:previous: OMD, don't you guys think you are going a little over board with this? Toronto is getting its panties in a knot, you don't have to re-tell the world a thousand times how much bigger you are than Calgary. Everyone on here already knew that even when the original post was made.

PS how does having more 150m tall + towers make an area more dense? Theoretically Calgary could have 1000 towers between 100 and 150 meters and if Toronto only had 30 towers between 100 and 150 meters would it still be more dense? Vancouver is a perfect example, we only have 1 tower over 150 meters ( + 3 under construction ) but we have numerous towers in the 140m range. Despite having fewer 150m+ towers than Calgary Vancouver is arguably still more dense.

I enjoy watching people argue about who is more dense. All I know is there are people in here a lot more dense then me. :tup:

toronto pwns period in heigh and desntiy calgary pwns for a city its size lol

Someone should post some photos of all Canadian cities from the air so we can really get an idea, I would do it but I'm at work right now and don't have time.

SSP forumers pretending they're too cool to talk about density...right...lol

Here's Sydney and San Francisco. Yeah I had some time on my hands today.

http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u...aps/Sydney.png http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u...nFrancisco.png

after some more thought ... apples 'n oranges

Calgary doesn't have a set CBD and downtown Toronto is incomparably big to downtown Calgary.

All it took was one little sentence to get all that feedback. One little assertion that something outside Toronto might actually be comparable (or not depending on your opinion). Well, mission accomplished. The last page and a half was more interesting reading than I've seen on here in weeks. ;) :haha:

Sky level
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/m...e2d092fa_b.jpg

Ground Level
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/m...3b73ecobb8.jpg

Could someone explain to me the reasoning behind the orientation of Toronto's skyline? Most cities next to a large water body have their skylines move along the shoreline (New York, Chicago, Hong Kong etc...), so why does TO's inexplicably move in one solid line away from the lake?

The single biggest reason is most likely the subway lines...

Yep, Calatrava is doing a pedestrian bridge located in the spot that CtrlAltDel has in his renders - at the western tip of Prince's Island. This is simply a stand in.

There will be a second pedestrian bridge further east connecting the redeveloping East Village to Bridgeland at the western tip of St. George's Island. The quasi-public development authority executing the redevelopment and TIF for the East Village that will build the eastern bridge has previously indicated that it may do a competition. Yet to be confirmed.

These bridges are a HUGE source of controversy, much like Winnipeg's ped bridge - with the fiscal conservative crowd latching on to them as a symbol of overspending at the City - at a time when municipal property taxes are set to rise by about 20% over the next three years.

In the end though, several efforts to thwart the bridges have been overcome and Calatrava is signed on (for at least one of the bridges).

As for this ridiculous density and skyline comparison - just forget it - not worth pursuing.

agreed it has its own thread might still be kicking around

In two words: Yonge Street

In one word: Subway...which came later than Yonge Street.

Yonge Street has been the main street of Toronto for 250 years, so obviously it has the most built up density of any street in the city..and it's also the reason the development in Toronto follows Yonge Street all the way up to Newmarket in a straight line.

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/m...e2d092fa_b.jpg

spot the AGO!!! It's the one wearing the bright blue hat!

Yonge Street, historically, was a very important trade route however, it really was the streetcar connecting the villages and mills that made it dominate.

I still find it surp[rising that there wasn't a bigger push to develop the waterfront in Toronto, the point about Younge Street makes sense, but why was it away from the waterfront?

The waterfront area immediately in front of the CBD cluster was fill in the lake (not actual land) - It was also heavily industrial for most of its history. There's a major rail corridor through there and Toronto made the mistake of building a large elevated freeway through the waterfront, which has stifled its development potential and cuts off the waterfront edge from the rest of the city.

There has been many efforts to redevelop the waterfront since the 70's which saw sporadic development and some successes like the Harbourfront centre. There's currently a lot being built up right now, and a lot of effort, but still has a long way to go.

I disagree with the Gardiner being anymore than a psychological barrier to those that rarely get this far south. It's certianly much easier to cross than the dank tunnels beneath the sprawling Lakeshore Drive in Chicago. (which, compared to the Gardiner, is directly on the waterfront) I wouldn't call it a mistake that it got built either eventhough it's clearly outlived its usefulness.

If anything it was the railyard and a massive recession following its removal that stunted the growth potential as there certainly aren't a lack of investor concerned by views of a guardrail.

To add to what Wooster mentioned about the industrial use of the waterfront up until quite recently, the lack of integration into any sort of street fabric can also be attributed to the historical use of Lake Ontario as a waste repository. Before advanced sewage treatment processes, the central waterfront was not a pleasant place whatsoever, and no one would have wanted to live or work there unless absolutely necessary. All the while, the rest of the city was growing. Once a large urban streetscape was built to the north, it was much easier to continue that pattern than to alter it to grow along the (still quite uninviting until not too many years ago) waterfront.

Is it possible to do the same for Montreal and Vancouver (same scale as the above)?
..it shouldn't take you too long, Mtl still only has 7 red markers, and V maybe 2-4 red and green?