...cities, such as (56) Buffalo, (59) Albany, and (60) Rochester. OKC (41) is one ahead of (42) San Antonio but behind (26) Tulsa.

Oklahoma City (41) (http://skyscrapercity.com/archive/index.php/t-200656.html)

Sorry if the title is a little misleading or ambiguous in nature. How else was I supposed to attract attention? Sex sells, but is also inappropriate for message boards.

Tulsa was #26.

How does the poll rank the cities?

Looking at the site myself, I believe the formula they're using is # highrises plus height. That's what one poster on there says anyhow.

To piggyback on my previous post, Oklahoma City is ranked in the top 10 category for "hottest cities for development".

Oklahoma City (8) (http://skyscrapercity.com/archive/index.php/t-168004.html)

Also, Tulsa (19) squeaked into the top 20.

OKC's skyline is much more interesting than Tulsa's IMO.

agreed.

Disagreed.

Of course. But we forgive you.

Where is the skyline that great? What about Denver???

uh I think I disagree. Can't top having 3 of the top 5 tallest buildings in downtown, plus, all three of those buildings a prettier and look much better kept than OKC's.

This is one area where I say that Tulsa beats OKC!

Kansas City Missouri ranked 23rd and Kansas City Kansas ranked 144th; very interesting.

come on hands down tulsa has a better skyline than okc.

come on hands down tulsa has a better skyline than okc.

Yes, I pretty much have to agree. I love the OKC skyline, but that Tulsa skyline view down the river from I-44 is beautiful. However, OKC coming off I-35 westbound onto I-40 is pretty awesome too.

-----------

Two words: Personal Preference

I think it depends on the perspective from which the viewer is looking at downtown. The trouble with OKC's skyline is that it is so compact that some buildings (Leadership Square or the Renaissance) are blocked partially or fully when viewed at certain angles. It's great for a pedestrian, but not a photographer. The dry similarity of hues also hurts the skyline.

I think Tulsa has a nice skyline, and IMO it is better than OKC's. The Mid-Continent Tower is a very distinctive icon, whereas First National will always be compared to the Empire State Building. But that doesn't mean the downtown is better, which we know not to be true.

Incidentally, my number one skyline would be Chicago's, daytime or nighttime, because it's defined and dazzling. Buildings are spaced just right. NYC's is just too dense and wide.

I agree with you about Chicago, Floater. It's an awesome sight driving in from the Eisenhower (is it the eisenhower? I think so.) It's probably my favorite skyline as well.

uh I think I disagree. Can't top having 3 of the top 5 tallest buildings in downtown, plus, all three of those buildings a prettier and look much better kept than OKC's.

That doesn't impress me when the difference in height is less than 200 feet, and the difference is even smaller with the rest of OKC's and Tulsa's skyline.

I do love the Mid-Continent Tower in Tulsa, but I do not believe either skyline is "better kept". The only tower in OKC that needs work is the First National Tower.

What really counts in how I rank skylines is architecture. Art deco in Tulsa is awesome, but most of those buildings are less than 20 stories. I look for very tall office towers. I am not a big fan of international style architecture, and almost every single tower in Tulsa is square international style. And yes, so is Chase Tower in OKC. Again, I do not like the Chase Tower. UGLY!

But what sets OKC apart from Tulsa is shape. First National and City Place have shape and form. Oklahoma Tower also has shape... although not much, but has a modern architectural style. I do like the ONG building in Tulsa, but Leadership Square really stands out for OKC.

I would rank both skylines in the same area. But honestly, OKC does need a new signature tower to replace Chase Tower.

I'm surely a fan of Okc and the great changes we've all witnesses over the past 10-years, but, as to skylines, consider the following downtown buildings which are 100 meters or more:

Oklahoma City

1- Chase Tower (1971, 36 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/06/115753.jpg

2- 1st National (1931, 33 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2005/10/406355.jpg

3- City Place (1931, 33 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/02/247571.jpg

4- Oklahoma Tower (1962, 31 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2005/10/406158.jpg

5- Kerr McGee (1973, 30 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/251347.jpg

Tulsa

1- One Williams Center (1976, 52 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/254169.jpg

2 - 1st Place Tower (1973, 40 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/130228.jpg

3 - Mid-Continent Tower (1984, 36 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/116072.jpg

4 - Bank of America Center (1976, 32 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/115445.jpg

5 - University Club Tower (1966, 32 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/128641.jpg

6 - 110 W 7th Building (1971, 28 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/254341.jpg

7 - Philtower (1927, 24 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/06/123330.jpg

8 - 320 S. Boston Building (1928, 22 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2003/04/188500.jpg

For some reason I don't know (maybe Emporis.com has something that keeps its images from being used directly, I don't know ... it worked fine when I previewed the message), images are not showing up in the prior message, even though the images' properties are (right-click, Properties).

Anyway, here's a list of the buildings and images I tried to stick into the above message. Just "posting" the links doesn't work ... you get a "forbidden" page ... if you really want to see them, though, you can right-click on a link and select "copy shortcut" and then paste the shortcut into your browser's address box and the image should open.

Oklahoma City

1- Chase Tower (1971, 36 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/06/115753.jpg

2- 1st National (1931, 33 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2005/10/406355.jpg

3- City Place (1931, 33 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/02/247571.jpg

4- Oklahoma Tower (1962, 31 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2005/10/406158.jpg

4- Oklahoma Tower (1962, 31 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2005/10/406158.jpg

5- Kerr McGee (1973, 30 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/251347.jpg

Tulsa

1- One Williams Center (1976, 52 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/254169.jpg

2 - 1st Place Tower (1973, 40 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/130228.jpg

3 - Mid-Continent Tower (1984, 36 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/116072.jpg

4 - Bank of America Center (1976, 32 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/115445.jpg

5 - University Club Tower (1966, 32 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/01/128641.jpg

6 - 110 W 7th Building (1971, 28 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2004/03/254341.jpg

7 - Philtower (1927, 24 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2001/06/123330.jpg

8 - 320 S. Boston Building (1928, 22 stories)
http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/5/2003/04/188500.jpg

Correction, Doug. Oklahoma Tower was built in 1982, not 1962.

and you listed it twice

Thanks, Doug.....

Nice job pulling those together for comparison.

------------

Thanks, writerranger, my heart was in the right place. And, yes, when I copied & pasted links in the 2nd message, I listed the Oklahoma Tower 2x, and yes it was built in 1982. Woe!

I've saved the linked images to my website so that they can be displayed here. I'll list Okc's & Tulsa's over 100 meter downtown buildings in 2 rows and hope they'll fit. Let's see if I can get it right this time:

OKC
1-Chase Tower (1971, 36 stories)
2-1st National (1931, 33 stories)
3-City Place (1931, 33 stories)
4-Oklahoma Tower (1982, 31 stories)
5-Kerr McGee Tower (1973), 30 stories)

http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.okc.chase.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.okc.1stnational.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.okc.cityplace.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.okc.oktower.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.okc.kerrmcgee.jpg

Tulsa
1-One Williams Center (1976, 52 stories)
2-1st Place Tower (1973, 40 stories)
3-Mid-continent Tower (1984, 36 stories)
4-Bank of America Center (1967, 32 stories)
5-University Club Tower (1966, 32 stories)
6-110 W 7th Building (1971, 28 stories)
7-Philtower (1927, 24 stories)
8-320 S Boston Bldg (1928, 22 stories)
http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.onewilliamscenter.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.1stplacetower.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.midcontinent.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.bankofamerica.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.universityclub.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.110w7th.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.philtower.jpghttp://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/emporis.tulsa.320sboston.jpg

Is that better?

Edited Note: That's weird. The buildings are now showing up in my original post this morning. They were only "x's" later this morning when I made my 2nd post, and also before I saved the images and reposted them in this message. Go figure.

There's nothing wrong with Oklahoma City's skyline, it's one of the best around the southern states IMO.

OUman

Tulsa's is kind of bland. It definitely is "big city" lookin' though with more taller buildings than OKC. OKC's is unique, with all the different styles of buildings and the Crystal Bridge is the kicker... very cool. :)

Both cities have impressive, but outdated, skylines. In OKC, Chase Tower could really use a facelift and needs MUCH better nighttime lighting. That building ruins an otherwise beautiful nighttime OKC skyline. Tulsa has too many tall boxes and desperately needs a new signature tower that is anything but a box. Something with some color or lots of glass would be nice too. It would be nice to see some new office towers but I think both will see residential towers built first.

I have written bulding management on several occasions abnout better lighting on downtown Oklahoma City's buildings, emphasizing that more dynamic and colorful lighting helps better sell downtown to prospects. However, all I recieved in return was a lecture on how expensive it is to illuminate a skyscraper.

Not of these complete idiots realize that... yes... floodlights burn a alot of juice. Neons burn far less energy. So do argon lights.

Want to see a neat OKC skyline? Drive in from the east on I40 just as the sun rises on a clear morning. The reflection off of the skyline is awsome. Same thing from on the west side when the sun sets.

I totally agree, Chicago Skyline is the best in this country, if not the world!!! Hands down!

But in oklahoma, I think OKC edges out Tulsa. Tulsa has a few that are taller but 163feet is hardly that much taller.

I think what hurts Tulsa is what helps OKC, density. Downtown OKC is much much more dense than Tulsa - and has that big city feel inside of it.

