Which cities have skylines bigger relative to their population? (job, compared, place)

[Chicagoist123]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

I would say, from looking at photos, the follow (this includes the metro area):

1. Chicago: Although a large city with about 6 million, it's skyline is the third biggest in the world, beating many megacities like Sao Paulo and Tokyo.

2. Seattle: With a metro about 3 million, it's skyline looks to be one of the biggest in the US. The city itself also punches above it's weight in other areas.

3. San Diego: Has quite a large skyline for a city of 2 million.

That's all I can really think of. What others, do you think?

ed: Oh I should have put this in the Gen forum, never mind...

Actually Chicago metro is close to 10 million.

[eagles123]

Originally Posted by supermanpansy

Umm, thanks for telling me things I already know Captian obvious. You cannot disclude highrises to make your argument. Highrises matter. So what their not supertalls, they still have relevance. Most skylines consist of mainly highrises only. Not too many cities with skyscrapers. So your argument is moot. NYC isn't just a "little" bigger. I have been to both numerous times. NYC is MUCH bigger with all of those highrises that you want to discount. It was a cute try though.

To add to your non existent point. Walk around Midtown Manhattan and inbetween all of those "Skyscrapers" are highrises which make a difference. Chicago is too "empty" compared to NYC. Even Toronto has twice as many "highrises" as Chicago and that is why many people feel that downtown Toronto seems more like NYC than Chicago. And for your information Chicago doesn't rival NYC. No city half the size of another "rivals" it. I don't think that you understand what a true rivalry is. Hong Kong rivals NYC. Chicago needs a building explosion just to "rival" Toronto. Chicago is too gappy. It looks nice from afar, but their is very little infill. That is why NYC seems so much more massive-also because it is. Chicago has 1100 highrises give or take a few. NYC has almost six thousand give or take a few. You can't selectively just take 10% of their building stock and compare it to 2-3 percent of NYC's building stocks.

And last but not least. For your information, most cities in this country have but a few skyscrapers. The rest of their downtown are highrises. Some don't have any. Downtowns consist of much more than skyscrapers. If you want just skyscrapers hop over to that ugly dessert city that is intolerably hot called Dubai. So to end the discussion, "by looking at it" I don't think that Chicago looks like NYC or rivals it.

Lol calm down this is a simple discussion not an arguement. As I said earlier a skyline is a visual image not a number. Your point is that NYC has more highrises therefore its way bigger. Well did you know that Philadelphia and Washington DC both have 330 highrises? So I guess you think that Washington DC skyline is just as big as Philadelphia and bigger then Boston, Dallas and other cities that have less "highrises". DC barely has a skyline. Who cares about highrises. If someone tells me to go look at a certain cities skyline I LOOK at the skyline itself I don't go look up how many highrises it has on the computer. Arlington, TX has more highrises then Seattle so I guess in your eyes Arlington has a more impressive skyline then Seattle. "Cute try though."

[foo cities]

Pittsburgh, Miami, Atlanta, Denver, Seattle, SF, Minneapolis and Boston.

[Slyman11]

S.FLA highrises
Miami- 307
Miami Beach- 152
North Miami- 16
North Miami Beach- 8
Fort Lauderdale- 163
Aventura- 82
Sunny Isles Beach- 49
West Palm Beach- 75
Coral Gables- 59
Pompano Beach- 45
Key Biscayne- 21
Hollywood- 48
Bal Harbour- 19
Highland Beach- 22
Surfside- 17

Info from emporis. 1083 highrises in S.FLA and I did not feel like including all the cities with highrises either. I know what you must be thinking 'it is not fair' but life is not fair

[MiamiRob]

^ Yes after the NYC & Chicago metros, Miami ranks 3rd. in the nation in the total # of highrises.
Miami Beach does have a impressive skyline for a city of 89,000 and 7 Square miles.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

I would say, from looking at photos, the follow (this includes the metro area):

1. Chicago: Although a large city with about 6 million, it's skyline is the third biggest in the world, beating many megacities like Sao Paulo and Tokyo.

2. Seattle: With a metro about 3 million, it's skyline looks to be one of the biggest in the US. The city itself also punches above it's weight in other areas.

3. San Diego: Has quite a large skyline for a city of 2 million.

That's all I can really think of. What others, do you think?

ed: Oh I should have put this in the Gen forum, never mind...

Tokyo isn't built up, it's spread out, but still much more dense then Chicago. Much better city too. Tokyo compares with NYC, but Chicago.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by sav858

I think pound for pound no city can come close to Honolulu. It has a metro of just under 1 million and according to emporis.com has 407 high rises. Compare that to the following much larger cities:

Yes, Honolulu has the most highrises per capita. On the mainland United States, NYC has the most highrises per capita, even if you count its large population. For example, Chicago would have to build around 1000 buildings without gaining any population just to have the same highrise per capita ratio compated to NYC.

[Vatnos]

Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus

Just do a comparison of "skyscrapers" (as defined by Emporis, for example) per metro population. I'll take a seriously high-level stab at what that could look like:

Metro - (# of skyscrapers in metro / metro population)
Atlanta - 400/5,000,000
Miami - 2,000/5,000,000
NYC - 8,000/20,000,000
Phoenix - 150/4,500,000
Seattle - 400/3,500,000

Etc. etc. etc.

I checked these numbers on my own, and going by 'skyscrapers' I found slightly different results:

New York ----- 693 / 22 million
Los Angeles --- 84 / 17.8 million
Chicago ------- 416 / 9.8 million
Boston -------- 57 / 7.6 million
San Francisco - 84 / 7.4 million
Dallas --------- 71 / 6.8 million
Philadelphia ---- 76 / 6.5 million
Houston ------- 104 / 5.9 million
Miami ---------- 158 / 5.4 million

Atlanta -------- 93 / 5.3 million

Phoenix -------- 41 / 4.1 million (not one of the top 10 largest metros, although the city proper is large so I assume that's why it was included. the metro is actually further down the list so it's unfair to compare it to these cities).

Atlanta really is fine. Remember that there's more than just quantity to consider, there's quality. Atlanta's tallest building is still the tallest in the US outside New York and Chicago. It has some architectural gems in its collection, whereas Houston and Miami might have a few more buildings, but they're mostly bland boxes.

Unlike some people here that think every tall building adds to a skyline, I actually don't. I think a few great buildings can outweigh a multitude of mediocre ones, and I would rather have a smaller skyline with quality (Charlotte) over quantity (Las Vegas).

[SluggoF16]

The original posting was about skylines that seem disproportionate to their population. This is Bartlesville, Oklahoma, north of Tulsa by about 50 miles. It is isolated, not a suburb, but a standalone small city of 35,000, with no attachment to a larger city, yet it has a rather impressive skyline for a city its size. Home to Conoco-Phillips, and Frank Lloyd Wright's only skyscraper (center).

I originally posted a hotlink, but since TOS doesn't allow, refer to the city's site.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Vatnos

I checked these numbers on my own, and going by 'skyscrapers' I found slightly different results:

Your numbers are wildly incorrect, they include unbuilt, cancelled, and paper projects, unless you think there is really a building in Chicago twice the height of Burj Dubai.