Best Small-City Skylines (Metro Population < 600,000)

yellowboy06 · #1 Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 4:12 PM**

There are so many threads discussing which major city has the best/second best/third best skyline, and let's face it, small cities just can't compete with the Chicagos and San Franciscos of the world.

Let's see some of the best 'small city' skylines (from cities with metros with less than 600,000 people). Post pictures along with what city it is as well as the metro population.

TOP 5...

1. Corpus Christi, Texas

(Source: http://www.ccmorf.org/)
Metro Population: 431,741
2. Des Moines, Iowa

(Source: http://www.desmoines.org/)
Metro Population: 556,230
3. Peoria, Illinois

(Source: http://givingbackpeoria.org/)
Metro Population: 371,206
4. Reno, Nevada

(Source: http://snapreno.com/)
Metro Population: 577,386
5. Boise, Idaho

(Source: http://appliancerepairboiseidaho.com/)
Metro Population: 587,689

Nowhereman1280 · #2 Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 4:35 PM**

Madison, WI has a sick skyline:

december.com

Its not very tall, but each building is very high quality and it is located on an Isthmus where excellent views of the skyline abound from all directions. The reason the skyline is relatively low and uniform is that Madison has a height restriction limiting the buildings to the crest of the the Capitol Building dome so that the dome will always be the sole peak of the skyline.

I'm very conflicted about the height restriction because Madison could certainly support some very tall buildings and has already begun to take on the aire of Paris with just solid 5-10 story buildings across much of the city. However, I don't want it lifted because the crown jewel capitol dome effect would disappear rapidly. I've always thought it would be interesting if they lifted it in the area of the University of Wisconsin campus where the most development pressure seems to be. That would be off to the side and away from the capitol dome and would satisfy the demand for the tallest buildings.

yellowboy06 · #3 Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 4:50 PM**

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Pretty nice, just needs taller buidlings.

CGII · #4 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 3:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

Madison, WI has a sick skyline:

december.com

Its not very tall, but each building is very high quality and it is located on an Isthmus where excellent views of the skyline abound from all directions. The reason the skyline is relatively low and uniform is that Madison has a height restriction limiting the buildings to the crest of the the Capitol Building dome so that the dome will always be the sole peak of the skyline.

I'm very conflicted about the height restriction because Madison could certainly support some very tall buildings and has already begun to take on the aire of Paris with just solid 5-10 story buildings across much of the city. However, I don't want it lifted because the crown jewel capitol dome effect would disappear rapidly. I've always thought it would be interesting if they lifted it in the area of the University of Wisconsin campus where the most development pressure seems to be. That would be off to the side and away from the capitol dome and would satisfy the demand for the tallest buildings.

I think Madison's height limit helps it be such an incredible pedestrian experience. If it were lifted anywhere to let taller buildings be built, those areas would just become really dense urban centres surrounded with non-development or parking lots like every other Midwestern city. Madison has a coherent urban fabric as a result of the height limit and I think that's great.

Ayreonaut · #5 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 3:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exodus

You forgot Windsor, 323,000 metro

No, I just skipped it since it was just posted. I also left out Victoria because I couldn't find a decent picture. I saw one the other day but can't remember where.

Nowhereman1280 · #6 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 5:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGII

I think Madison's height limit helps it be such an incredible pedestrian experience. If it were lifted anywhere to let taller buildings be built, those areas would just become really dense urban centres surrounded with non-development or parking lots like every other Midwestern city. Madison has a coherent urban fabric as a result of the height limit and I think that's great.

I don't think the height limit is responsible for that CGII. I think the pedestrian experience is primarily a function of the fact that the city is relatively inaccessible by freeway and has few streets over two lanes. Thus traffic and parking are hell in Madison and its a very unappealing place to drive, so everyone bikes or walks. People won't build parking lots where there is no demand to park. Also, the fact it is on an isthmus makes it even more unlikely that anyone would tear down buildings in favor of highrises. Its only accessible from two directions, so its like you have a Chicago-Lakefront effect from two directions. Imagine how few parking lots would be in Chicago if the whole city was like the North Lakefront: No freeways and only accessable from one or two directions.

Further evidence of this lies in the fact that other cities that never had height restrictions also never had parking lots until freeways were punched through the middle of them.

Steely Dan · #7 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 6:04 PM**

Evanston, IL is a small city of ~75,000 and has built a pretty decent little skyline for itself. if the economy ever turns around, there will be a new 400' tall centerpiece tower built right in the middle of the skyline in the coming years

Andy Tucker/ flickr

texcolo · #8 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 6:54 PM**

Rochester, Minnesota

Omaha, Nebraska

jdcamb · #9 Posted **Oct 28, 2009, 7:37 PM**

Rochester NY

image by: jdcamb

image by: Chris Tomkins-Tinch

City pop. = 220,000

Metro = 1,100,000 (I think of it as a small city)

urbanactivist · #10 Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 6:18 PM**

for "very small" cities, I'd go with Hot Springs, Arkansas (pop. 37k). Kinda tough to get a skyline shot there, but the density and variety of its buildings is very impressive... not to mention that most of the city was built during the Art Deco era.

kcexpress69 · #11 Posted **Feb 13, 2010, 1:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanactivistTX

for "very small" cities, I'd go with Hot Springs, Arkansas (pop. 37k). Kinda tough to get a skyline shot there, but the density and variety of its buildings is very impressive... not to mention that most of the city was built during the Art Deco era.

Little Rock has a pretty impressive skyline for a city under 200,000. Not sure what the metro pop. is. This was one of the best I could locate from my trip back in 2008

SpawnOfVulcan · #12 Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 6:26 PM**

You can't really see all of the skyline, but here is a small capture of Mobile, Alabama's skyline. Definitely one of the best in the 'small' category. Tallest building is 745 feet.

Lumis.com

youngregina · #13 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 7:43 AM**

Look up Regina, SK. I think my city has a fairly impressive skyline for a city of only 200 000.

Buckeye Native 001 · #14 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 7:46 AM**

Des Moines

Exodus · #15 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 9:56 AM**

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

KB0679 · #16 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 4:56 PM**

Winston-Salem, NC (MSA: 468K)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1196/...fa946b30ef.jpg http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1364/...bd77010ceb.jpg

Shreveport-Bossier City, LA (MSA: 390K)

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/p...m/23337804.jpg

Mobile, AL (MSA: 406K)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/...c04c9a3b04.jpg

texcolo · #17 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 11:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KB0679

Winston-Salem, NC (MSA: 468K)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1196/...fa946b30ef.jpg http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1364/...bd77010ceb.jpg

Shreveport-Bossier City, LA (MSA: 390K)

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/p...m/23337804.jpg

Mobile, AL (MSA: 406K)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3174/...c04c9a3b04.jpg

Are they dressing up the older building with a new spire to make it look like the newer building? Is that finished?

The new tower is awesome by the way.

TarHeelJ · #18 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 11:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by texcolo

Are they dressing up the older building with a new spire to make it look like the newer building? Is that finished?

The new tower is awesome by the way.

Yes - isn't it tacky? The RSA Battlehouse is nice, but the hotel with the copycat crown is a mess.

wrab · #19 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 5:01 PM**

600,000 is an awfully high threshold for a "small" USA city, yellowboy, given that it includes such places as Denver, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Washington DC, Las Vegas, Portland, Atlanta, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Honolulu, St Louis, Buffalo & Cincinnati.

But given that those are your parameters, my vote goes to Seattle (pop. 598,707), followed closely by Minneapolis (pop. 382,605), Cleveland (pop. 433,748) and Pittsburgh (pop. 310,037).

KB0679 · #20 Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 5:02 PM**

^Read the title again.