Canadian Skyline Thread III

[kool maudit]

Even if the office blocks along the core streets were somehow Lower Manhattan-like giants, it would still be kind of incoherent. Like, "wow, what's that thing?"

"Well the first 10 floors are parts of the tax agency and then McKinsey has a part and then there are some lawyers and pension managers. I think there is an OHIP office. And the top is a condo."

It would be better had these things been capped at 10 storeys and all built in the same style. The focus is the Parliament, the Supreme Court, the central bank etc. That's what makes this place a place. You don't need landmark skyscrapers muddying the signal and you certainly don't need the line of thinking that aggregates blobs of sub-mundane office blocks into the city's central feature. They're not and they kind of can't be.

Ottawa should forget about its "skyline".

[kool maudit]

Of course, in my ideal Ottawa, not only would the BoC, Parliament, the court etc. be landmarks, but other things would pop from the uniform, Turin-like rows along Queen and Laurier as well. You'd have a striking, curvaceous corner block with a massive water feature for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Canada Post would have a corner dome topped by fleet-footed Hermes. Things like this.

The Sir Wilfred Laurier memorial rising out of Commissioners Park like the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, rather than some forgettable Etobicoke condos (it wouldn't matter if they were 100 storeys).

[Acajack]

It was mentioned not long ago that when the Government of Canada started to greatly expand in the 20th century, a lot of its initial office space to house public servants consisted of buildings that were basically converted barracks and hangars. So what they started to build in the 1960s is actually a great improvement.

I sometimes compare Ottawa to the capitals of the Nordic countries, but I think that might be a bit unfair. At least in the case of Oslo, Copenhagen and Stockholm. In addition to being the biggest cities of their countries, while not really imperial capitals they also are home to long-established royal families which gives them some extra regal oomph.

That said, Helsinki doesn't really have this going for it so Ottawa should at least be as good as Helsinki. (Which is the alpha city of the entire country, but the entire country has the population of Greater Montreal.)

[niwell]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

It may well be good urbanism, and I have nothing against highrises or TOD or densification or whatever else.

.

Even in that case it’s generally not. Outside of the core the highrise neighbourhoods still tend to be dominated by 70s era tower in the park communities. Which are fine for what they are but nobody’s regaling their charm. New towers may be better in design (arguable) but nothing great outside a very local context. Downtown is dense in terms of lot coverage but guided by very practical tendering processes, not the largesse of big banks or even the modernist towers put up by insurance companies on University ave in Toronto.

Ottawa’s strength lies in its older pre-WWII neighbourhoods which are decently impressive for a city its size. They are very pleasant places to live by and large. But then again nothing really special in the city’s stature as the capital of an at least somewhat important nation. Though maybe reflective of our general vibes!

[Martin Mtl]

From photographer Stu at https://forum.agoramtl.com

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Zeej

Yeah sorry, not a continuous skyline. Great to see Ottawa filling in though!

If that's the barometer for "continuity", then perhaps we can start referencing the ~100km-long Hamilton-Oshawa skyline.

[csbvan]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

For photographer Stu at https://forum.agoramtl.com

One of my favourite buildings going up in the country. Happy to see it in person a few weeks ago!

[905er]

I second that sentiment. This is my favourite tower currently under construction in Canada.

[zahav]

Wow ya that Montreal tower is gorgeous in those shots! Hopefully all the final details will only make it better in person. Ahhh, the beauty that can come from no balconies lol! Hopefully the trend of protruding boxes and geometric jumbled building aesthetic is on its way out. I don't know about other cities, but this most recent boom in Van resulted in a lot of these geometric jumbles (Telus Garden, 401 W. Georgia, The Stack, Alberni by Kengo Kuma, Vancouver House). It was cool to have unique buildings after the decades of seafoam green 20-30 floor condos and mundaness, but I am ready for it to slip into the history books until it is retro and cool again in a few decades... For example, Burrard Place is decently tall (56 stories), especially by Vancouver DT standards. And it uses similar windows as Le 900 Saint-Jacques in some parts, it had potential. The tower could have been like that up and down, and it could have been very effective. Instead it has like 10000 different things going on, side to side and up and down in every direction all different.

[cranes]

Waterloo

https://www.cbre.ca/properties/land/...ntario-n2l-5z6


https://www.cbre.ca/properties/comme...ntario-n2l-3k7

[Martin Mtl]

From photographer Stu at https://forum.agoramtl.com

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think the story's been told a few times before on here that with the federal government as the main client for office buildings there is a huge downward push on design and architectural quality as the feds don't want to be seen as splurging on fancy Ottawa digs with the money of Canadians from across the country.

Of course there is a lot of office space in Ottawa not occupied by the feds but the basic mindset still permeates the entire commercial real estate market in the city.

Whereas in other cities where private corporations dominate there is more of an impetus to make a powerful statement with a nice HQ building.

Which is kind of weird when you think about it. Our Federal Public Servants should be working for us in bland, non-descript, border line depressing towers, but our banks who profit off us are expected wave their wealth in our faces while offering us 0.5% interests that we pay back to them on "service" fees.

Originally Posted by niwell

Even in that case it’s generally not. Outside of the core the highrise neighbourhoods still tend to be dominated by 70s era tower in the park communities. Which are fine for what they are but nobody’s regaling their charm. New towers may be better in design (arguable) but nothing great outside a very local context. Downtown is dense in terms of lot coverage but guided by very practical tendering processes, not the largesse of big banks or even the modernist towers put up by insurance companies on University ave in Toronto.

