The only north American ruined cities I can think of are some Puebloan sites in the southwest. Aside from that, there's Cahokia, but if I understand it correctly Cahokia is "just" a series of mounds with pieces of buried physical culture rather than structures, monuments and temples.
I am personally familiar with the classic Mediterranean and have taken a few undergraduate courses on the archaeology of Anatolia and the Near East. While I do know that metallurgy was mostly unknown to the Native Americans (correct me if I'm wrong) we still have lots of paleolithic city ruins in the near east like Gobekli Tepe.
In a kind of narrative sense, why did 17th century America look more like "unspoiled wilderness" than "post apocalyptic landscape" despite the continent relatively recently having a large population?
There’s more than “some” sites in the southwest, there are many sites of ruined villages and towns (including stone, brick, & wooden buildings) that supported a very dense population peaking around the 11th century. These peoples built extensive irrigation networks (canals, dams), roads, and other features you’d associate with urbanization.
However, consider that there were a few challenges to building dense urban settlements in North America. First, no draft animals. No horses, donkeys, oxen, or cows to pull plows and carts and help you build cities. Secondly, a lack of protein sources. Especially without animal help, you need strong people to build cities (and you have to divert their labour from farming or hunting), that requires a nutritious protein-heavy diet. There were no pigs, cows, or sheep in N.America, so getting meat required hunting (deer or turkey), stomping around in the woods all day to hunt burns more calories than slaughtering domesticated animals. Corn (maize) didn’t spread into north america until about 2100BC, it took a while to spread north from Mexico. A diet based on native north american vegetables lacks some essential proteins and would have limited population size. If you have a low population that isn't booming because of agriculture, you don't really have any reason to expend energy on building a fortified town.
Because the climate situation in the Southwest was marginal at best for agriculture, these town-based cultures were very fragile. Once the population got too big, it only took a few bad years of excess drought, etc. to lead people to abandon the towns and move elsewhere.
Because most of this stuff is in the Southwest, it wasn’t “discovered” by Anglo-Americans until the late 19th century in some cases. So there’s a long time for European settlers in the Eastern US to percolate a belief that there are no stone ruins in America. Add to a self-serving manifest destiny myth of an unpopulated continent, and there you go.
Info on Southwestern Peoples: Plog, S. (2008) Ancient Peoples of the American Southwest, Thames & Hudson. Maize/Corn intro to N.America: https://www.pnas.org/content/106/50/21019
There are a number of good responses here, and more to say, but see the Technology and Civilization section our FAQ. There are a number of good posts bearing on your question.