Have you ever caught a view of the Minneapolis skyline, and thought, what a beaut!
Every day, it’s a sight to make the heart sing. At night, it’s a glittering abstraction, with colors dancing at the top of the Target tower. But perhaps we like it because it’s ours, and we are full of Minnesota pride. If we saw it anew with fresh eyes, might we still think it’s grand?
What makes for a good skyline, anyway?
For starters, consider the design, density, variety and height. Each of these attributes is a variable element, assembled in different combinations from city to city. You can have a skyline dominated by one building with a design so good it seems as if the rest of the city is just a stage for its performance. Or you can have a dense skyline with lousy buildings that’s still impressive for its bulk. Variety is nice, and the skyline could include an international-style skyscraper box, a 1970s glass tower and an old 1920s tower with lots of windows, which provide a human-scaled metric better than a blank glass wall. And height matters because it’s testament to a city’s commercial achievements.
“Fortunately or unfortunately, people judge the city by heights — it’s seen as equivalent to prosperity,” says Thomas Fisher, a professor at the University of Minnesota’s School of Architecture.
Or, perhaps, its former prosperity. For instance, St. Paul’s skyline does not give a boom-town impression and it’s one of those rote midlevel Midwestern skylines that aren’t perfect, featuring some good buildings and some regrettable boxes. St. Paul’s tallest tower — the 37-story Wells Fargo Place on E. 7th Street — is a so-so structure whose saving grace is its angled roof.
But downtown St. Paul also has some fine tall buildings, including the big 1930s brutes of the Post Office and the First National Bank. The 17-story Travelers building helps the skyline with its pyramidal roof, and that’s rare.
“There used to be more attention to the tops of the buildings,” Fisher says. “Modern flat building tops are where you put the AC.”