Canadian Skyline Thread III

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Hard disagree. I just got back from Chicago, and I was blown away by the vibrancy all over the central area, from South Loop to way beyond the northern fringes of the Magnificent Mile. The wealth on display is also several levels higher than what I have seen in any Canadian city. The pedestrian traffic was on par with Montreal's famous Rue Ste. Catherine on a summer afternoon. And the architecture blows any Canadian city clear out of the water. Beaten only by New York City.

Wealth in what form? Luxury cars? Pricey boutiques? Something else?

[MolsonExport]

like many large US cities, one third of the people are loaded to the gills, one third are average, and the bottom third haven't a pot to piss in nor a window to throw it out of. We had to stop on the South Side, and well, that is a whole other universe.

Believe me, I'd rather be woot-wooting for our Canadian cities, but while our largest handily beat most similarly-sized US cities, their largest are still in another league (well, NYC and Chicago, for sure; maybe San Francisco....I am not talking about the Houstons, Phoenixes, and Minneapolises here).

[Nouvellecosse]

Fascinating stuff. Chicago sounds kind of inconsistent the way some visitors find it quieter and less vibrant and others find it more bustling and vibrant using the same cities as reference points.

[jc_yyc_ca]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Hard disagree. I just got back from Chicago, and I was blown away by the vibrancy all over the central area, from South Loop to way beyond the northern fringes of the Magnificent Mile. The wealth on display is also several levels higher than what I have seen in any Canadian city. The pedestrian traffic was on par with Montreal's famous Rue Ste. Catherine on a summer afternoon. And the architecture blows any Canadian city clear out of the water. Beaten only by New York City.

Sorry Molson, but I'm going to have to have a hard disagree also. We'll have to agree to disagree.
Maybe something was happening in town when you were visiting? Maybe it was the timing of when I went? (June)
Honestly, it really wasn't very busy and I was quite surprised. We spent a fair bit of time in the same places, around south loop and N/S Michigan ave as my friend lives nearby.
Since reading your post I went on Google streetview to look at some of the streets I was at, and they look much the same as when I was there. Though I have noticed that when you choose other dates, some years they'll look busy and some years they aren't busy, even though they're all in the summer, so maybe it's a case of it being hit and miss sometimes.
The week before Chicago I was in Toronto and it felt much busier to me.

As for the architecture, Chicago was very cool. You'll get no argument out of me there. I really liked a lot of things about the city, but for whatever reason it wasn't very busy when I was there.

[zoomer]

I not a fan of using street view to determine much about a city for many reasons, including the poor image quality, it's from the perspective atop a car in traffic, it feels very out of context changing from seasons or even years from one street to the next and lacks audio and other indicators on how the space is used compared to a 4k walking video for example.

I've watched a lot of Chicago 4k walking tours and as I said before the architecture, layout and design of the city is great, with awesome surprises around every corner. One thing that surprised me is the extent of which the city is a water city (river and lake) during the summer. Of course, just a perspective from a 2D version, I haven't been there. Here's a good overview of the city and from what I've seen the city has does not feel as busy or vibrant as Toronto for example.

• Video Link

[zoomer]

Originally Posted by someone123

Halifax


Source

Bumping this great pic from the end of last page so it doesn't get lost in the flip. I really like the twilight version from the link which really shows Citadel quite clearly.

[Metro-One]

A great pic just posted on the Kelowna thread!

Originally Posted by JayMi

Took a photo from roof top of 1333 Bertram on Friday.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Calgarian]

Kelowna is all grown up now!

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Believe me, I'd rather be woot-wooting for our Canadian cities, but while our largest handily beat most similarly-sized US cities, their largest are still in another league (well, NYC and Chicago, for sure; maybe San Francisco....I am not talking about the Houstons, Phoenixes, and Minneapolises here).

At this point though, only New York and Los Angeles are really any larger than any Canadian cities though; and the latter isn't exactly famous for its urbanity (NYC of course is in another stratosphere of urbanity compared to anywhere else in North America).

But by most metrics of urbanity - density, pedestrian traffic, transit ridership, etc. - Toronto and Montreal best any US city that isn't New York these days; while even Vancouver compares favourably to cities many times its size. I certainly wouldn't call Chicago or San Francisco in another league - unless we're just talking about the wealth of great 19th & 20th century architecture; in which case, no argument there.

