Quote:
Originally Posted by fashionguy
Kansas City wins. St. Paul's skyline is nice when the State Capitol and Cathedral of St. Paul are included. However, it is too short and completely lacks tall glassy office towers which I would like to see for a lively city. To that end, I wouldn't rank Kansas City high either, but it is a little bit better than St. Paul.
Kansas City is not overshadowed by St. Louis. They are separated apart by the whole state of Missouri. One on the west side and one on the east. They are almost as far apart as possible for two cities in the same state. This is very different from Minneapolis and St. Paul. Development of St. Louis would hardly affect development of Kansas City. Besides, St. Louis is not that agressive about tall buildings either. Its skyline is more or less comparable to Kansas City's, although it is clearly the larger metro, and metro population is usually what matters in terms of everything.
|
Good post.
Another thing about KC is that the city is much larger than Downtown. When you include other midtown skylines like Crown Center, and the Plaza, the city is really in a different league than St Paul. In terms of just the downtown skyline, I still give KC the edge, most because if the striking contrast of old art deco towers, new glass towers, and modern structures like the Sprint Center and soon Performing Arts Center. Since KC is the center of a metro area and not the second center of a metro area, KC wins. KC could really use a few new modern towers like Minneapolis, they have some awesome new buildings.
St Paul has a great skyline though.
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.
