Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[Hali87]

Untitled by Hali87, on Flickr


Untitled by Hali87, on Flickr

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Winnipeg looks good. I like the baseball stadium next to the river and all the green spaces around the downtown core.

Does Winnipeg have many early 1900's highrises or midrises? At one time (long ago) wasn't it considered to be the Chicago of the North?

Yes, the Exchange District is dominated by early 1900 midrises (possibly even a bit older?) and there are several interesting proto-highrises downtown. This has always been one of my favourites:


Source

[Brizzy82]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Winnipeg looks good. I like the baseball stadium next to the river and all the green spaces around the downtown core.

Does Winnipeg have many early 1900's highrises or midrises? At one time (long ago) wasn't it considered to be the Chicago of the North?

We do!


Donald Street & Cumberland Avenue Winnipeg Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

McDermot Ave & Adelaide Avenue Winnipeg Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

Lombard Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

A Glimpse Down Albert Street Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

Bankers Row Main Street Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

The Hotel Fort Garry Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

Bannatyne Ave Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

Main Street and Bannatyne Winnipeg, Manitoba by D Ezinicki, on Flickr

[Echoes]

That is a fantastic Winnipeg aerial.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by softee

That block of Pembroke is a bit of an outlier being so close to downtown, there are more than a usual number of detached houses (although most are now subdivided into apartments), and the homes are set back a little farther from the street allowing for bigger than usual front lawns compared to surrounding streets in the area. When the street was first built up, it was considered somewhat of an upperclass street for the area.

I don't see why you're reacting to this as if it was a flaw. Most people would likely view it as a positive. It just happens to be the way the city was built.

Though I suspect sooner than later most of these areas that you still find fairly easily in central Toronto except for the very ritziest will be gone.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Cineple...db!8m2!3d43.656594!4d-79.3805558!6m1!1e1

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Brizzy82

We do!

Thank you Brizzy82. Those are great looking old buildings. Do most of them still exist; hopefully they do.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Hali87

Yes, the Exchange District is dominated by early 1900 midrises (possibly even a bit older?) and there are several interesting proto-highrises downtown. This has always been one of my favourites:


Source

Very nice, I like the mix of old and new in Winnipeg, purely from what I have seen in pictures since I haven't been there yet.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Hali87

Untitled by Hali87, on Flickr


Untitled by Hali87, on Flickr

Nice pictures Hali87. I like that perspective.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

Halifax is a Port City. (& wherever their are Port Activities, large & thriving CBD's Pop up near those areas for that reason)

I think you are confusing cause and effect here. A lot of cities started out as small port towns, and the businesses were right next to or inside the wharves. When containerized shipping happened, the container terminals were built near the existing port facilities. That was around 1970 so a lot of cities have grown since then. Few cities were planned with port districts and office districts next to each other.

You don't really want container terminals next to office districts if you can avoid it. This is a bit of a planning headache in Halifax; some containers are loaded onto trains but others go onto trucks and those trucks generate a lot of noise and emissions downtown. There have been proposals to either move the container terminal or create an "inland shipping" hub outside the city where containers are loaded onto trucks. Nobody worries about keeping the container terminals next to downtown; the port traffic is regional and most of it comes in from or heads elsewhere. Some industries do like to locate next to ports but they need a lot of space and to them the high land costs downtown are downside.

It's all Supply & Demand & strategic advantageous settlement patterns.
Saskatoon is NOT a Port, & for that reason their aren't nearly as many of it's residents living in/ around its downtown core as Halifax would have.

The older cities don't necessarily have taller highrises or skyscrapers. The old neighbourhoods (before even streetcars) were high density but they were lowrise buildings below 10 storeys or so. The density existed because the buildings were packed in tightly and covered a lot more of the land area (less land was dedicated to open space or roads). People lived in denser settings because travelling around was harder without motorized vehicles. When you have to walk everywhere, you want to live within a small radius of maybe a couple kilometres. People were also poorer and building technology was more labour intensive so each person on average got less space to live in. An apartment that has a couple of students in it today might have had 7 people in it in 1900 (parents, kids, boarders).

Halifax looked like this in the early 1900's before highrises. I think these buildings and streets are what distinguish the older cities from the newer cities (unfortunately in the case of Halifax a lot of this was destroyed, but a lot of it is still there):



Aside from age, geography has an impact too. In Halifax, there are only a few ways to get on and off of the peninsula that has most of the inner city and downtown on it. There's a somewhat large cost to living in the suburbs and paying to cross the bridge or driving an extra 10-15 minutes each way through the bottlenecks. This is why the Halifax peninsula is pretty densely built up but many of the outlying areas aren't. Many people who are already stuck out in the suburbs are happy to drive just a little bit farther to have a much bigger and quieter place.

Areas with views or water frontage can also be more desirable so they tend to be more densely built up.

[Brizzy82]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Thank you Brizzy82. Those are great looking old buildings. Do most of them still exist; hopefully they do.

Yes those are all semi recent, those buildings still exist.

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

I depends what kind of density we're talking about. The mid-density level of Montreal's traditionnal triplexes has not match anywhere in Canada. In Montreal, you go from downtown to miles and miles of that kind of density. But there is very little highrises there in the mix though, contrary to Toronto. But in Toronto, I find you get to single detached homes quite a bit quicker than you do in Montreal.

For Montreal, I'm talking this kind of density:

Yeah my Bad, your probably right come to think of it.
Although surprisingly (Given it's size & all), Winnipeg has it's own
similar version of that type of thing going on. (Just on an obviously
much smaller scale), but nonetheless impressive for a City that size,
but yea I underestimated Montreal, Where it lacks in Skyscraper's.
(Relative to Toronto & Vancouver), it more than makes
up for in Layered Density Neighborhoods that have Row Houses/
triplexes. I just assumed @ 1st Toronto had more because it was the bigger
City. It's interesting because Boston in the US is the same sort of way,
not many Tall Buildings but alot like Montreal in it's Built Form away from the CBD.
Would u say perhaps that has something to do with the lower rent prices in Montreal?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

The Presence of a PORT, makes the Skyline much, much bigger. (For obvious reasons). Most people do not Build The CBD's Miles away/ apart from where their vessels ARE. it wouldn't make any sense to do that right?

It's correlated in a way but I don't think the presence of a port has a direct impact on a city skyline or urban form. Most port cities in Canada are old because colonies needed ports as soon as they were established. Conversely, the "newer" provinces (excluding Newfoundland) are all located inland and were settled later, after what are now all the larger port cities in Canada were all fairly well established. By this time rail technology was already developed so these cities could develop around streetcar systems while the earlier cities retroactively added streetcars to areas that weren't originally designed for them. With streetcars (and the other forms of transit that followed), it's more practical to live further from the main employment centres, so there was less incentive to pack housing in as tightly in cities that weren't already densely built up before streetcars were introduced.

Ports are also by necessity on a major body of water. In the prairie cities, it's fairly easy and logical for growth to radiate pretty much evenly from the centre of the city in 360 degrees. This isn't really possible in Halifax, or St. John's, or Vancouver or Toronto or Hamilton or Montreal or Victoria or Saint John or Charlottetown or Prince Rupert or Sydney or Thunder Bay. To fit the same number of people within X km of the centre of the downtowns of each of these cities, residential units need to be packed in more tightly than in cities that can radiate in all directions.

Consider that the largest port facilities in North America are not in New York or San Francisco or Vancouver, but LA. And consider how far LA's downtown is from the ocean.

[Marshal]

That was a very nice picture of Winnipeg.

A lot of silliness going on here:

"I like this downtown because it's quicker to get through." Huh?

San Fransisco is more interesting than Chicago or New York." Wow. Really? I won't judge your taste, and I love San Fransisco, but what prompts one to want to rate such different cities against each other? New York is missing things, but interest ain't one of them.

"Chicago has more than New York." You have got to be kidding. I know both cities very well, and its not close. But then why should it be? Chicago has tons. OK. New York has double and then some.

Making an argument with two old skyline shots is reasonable, except they need to cover the same ground. The Chicago shot almost captures the entire skyline. The 1915 New York shot is of a small section on of downtown, and is miles away from Midtown. It shows about 5, maybe 7% of the city's 1915 building stock. If it didn't include the Woolworth Building it would hardly represent anything at all particular to NYC.

"Saskatoon as best prairie city" Maybe in the 300,000-320,000 range.

And you are arguing about this crap. Its like reading a bunch of boobs running around and into each other.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Marshal

"Saskatoon as best prairie city" Maybe in the 300,000-320,000 range.

Well, I said Saskatoon was the best looking Prairie city, not the best overall city.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Marshal

That was a very nice picture of Winnipeg.

A lot of silliness going on here:

"I like this downtown because it's quicker to get through." Huh?

San Fransisco is more interesting than Chicago or New York." Wow. Really? I won't judge your taste, and I love San Fransisco, but what prompts one to want to rate such different cities against each other? New York is missing things, but interest ain't one of them.

"Chicago has more than New York." You have got to be kidding. I know both cities very well, and its not close. But then why should it be? Chicago has tons. OK. New York has double and then some.

Making an argument with two old skyline shots is reasonable, except they need to cover the same ground. The Chicago shot almost captures the entire skyline. The 1915 New York shot is of a small section on of downtown, and is miles away from Midtown. It shows about 5, maybe 7% of the city's 1915 building stock. If it didn't include the Woolworth Building it would hardly represent anything at all particular to NYC.

"Saskatoon as best prairie city" Maybe in the 300,000-320,000 range.

And you are arguing about this crap. Its like reading a bunch of boobs running around and into each other.

You have to get out of your house more. In Ontario, I like Hamilton the best because that I lived there for several years and enjoyed the city. A person's preference doesn't have to be based on the quantity of skyscrapers or how many attractions are in a city.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

Yeah my Bad, your probably right come to think of it.
Although surprisingly (Given it's size & all), Winnipeg has it's own
similar version of that type of thing going on. (Just on an obviously
much smaller scale), but nonetheless impressive for a City that size,
but yea I underestimated Montreal, Where it lacks in Skyscraper's.
(Relative to Toronto & Vancouver), it more than makes
up for in Layered Density Neighborhoods that have Row Houses/
triplexes. I just assumed @ 1st Toronto had more because it was the bigger
City. It's interesting because Boston in the US is the same sort of way,
not many Tall Buildings but alot like Montreal in it's Built Form away from the CBD.
Would u say perhaps that has something to do with the lower rent prices in Montreal?

You have to remember that Winnipeg used to be Canada's third largest city. It was the gateway to western Canada with the railroads and was the hub for all banking in the west. It makes perfect sense for Winnipeg to have all those historical buildings. Heck, Winnipeg had the first skyscraper in Canada:

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Well, I said Saskatoon was the best looking Prairie city, not the best overall city.

I agree with that Statement! The best Prairie City is obviously Calgary, but Saskatoon has a nice look/ feel to it too! I'd say Winnipeg is another City I really like & would like to spend more time there in the future.

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

You have to remember that Winnipeg used to be Canada's third largest city. It was the gateway to western Canada with the railroads and was the hub for all banking in the west. It makes perfect sense for Winnipeg to have all those historical buildings. Heck, Winnipeg had the first skyscraper in Canada:

Wow! & this is exactly why I would like to spend more time in Winnipeg in the Future!

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Hali87

It's correlated in a way but I don't think the presence of a port has a direct impact on a city skyline or urban form. Most port cities in Canada are old because colonies needed ports as soon as they were established. Conversely, the "newer" provinces (excluding Newfoundland) are all located inland and were settled later, after what are now all the larger port cities in Canada were all fairly well established. By this time rail technology was already developed so these cities could develop around streetcar systems while the earlier cities retroactively added streetcars to areas that weren't originally designed for them. With streetcars (and the other forms of transit that followed), it's more practical to live further from the main employment centres, so there was less incentive to pack housing in as tightly in cities that weren't already densely built up before streetcars were introduced.

Ports are also by necessity on a major body of water. In the prairie cities, it's fairly easy and logical for growth to radiate pretty much evenly from the centre of the city in 360 degrees. This isn't really possible in Halifax, or St. John's, or Vancouver or Toronto or Hamilton or Montreal or Victoria or Saint John or Charlottetown or Prince Rupert or Sydney or Thunder Bay. To fit the same number of people within X km of the centre of the downtowns of each of these cities, residential units need to be packed in more tightly than in cities that can radiate in all directions.

Consider that the largest port facilities in North America are not in New York or San Francisco or Vancouver, but LA. And consider how far LA's downtown is from the ocean.

Oh wow I guess u do have a point there/ then I never actually knew that b4. (Guess u learn something new everyday).

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Marshal

That was a very nice picture of Winnipeg.

A lot of silliness going on here:

"I like this downtown because it's quicker to get through." Huh?

San Fransisco is more interesting than Chicago or New York." Wow. Really? I won't judge your taste, and I love San Fransisco, but what prompts one to want to rate such different cities against each other? New York is missing things, but interest ain't one of them.

"Chicago has more than New York." You have got to be kidding. I know both cities very well, and its not close. But then why should it be? Chicago has tons. OK. New York has double and then some.

Making an argument with two old skyline shots is reasonable, except they need to cover the same ground. The Chicago shot almost captures the entire skyline. The 1915 New York shot is of a small section on of downtown, and is miles away from Midtown. It shows about 5, maybe 7% of the city's 1915 building stock. If it didn't include the Woolworth Building it would hardly represent anything at all particular to NYC.

"Saskatoon as best prairie city" Maybe in the 300,000-320,000 range.

And you are arguing about this crap. Its like reading a bunch of boobs running around and into each other.

I just prefer Toronto because it doesn't have that overwhelming/ overbearing feel of NYC yet it's still big, cooperate, busy, lots to do & see & still has tons of large buildings. I don't like how far out NYC's Layered Scraper Sea/ Density lasts. To me I'd rather it abruptly end only a few blocks from the Financial District the way it does in Toronto. (I see this as plus too anyways), because the same layered/ built form density continues to exist in Toronto anyways outside of the immediate Downtown Core in places like North York, Scarborough, Etobicoke, & even in the Suburbs like Mississauga, Markham, Brampton, & Richmond Hill. (+ it wouldn't take u as long
to get into the Airport also).
(Unlike Manhattan that just piles the whole thing onto 1 Island, calls it a borough & forces everyone to live in a congested nightmare). Toronto can better ease the congestion while still maintaining it if u like in a few set area's. (& it's the more Multicultural City but it doesn't matter most people will say I guess simply because it's not as big).