Tulsa might look impressive from that hill (to the NE of downtown i believe) but OKC would look even better if it were in a similar geography.

Look at Seattle's skyline - not that impressive if it were in a region like OKC (flat, lack of highrise hills), but in its setting - it looks absolutely stunning.

So my point it - it doesnt often matter the height of the buildings. Chicago has height and it needed it - for it to be #1 in almost everyone's book, in addition to its density and 2+ mile wide/length size. Tulsa/like Seattle, captured its natural setting to create scapes which make it look bigger than it is. Which also works.

OKC built a dense model which ran out of funding, otherwise, it would be much more similar in nature to that of Calgary, AB - arguable the BEST skyline for a city the size of 1M. They have OKC's density with all of their planned buildings built (unlike OKC which collapsed before all could be built).

Yes, I agree that OKC needs the next signature tall boy for the state - but I also think OKC's dense skyline is the already the best in the state.

With Devon spread out among the various towers downtown because of their growth, I would think they would be itching to build a new tower. Surely it would be more convenient for them to have all employees in one place. And we know they're not hurting for dough.

I don't guess that I ever saw Chicago's skyline at night when I was there, but Cinci has a pretty impressive nighttime skyline when you are driving from the airport (in KY?)... Also the view along the river is neat!

Just came across this thread...Any chance Devon is giving any serious thought of building their own tower?

Something modern like the Enron Tower in Houston

Maybe SandRidge will build a tower?

Their owner is more interested in the corporate campus concept.


Just came across this thread...Any chance Devon is giving any serious thought of building their own tower?

Something modern like the Enron Tower in Houston

They fund a lot of economic development projects in OKC. They've been vital to OKC's rebirth. But they are totally uninterested in building a new tower. They love being stretched at opposite ends of downtown.

While I meant that sarcastically, they really don't seem to mind so much. They've organized departments so that it doesn't disrupt the flow of business for them.

By the way, the Enron Tower would look hideous in OKC. Oh and for the record, as an old timer Houstonian, I reserve the right to call a tower whatever I wish...

Well we know they have much more cash sitting around than debt ridden Chesapeake...Is Sandridge big enough midtowner?...If not is our only chance of someone coming into OKC and building one?

No because you're missing the concept and scale in which skyscrapers are built these days. More likely than not, corporations build corporate campuses, and apartments and condos fill new skyscrapers. It's a reverse sprawl/urbanization movement that's pretty interesting in itself.

Riata/SandRidge has about a tenth of the employees that Chesapeake has.

Cities of all sizes building high-rise residential

USATODAY.com - Nice view: Cities of all sizes embracing high-rise living (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-02-15-city-living_x.htm)

We ain't Tampa :)

I love our condensed skyline, but I just drove back from Houston (again) and passed the Houston skyline (wow!) and then 4 hours later passed the Dallas skyline and - revelation - I realized how small our towers downtown really are.

-------

writerranger...Went to Houston a few weeks back for the first time...I don't normally notice towers/skyscrapers, but I found myself saying wow and cool a lot while driving around

Reliant stadium was very nice as well...Not so sure on living there, but it looks like they know how to design bldgs down there

For ten years I lived in Houston's inner west side. At first in student housing and then after I started dating my wife I had a townhome in the Medical District.

Coming from a place like Houston, it puts perspective on how slow the boom here is occuring, and how we've really laid waste to our urban character. We're just set to become another Dallas or LA, when we could be a Houston or Minneapolis. But it aint too late...

Spartan, I went to Houston a couple months ago and I was curious about the Williams Tower in the Galleria area. This isn't the same Williams that's based in Tulsa, is it? It's a very impressive tower.

It used to be the Transco Tower. Williams (yes, the Williams of Tulsa) purchased Transco about 10 years ago and the name was changed in '98 or so. You are right - it's quite impressive.
http://writerranger.zoto.com/img/30/706fb1163da5571de7921fba992e1d84.jpg

http://writerranger.zoto.com/img/30/0dc61f2ecb45fb39c79770d9a95b0503-.jpg

http://writerranger.zoto.com/img/30/3885e26cd04a8a7588fb4c0cb4898a82-.jpg

-----------

Tallest building in the world located outside of a central business district. I still call it the Transco.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y185/mrell32/Image00001-1.jpg
A pic that a guy on a Houston forum I'm active on posted...it shows Uptown, Montrose, and the western half of downtown. Oddly enough you can see the rooftops of my alma mater as well.

That's an interesting shot, Spartan!

-----------------

Kind of a misleading topic title. My mind went immediately to NY, NY and I thought who would rank our skyline better than NYC.

How nice, Williams actually keeping a tower after they purchased the company that owned it. Now why can't Anadarko Petroleum do that?

Didn't you? Anadarko's CEO has a grudge against OKC.