Bend's skyline(or the one in Huntington, WV) could potentially have looked more like this, if South Bend and Huntington hadn't had late 20th century population declines. To each their own I guess, when it comes to judging skylines.
Last edited by SonySegaTendo617; 06-09-2022 at 09:32 AM..
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.
