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.
This has been one of the most entertaining threads I've read in a long time, I didn't expect cities such as Houston, Philly, and etc to be mentioned. But I wouldn't say Baltimore has the worst skyline in America it's just shorter than others, and throughout looking through this thread I must say Phildelphia def has one of the best skylines in America without a doubt.
The skyline that I would proclaim as the worst (for a large city) would be Miami, it's a large skyline filled with buildings that look identical for the most part but the actual city at ground level is beautiful and it's perhaps the most fun city I've visited in my life.
I agree, Baltimore while not tall is very interesting, especially how it wraps around the bay. Also the Harbor east is a nice addition in recent years
Baltimore also has pretty good density and some smaller buildings of visual interest
1. San Jose
2. Phoenix
3. Norfolk
4. Birmingham
5. San Antonio
6. New Orleans
7. Kansas City
8. Salt Lake City
9. Little Rock
10. Baltimore
I know I numbered them, but I didn't put thought into the order. Just numbered as they came up in thought. These are the ones I feel are most disappointing relative to their sizes.
San Jose. Terrible skyline airport or not. Boring architecture, no massing hardly at all etc.
Phoenix. Yea, sure, not a great skyline at all and totally stuck in one era (1980’s)
Norfolk. Not bad for the size of the city really, Norfolk is not very big. Skyline looks nice along the water.
Birmingham. Also not bad for the size of the city, buildings are a bit boring and boxy, but not bad.
San Antonio. I like SA's skyline. It's a bit small for the size of the city, but it has character and is not a bunch of glass boxes which is a nice change for other big texas cities.
New Orleans. It has a decent skyline. Mostly hotel towers, but still decent. About right for the size of the city.
Kansas City. Simply does not belong on this list. KC has one of the most charming and photogenic skylines there is. Just a great mix of architecture and good height and massing.
Salt Lake City has a pretty underwhelming skyline. I wouldn't say it sucks, but it's small and nothing to get excited about, the mountains in the background keep it from sucking.
Little Rock. Little Rock has a great skyline for the size of the city.
Baltimore. Like KC, is way out of place here. Baltimore has a great skyline. You just have to see it from different angles other than from the inner harbor. Very nice mix of architecture and the skyline is spreading down the harbor. They could use a modern tower right on the inner harbor between Camden Yards and the World Trade Center though.
New Orleans. It has a decent skyline. Mostly hotel towers, but still decent. About right for the size of the city.
Just so you know the 5 tallest buildings in New Orleans are not hotels (the next two tallest are hotels, though). Then 18 of the tallest 25 are not hotels as well (nor are they residential).
Shooting from the hip, I would say Tulsa, Oklahoma City and San Antonio. From some views I've seen, they seem vapid.
I think Tulsa's skyline is pretty impressive for its size. My only complaint would be that it's largely uninteresting from an architectural standpoint.
Oklahoma City is fairly uninspiring outside of their new gleaming 844 foot glass tower...which looks woefully out of place.
I do agree San Antonio is rather unimpressive for its size...though at least it's fairly dense.
One could argue that it's BIGGER than it should be...
As for San Antonio, the city focuses more on ground/human level. Don't really think they even want the skyline to be that big. It's more historic than anything, and I guess that's ok.
Saint Louis- Short, small, nothing great for a metro of 3 million, wastes its river setting
Baltimore- Short, small, nothing great for a metro of 3 million, wastes its harbor setting
Philly- Four tall buildings standout, short, wastes its river setting
Detroit- Ren Center stands out otherwise short, small, wastes its river setting, nothing great for a metro of 5 million
Orlando- Short, small, nothing great for a metro of 3 million, no buildings standout
Phoenix- Short, small, nothing great for a metro of 4 million
I cant vouch for Orlando or Phoenix but the rest of the cities you mentioned have spread out downtowns that cant be seen in 1 picture. Many of these cities also have "mini" downtowns outside the city proper for the suburbs
Denver's skyline is fine, and aided dramatically by the mountainous backdrop.
Frankly, my vote's on Phoenix or Dallas.
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.
