So the article is right and Chicago is still in a league of its own in that regard.
So the article is right and Chicago is still in a league of its own in that regard.
I think possibly the only legit "skyscraper city" that has been left out according to the article's "definition" would be Philadelphia which is affordable still.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_of_Buildings_Act_of_191...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_City,_Arlington,_Virgi...
Philadelphia is indeed the other contender! They weirdly haven't seen explosive job growth though, despite being an excellent city. They also don't have innovative land use policy. But the vast, partially abandoned north Philly is a "reserve army of underemployed land" keeping a check on prices--as is the excellent, fully electrified suburban regional rail network inherited from the Pennsy. Maintains a wide swathe of commutable land w/in 45 mins of CBD.