Regarding Chicago's vibrancy, IMO it does have pockets that are very vibrant, but are also somewhat disconnected - there are a lot of gaps in the urban fabric in a way that doesn't afflict Canada's "big 3". I could image that certain spots like the Loop and Mag Mile get pretty busy in peak summer tourist season though.

[Surrealplaces]

My own personal experience regarding Chicago, is that it can be a bit hit and miss. It is nowhere near NYC, and is more on the mortal side like the rest of North America. I remember strolling around Chicago and found it to be on the quiet side, but I've also heard from people that it's bustling. For the vibrancy of all NA cities not named NYC varies in vibrancy with each visit. the bigger the city the less the vibrancy varies, but to me it still varies.
A few years back I was in Montreal on a weeknight at 8:00pm visiting Old Montreal and there was literally nobody around. Here are the pics.

A couple of years later I was visiting old Montreal again around the same time of year, on a day with worse weather and the streets were busy.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

But by most metrics of urbanity - density, pedestrian traffic, transit ridership, etc. - Toronto and Montreal best any US city that isn't New York these days; while even Vancouver compares favourably to cities many times its size. I certainly wouldn't call Chicago or San Francisco in another league - unless we're just talking about the wealth of great 19th & 20th century architecture; in which case, no argument there.

I would not consider density, pedestrian traffic, transit ridership as a sum of urbanity as that would firmly place Toronto's Entertainment District well above its streetcar suburbs and/or the European places we all wish would be closer. It also infers more people equals greater vibrancy that there are optimal limits or traffic jams created through excess

The one consistent commonality among urban Chicagoans that have visited Toronto is they marvel at the retail scene of small shops; independent or chains they don't recognize.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Hard disagree. I just got back from Chicago, and I was blown away by the vibrancy all over the central area, from South Loop to way beyond the northern fringes of the Magnificent Mile. The wealth on display is also several levels higher than what I have seen in any Canadian city. The pedestrian traffic was on par with Montreal's famous Rue Ste. Catherine on a summer afternoon. And the architecture blows any Canadian city clear out of the water. Beaten only by New York City.

I've been in Chicago for a whole week in the end of June, first time in North America, so I cannot compare with Canadian cities.

But I found a city with superb architecture (probably way superior/grandiose than Toronto and Montreal for obvious reasons), lots of pedestrian traffic on the streets despite the scorching heat, a very liberal atmosphere (the city was covered with rainbow flags).

It was an amazing trip and that's me, who love urban life, urban density, crowded streets. I was excited about Chicago mostly due architecture but it ended up delivering an amazing urban experience.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Yuri

I've been in Chicago for a whole week in the end of June, first time in North America, so I cannot compare with Canadian cities.

But I found a city with superb architecture (probably way superior/grandiose than Toronto and Montreal for obvious reasons), lots of pedestrian traffic on the streets despite the scorching heat, a very liberal atmosphere (the city was covered with rainbow flags).

It was an amazing trip and that's me, who love urban life, urban density, crowded streets. I was excited about Chicago mostly due architecture but it ended up delivering an amazing urban experience.

Like most US cities, there are pockets of extreme wealth and extreme poverty. Tourists invariably travel to the former while never laying eyes on the latter or the great expanse of mediocrity between these 2 solitudes. Predictably, people reach conclusions that aren't representative of the whole. Bel Air/Malibu don't represent LA, for instance, while Belgravia/Soho don't represent London.

Is Chicago vibrant and cosmopolitan? By US Midwest standards, yes. Chicago's grand pre-war buildings and built form influence perceptions but they speak more to Chicago's glorious past than the city it is today. In Toronto, the reverse is true. The overall built form doesn't reflect the city's status today but the relatively modest city it used to be. This will get lost on the casual visitor but Toronto zoomed ahead of Chicago 10-15 years ago. It's not just myself saying it either. Everyone I've asked (half of them urban planners, architects) who visited said the same thing. Every last one of them.

2005-2024, Toronto has been re-building, re-imagining, and intensifying itself from one end to the other .... and at a dizzying pace. Activity has admittedly slowly significantly the last 18 months but it's clear the 2 cities are on vastly different trajectories. Chicago is, by no means, in decline but it's being left behind by other cities growing and developing rapidly. Melbourne will move by them too.

[zoomer]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

A great pic just posted on the Kelowna thread!

