U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Unread 07-31-2011, 06:11 PM
Status: "most vulnerable when you have everything or you have nothing" (set 13 hours ago)
 
27,092 posts, read 30,575,581 times
Reputation: 5411
Binghamton, NY (48,000)
Binghamton, ny - Google Search

Binghamton, ny - Google Search

Binghamton, ny - Google Search
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 07-31-2011, 06:33 PM
 
50 posts, read 41,727 times
Reputation: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by samwill89 View Post
I would think that South Padre Island, TX takes the cake for the US. With a population of only 2,000, it looks like:








I would imagine that many resort cities (like Atlantic City and SPI) would punch above their weight for highrises and skylines, especially when real estate along a beachfront is at a super premium.
Another SPI photo showing the entire skyline:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/rockitman/0351.jpg

Great photo thread showing its unique fabric.
South Padre Island Extravaganza (148 pics) - SkyscraperPage Forum

http://www.members.shaw.ca/rockitman/0546.jpg

Last edited by JMT; 10-25-2012 at 02:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-31-2011, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Alabama Docks
283 posts, read 294,683 times
Reputation: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by sparrowmint View Post
But they didn't have 700,000 in the 60s and 70s either. 600-500,000 in a steep decline, with around 400,000 by 1980.
1960 puts Pitt at 676,000
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2011, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Mississippi
824 posts, read 1,028,720 times
Reputation: 659
I know it pales compared to many cities, but Jackson, MS isn't bad for 175,000 people.

I am thoroughly impressed with Yellowknife though. Less than 20,000 people?

http://www.jackmobb.com/blog/wp-cont...atnightkq1.jpg

Last edited by JMT; 10-25-2012 at 02:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2011, 09:09 PM
 
Location: Pixburgh
501 posts, read 292,095 times
Reputation: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPortCity View Post
People putting Pittsburgh on this need to understand back in the day Pitt had almost 700,000 in the city, thats why their Skyline is vastly better than other cities of 300,000. Just a little history.
Its true Pittsburgh's population was twice what it is now but that has nothing to do with its skyline.
But you are right if you mean it isn't fair to compare Pittsburgh to other 300k cities, just not for the reason you think you are.

If that were the case, these buildings would all be 70+ years old because the population peaked in the late 40's, early 50's.

http://0.tqn.com/d/pittsburgh/1/0/W/h/pnc_park_view.jpg

but of the 5 tallest buildings, 4 were build in the 80's (after the great exodus), one in the 70's. if the city were truly shrinking that much(not just moving out to suburbs) then they would have just used the available buildings built in the 30's.



The reason is cities don't all define themselves the same. Alot of cities in the northeast, especially in PA don't annex suburbs.

Heres an example:

If you look at it objectively, Pittsburgh is a bigger city than San Antonio.
Yet San Antonio is 7th on the 'biggest city' list while Pittsburgh is 56th.
Because while the suburbs are dependent, and identify with their respective cities the same..pittsburgh counts about 55 square miles as its 'population', where S.A. counts almost 10x as much almost 500 sq/miles.

I've been in this argument a few times, and if you want to know a cities true 'size' just go by this list its a lot more accurate than population counts with a thousand different rules

Last edited by JMT; 10-25-2012 at 02:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2011, 11:40 PM
 
Location: Rochester
588 posts, read 691,117 times
Reputation: 655
Omaha (432,958):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2036/...6cf41720f4.jpg

Rochester (210,565):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3255/...4abf3ededb.jpg

Halifax (372,679):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2102/...49088c5d51.jpg

Salt Lake City (186,440):

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/...e4e9f4087c.jpg

Mobile (195,111):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/...c6516b4d77.jpg

Last edited by JMT; 10-25-2012 at 02:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-03-2011, 12:07 AM
 
Location: Alabama Docks
283 posts, read 294,683 times
Reputation: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by safak View Post
Its true Pittsburgh's population was twice what it is now but that has nothing to do with its skyline.
But you are right if you mean it isn't fair to compare Pittsburgh to other 300k cities, just not for the reason you think you are.

If that were the case, these buildings would all be 70+ years old because the population peaked in the late 40's, early 50's.



but of the 5 tallest buildings, 4 were build in the 80's (after the great exodus), one in the 70's. if the city were truly shrinking that much(not just moving out to suburbs) then they would have just used the available buildings built in the 30's.



The reason is cities don't all define themselves the same. Alot of cities in the northeast, especially in PA don't annex suburbs.

Heres an example:

If you look at it objectively, Pittsburgh is a bigger city than San Antonio.
Yet San Antonio is 7th on the 'biggest city' list while Pittsburgh is 56th.
Because while the suburbs are dependent, and identify with their respective cities the same..pittsburgh counts about 55 square miles as its 'population', where S.A. counts almost 10x as much almost 500 sq/miles.

I've been in this argument a few times, and if you want to know a cities true 'size' just go by this list its a lot more accurate than population counts with a thousand different rules
If Pitt had never had 670,000+ its skyline wouldnt be the same. If Pitt always had 305,000, buildings would be missing. Because Pitt was so big people knew about Pitt and attracted them to build there 10-20 years later.

Look at New Orleans, they got a pretty decent skyline for 345,000, because it 1960 they had 625,000 in the city and because people know about them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-03-2011, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Pixburgh
501 posts, read 292,095 times
Reputation: 480
why wouldn't it? Its a pretty big city, you just aren't seeing the point.

Pittsburgh didn't 'used' to be a big city..it still is a top 25 sized city.
In fact if it claimed its suburbs to the extent Houston does it would be the 9th biggest city in america.

It would go from northern washington county up to the north hills, encompass monroeville to the east.
those areas are just as much a part of Pittsburgh as Houstons are to it, they just don't count on your population lists.

Cities that don't annex suburbs like Pittsburgh, decline their own poplulation as they grow. As they build highways and parking and more industiral and business IN the city, so people could move outside the 'footprint'.....the city grew, while technically declining in population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-05-2011, 09:06 PM
 
Location: Somewhere
214 posts, read 154,084 times
Reputation: 150
Default Albany doesn't count!

All of those buildings were funded by the New York government, so it doesn't count... I have to say Buffalo. With a population barely over 260,000 the skyline is very impressive for a city its size!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-05-2011, 09:15 PM
 
5,242 posts, read 3,140,138 times
Reputation: 2057
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffalonianPride View Post
All of those buildings were funded by the New York government, so it doesn't count... I have to say Buffalo. With a population barely over 260,000 the skyline is very impressive for a city its size!
OH no a government project, thats completly invisable, like the hoover dam, or Washington DC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top