Skyline Battle: OKC vs. Tulsa vs. Little Rock

[G.Walker]

Which of these cities skylines do you think is best? All three have their own qualities, but which one stands out? Given the population size, Little Rock has a great skyline that might slide under some people's radar.

Tulsa



OKC



Little Rock

[Kerry]

I think OKC still has the best but I was in a bookstore the other day and they had a coffee table book of Skylines of America. Little Rock was in it but OKC and Tulsa were not.

BTW - I think the Sandridge building would have looked a lot better if the big windows were at the bottom and small windows at the top.

[Rover]

Little Rock isn't nearly as nice as OKC and Tulsa. It is more competitive with Wichita. Nice little town, but not a city. Heck, Midland, Texas has a better skyline than LR.

[Kerry]

Little Rock isn't nearly as nice as OKC and Tulsa. It is more competitive with Wichita. Nice little town, but not a city. Heck, Midland, Texas has a better skyline than LR.

I had no idea Midland had a downtown like that. Wow.

[G.Walker]

Little Rock isn't nearly as nice as OKC and Tulsa. It is more competitive with Wichita. Nice little town, but not a city. Heck, Midland, Texas has a better skyline than LR.

Little Rock's population is only 189,515, this skyline is very impressive for a city that size.

[Platemaker]

Enter ronronnie. j/k

[khook]

ask the same question in a couple of years..... say 2013

[BG918]

Tulsa has the advantage of having the condo/apartment towers just south of the downtown CBD that add to the overall skyline. So it looks a lot bigger if you are looking at it from that angle but not nearly as impressive if you are viewing it from the north. I'd say after Devon is complete OKC will have the more impressive skyline from afar. Tulsa will need a new tower to pass OKC at that point.

[ourulz2000]

Birmingham is nice:

[Grant]

The angle of that picture makes OKC's skyline look like it's more than like 3 blocks deep. Impressive, though.

Little Rock's population is only 189,515, this skyline is very impressive for a city that size.

Yes but their metro area population is close to 700,000....I'm surprised by Midland's skyline, too. I never knew that metro had over 250,000 residents.

[shane453]

Tulsa is pretty great:

Flickr user Fiveholer


Little Rock is ok:



I think you could make an argument for Tulsa or OKC being the best, but I think they are both better than Little Rock. Little Rock is a nice skyline though.

[Architect2010]

I also find Little Rock's skyline incredibly impressive for it's size.

I am torn between OKC and Tulsa. I think they're both beautiful in their own regards. Tulsa seems more outdated and less dense, but it's towers are the tallest and the most beautiful. OKC's is much more eclectic and modern, not to mention dense, but is also short and boxy.

[RockChalk]

Kerry,
As for the windows on the Kerr-McGee/Sandridge tower,....when I was in architecture school at OU in the 70's, I learned that the arrangement and sizing of those windows was no mistake. Here's the deal: If you are on the street level, and look up at other towers, it appears that they get smaller as they go up, which is typical perspective. The Sandridge building with windows getting larger, the higher they are on the building, gives an optical illusion of just the opposite. Check it out in person, and I think you'll see what I mean.

[dmoor82]

Little Rock isn't nearly as nice as OKC and Tulsa. It is more competitive with Wichita. Nice little town, but not a city. Heck, Midland, Texas has a better skyline than LR.

^^^ Ahhh NO! Wichita has a small skyline and thier tallest is under 375',and Little Rock, on The other hand is Damn nice for The population it boast,Little Rocks tallest is taller than OKC's(for now) until Devon is done,I am in Wichita once a week and OKC's NW Exp skyline compares to dt WHC!

[z28james]

Midland is oil money, when I worked for Toys R Us, it was interesting because the 1 TRU they had there would be like one of the biggest in sales and volume when oil money is rolling in, but when its down, that place would be like a ghost town.

I may sound like a yardbird but I like the OKC one better because it look more modern. Tulsa has a nice downtown though but to me its really boring. Little rock is indeed impressive for its size.

[architect5311]

I also find Little Rock's skyline incredibly impressive for it's size.

I am torn between OKC and Tulsa. I think they're both beautiful in their own regards. Tulsa seems more outdated and less dense, but it's towers are the tallest and the most beautiful. OKC's is much more eclectic and modern, not to mention dense, but is also short and boxy.

What exactly is more outdated about Tulsa's skyline relative to OKC, and what is more modern and eclectic about OKC's skyline?

[ljbab728]

What exactly is more outdated about Tulsa's skyline relative to OKC, and what is more modern and eclectic about OKC's skyline?

I don't have any problem with the design of buildings in either skyline. They are what they are and were designed based on the budgets, trends, and needs of the developers at the time they were built. Neither city will ever have the historic skyline buildings of New York or Chicago or the newer trends such as Dubai or Shanghai. Traditional is what works in Oklahoma like it or not.

[edcrunk]

tulsa's buildings are a tad more artsy and interesting than okc, but i have always felt our downtowns were very similar. i've dj-ed in little rock countless times and was never impressed or thought their skyline compared to okc or tulsa.

[Wishbone]

Amarillo is also not bad for it's size.

[Rover]

There are two issues....which has the most appealing PICTURE of a skyline, or which has the better skyline. If you actually go to LR, it is not all that impressive. Amarillo? Please....

Tulsa's is enhanced because the downtown sits on a hiltop and therefore sites up higher from the river. OKC starts at a low spot.

[architect5311]

Neither city will ever have the historic skyline buildings of New York or Chicago or the newer trends such as Dubai or Shanghai. Traditional is what works in Oklahoma like it or not.

Relative for it's size Oklahoma City has had a historic skyline with the First National Tower, Ramsey Tower(City Place), Biltmore(razed), Petroleum Building(razed) and others, which between 1931 and the early 1970's was one of the more impressive skylines west of the Mississippi.

I would definitely put the Devon Tower in the newer trend category.

[BG918]

There are two issues....which has the most appealing PICTURE of a skyline, or which has the better skyline. If you actually go to LR, it is not all that impressive. Amarillo? Please....

Tulsa's is enhanced because the downtown sits on a hiltop and therefore sites up higher from the river. OKC starts at a low spot.

That is very true, which is why you often see the Tulsa skyline photographed from the river so it appears much taller because it sits a good hundred feet higher than the river itself. Go from Riverside into downtown on Denver Ave. and you see how much higher it is than the valley below.

[okcpulse]

What exactly is more outdated about Tulsa's skyline relative to OKC, and what is more modern and eclectic about OKC's skyline?

The modern/eclectic boost to Oklahoma City's skyline lies in Leaderhsip Square, it has shape and form. Oklahoma Tower isn't eclectic per se, but having to angled sides on the NW and SE corners of the tower makes a difference.

First National and City Place have a lot of shape and form. That leaves Chase Tower and Sandridge Tower in the boring category with its minimalist international style.

In Tulsa, four of the five tallest towers are essentially boxes. Mid-Continent Tower, however, is awesome, to say the least. One of my favorite buildings, and it is a classic Tulsa icon.

[Spartan]

Little Rock is actually a remarkably nice little city, and it deserves some credit in my opinion. They've had a decent amount of mid-rise infill as well, on the eastern edge of the skyline. They also have historic streetcars that link the River Market area with North Little Rock's downtown area..and the River Market is one of my favorite urban areas in the south.

http://downtownontherange.blogspot.c.../Little%20Rock
I've written a handful of posts on Little Rock here..

[ljbab728]

Relative for it's size Oklahoma City has had a historic skyline with the First National Tower, Ramsey Tower(City Place), Biltmore(razed), Petroleum Building(razed) and others, which between 1931 and the early 1970's was one of the more impressive skylines west of the Mississippi.

I would definitely put the Devon Tower in the newer trend category.

The older OKC highrises were typical of what was being built at the time they were constructed and were, indeed, impressive for a city of our size at that time. The Devon Tower will be equally impressive but won't be as "out there" as some of the high rises being built in some foreign cities. Many of those seem to be being constructed strictly to say "look at me" rather than following form and function.