Form and branch structure look like it, but there are others that look like that. Foliage would prb'ly narrow it down.

Large Calocedrus decurrens, was one tree I had some difficulty distinguishing from S. giganteum, during a visit to Yosemite Park last summer.

The awl shape of S. g. wasn't always apparent even when fairly close. The flatter sprays of C. d. were a bit more visible when viewing a short distance from the tree.

The overall shape to me is definitely more like Sequoiadendron, but until we see a close up of foliage, can't quite rule out Calocedrus.

After looking at closeups of foliage of both, it’s definitely a sequoia.

It’s not that attractive of a tree…. yet. imo

L Clark, it's in CO, so prb'ly not its preferred siting (it likes deep winter snow for one thing). Might be the best it can do there.

My first thought too was Sequoiadendron. ;-)

" (it likes deep winter snow for one thing) "

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. Giant sequoias grow perfectly well in my area and we get almost no winter snow. What they do appreciate is likely a lot more moisture/rainfall than is common in CO and that might account for its thinness and scraggly appearance.

The tree is in irrigated bluegrass lawn, but even that may not be enough water. idk