Is that the UBC site in the middle? The fenced off site behind it - is that another development or work/storage yard for UBC?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by zoomer

Is that the UBC site in the middle? The fenced off site behind it - is that another development or work/storage yard for UBC?

Yes, that’s the UBC tower, the first official skyscraper in B.C. outside of Metro-Vancouver.

I think the other lot is just a staging yard for the UBC project (but has eventual plans for a tower itself).

What is actually under appreciated about Kelowna’s downtown growth is it hasn’t been just towers, but also a lot of middle density.

[Calgarian]

That's the tower that was causing problems for it's neighbours I believe.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

The one consistent commonality among urban Chicagoans that have visited Toronto is they marvel at the retail scene of small shops; independent or chains they don't recognize.

Just spent 5 days in Toronto and I was absolutely floored by the number of restaurants and cafes and of every possible ethnic food imaginable. Never seen so many patios in my life. I knew Toronto had a great food scene but I found it next level. Sorry Montreal but your days of being Canada's culinary capitol are long since over.

I think there would be very few cities on this planet that could lock horns with Toronto on the sheer diversity of it's food offerings. Certainly New York and maybe London but that's it.

[Coldrsx]

'I think there would be very few cities on this planet that could lock horns with Toronto on the sheer diversity of its food offerings. Certainly New York and maybe London but that's it.'

Paris, HK, Tokyo, Singapore, Sydney, etc. etc. etc.

Toronto is impressive for sure, but I don't find it all that special food wise on an international scale.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Like most US cities, there are pockets of extreme wealth and extreme poverty. Tourists invariably travel to the former while never laying eyes on the latter or the great expanse of mediocrity between these 2 solitudes. Predictably, people reach conclusions that aren't representative of the whole. Bel Air/Malibu don't represent LA, for instance, while Belgravia/Soho don't represent London.

Is Chicago vibrant and cosmopolitan? By US Midwest standards, yes. Chicago's grand pre-war buildings and built form influence perceptions but they speak more to Chicago's glorious past than the city it is today. In Toronto, the reverse is true. The overall built form doesn't reflect the city's status today but the relatively modest city it used to be. This will get lost on the casual visitor but Toronto zoomed ahead of Chicago 10-15 years ago. It's not just myself saying it either. Everyone I've asked (half of them urban planners, architects) who visited said the same thing. Every last one of them.

2005-2024, Toronto has been re-building, re-imagining, and intensifying itself from one end to the other .... and at a dizzying pace. Activity has admittedly slowly significantly the last 18 months but it's clear the 2 cities are on vastly different trajectories. Chicago is, by no means, in decline but it's being left behind by other cities growing and developing rapidly. Melbourne will move by them too.

Precisely because of those "but" on Chicago, that it looked very pleasant, urban and vibrant. It has a very good LGBT scene, way bigger than I expected and that considering I'm used to São Paulo's, which is massive.

And indeed, as a tourists I won't have no desire to leave central areas or those cool urban neighbourhoods. But that I don't do even down here São Paulo. I see no reason to leave the areas I like, basically Downtown.

Chicago doesn't indeed grow as fast as Toronto or Melbourne, but it's an economic juggernault regardless, massive global hub and it will remain pretty much forever.

-----------------------------------

BTW, my next trip to North America will be Montreal (and Toronto) and as we're discussing urban density, the main street in Montreal is very beautiful, but it's underwhelming compared to the grandeur of Loop-Near North Side. I'm pretty sure I'll love Montreal, but I don't see it feeling bigger/more urban than Chicago.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Precisely because of those "but" on Chicago, that it looked very pleasant, urban and vibrant. It has a very good LGBT scene, way bigger than I expected and that considering I'm used to São Paulo's, which is massive.

And indeed, as a tourists I won't have no desire to leave central areas or those cool urban neighbourhoods. But that I don't do even down here São Paulo. I see no reason to leave the areas I like, basically Downtown.

Chicago doesn't indeed grow as fast as Toronto or Melbourne, but it's an economic juggernault regardless, massive global hub and it will remain pretty much forever.

While true for ordinary people, that isn't a very good response for the context of SSP or similar sites. Most of us are here precisely because we take a deeper, more detailed interest in cities beyond the superficial impressions of the average person who only thinks about their own limited part of cities. The reason to take an interest in the overall city and metro area is that we're interested in cities and their function. So while there's nothing wrong with discussing one's direct experiences, it's also valid to point out when those experiences are limited in scope.