Ottawa’s strength lies in its older pre-WWII neighbourhoods which are decently impressive for a city its size. They are very pleasant places to live by and large. But then again nothing really special in the city’s stature as the capital of an at least somewhat important nation. Though maybe reflective of our general vibes!

Hearing a lot of positive views about Ottawa's streetcar suburbs while these interesting places are often being taken over by non-descript blockbusting mid-rise condos and apartments. TOD is good, but there are ways of doing it while preserving the heritage character of a place (ex, complete early 20th century retail strip preserved while new apartments built behind them replacing a small mall and parking (https://www.mintoapartments.com/otta...Bank/main.html)).

[J.OT13]

Unpopular opinion, I'm not a fan of that new Montreal tower. Looks like a non-descript 1970s office block. We have some very similar buildings in Ottawa, just shorter.

[kool maudit]

Waterloo is the worst-looking city I swear

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Which is kind of weird when you think about it. Our Federal Public Servants should be working for us in bland, non-descript, border line depressing towers, but our banks who profit off us are expected wave their wealth in our faces while offering us 0.5% interests that we pay back to them on "service" fees.

Yeah it is kind of weird that privately owned enterprises are expected to be nice while public entities are expected to be perfunctory. I think a lot of it comes down to the idea that the public sector is mandatory and therefore should be accountable while the private sector is optional. You have to pay taxes whether or not you're pleased with the government unless you're willing and able to leave the country. And while we can choose tax rates and spending priorities as a collective voting public, we have little say as individuals. Whereas in theory, we can opt-out of dong business with a private corporation if we don't like what it's doing by either choosing a different company or abstaining from buying the product or service (although that's much tougher in actual practice).

That being said, I think it's actually sometimes the reverse. That private companies are expected to show opulence specifically because they're optional. They need to cultivate an image to attract business by presenting a strong brand. A bank that displays power and opulence conveys stability and success. It implies that your money is safe with them since they know what they're doing and there's no chance of a bank collapse. A government on the other hand doesn't need to prove anything to anyone in the domestic context since doesn't have to "attract" business or "earn" revenue. And when governments do feel a need to prove themselves for some reason, they are capable of grandeur. Dictatorships in particular often feel a need to prove their legitimacy and will build lavish mega-projects. Democracies on the other hand tend to do that much less often which is precisely why people tend to get nervous when democracies start acting like that. The government isn't supposed to be a separate, independent entity that has a reason to prove its power or success. It's just supposed to be an extension of the public composed of public servants working for us.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Waterloo is the worst-looking city I swear

That reminds me, I wanted to comment on that first Waterloo shot. Reminds me of the east end of Ottawa that was largely built in the 1950s to1970s with modern apartment towers popping up along the O-Train line (which is along the highway).

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yeah it is kind of weird that privately owned enterprises are expected to be nice while public entities are expected to be perfunctory. I think a lot of it comes down to the idea that the public sector is mandatory and therefore should be accountable while the private sector is optional. You have to pay taxes whether or not you're pleased with the government unless you're willing and able to leave the country. And while we can choose tax rates and spending priorities as a collective voting public, we have little say as individuals. Whereas in theory, we can opt-out of dong business with a private corporation if we don't like what it's doing by either choosing a different company or abstaining from buying the product or service (although that's much tougher in actual practice).

That being said, I think it's actually sometimes the reverse. That private companies are expected to show opulence specifically because they're optional. They need to cultivate an image to attract business by presenting a strong brand. A bank that displays power and opulence conveys stability and success. It implies that your money is safe with them since they know what they're doing and there's no chance of a bank collapse. A government on the other hand doesn't need to prove anything to anyone in the domestic context since doesn't have to "attract" business or "earn" revenue. And when governments do feel a need to prove themselves for some reason, they are capable of grandeur. Dictatorships in particular often feel a need to prove their legitimacy and will build lavish mega-projects. Democracies on the other hand tend to do that much less often which is precisely why people tend to get nervous when democracies start acting like that. The government isn't supposed to be a separate, independent entity that has a reason to prove its power or success. It's just supposed to be an extension of the public composed of public servants working for us.

Well said.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Unpopular opinion, I'm not a fan of that new Montreal tower. Looks like a non-descript 1970s office block. We have some very similar buildings in Ottawa, just shorter.

See it in person and you will see that there is nothing like it in Ottawa. The intricacy of the precast is a wonder that this picture can’t even begin to translate.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

See it in person and you will see that there is nothing like it in Ottawa. The intricacy of the precast is a wonder that this picture can’t even begin to translate.

I'll need to take a closer look next time I'm in Montreal, but from the pictures, it reminds me of these (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4205...5410&entry=ttu).

On the clusters of towers outside the core, it seemed to have been mostly an Ontario thing to have back in the 60s and 70s with the commie blocks in a park. Realizing that looking at Kitchener-Waterloo. We're seeing it more now across the country along rapid transit lines (particularly in the Vancouver area of course).

[905er]

I don't see it.. like at all.. how can a turd remind you of a diamond? That Montreal tower is stunning. The only similarity I see is possibly the colour.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I'll need to take a closer look next time I'm in Montreal, but from the pictures, it reminds me of these (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4205...5410&entry=ttu).

About these pictures I took: