The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Traynor

Square mile for square mile... Toronto may have way more highrises but they are all over the place and not downtown in the same density levels as Vancouver's.

If Vancouver's downtown population density is higher, its only because its more dedicated to residential land use, and lacks the commercial space of Toronto's.

I'll just repost Flar's density chart and we can put this stupid conversation to an end: http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/9828/densityp.jpg

[caltrane74]

Traynor replace that picture with this picture.



I rest my case.

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

If Vancouver's downtown population density is higher, its only because its more dedicated to residential land use, and lacks the commercial space of Toronto's.

I'll just repost Flar's density chart and we can put this stupid conversation to an end:

You've missed the point of the argument... It was never about people or population density.

It was about buildings over 12 floors high crammed into the same area. The definition of density Cal was originally boasting about, that started this recent discussion.

So let's put stupid interjections to an end.

[Traynor]

Once again Cal, your scale is waaaaaaay off. Mine was near exact as you can get it.

[caltrane74]

Your view cuts out most of the mid rises in Toronto that line up well against those in your Vancouver shot.

So while your scale might be exact, the perspective is not.

Try This Instead



News 46

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Your view cuts out most of the mid rises in Toronto that line up well against those in your Vancouver shot.

So while your scale might be exact, the perspective is not.

BUT THAT'S THE POINT!!!

There are more buildings crammed into the same area in Van than TO. Because if you shift the TO view to include Yonge and Bloor, then you loose the CBD.

ERGO.... NOT AS DENSE!

*sigh*

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Traynor

You've missed the point of the argument... It was never about people or population density.

It was about buildings over 12 floors high crammed into the same area. The definition of density Cal was originally boasting about, that started this recent discussion.

So let's put stupid interjections to an end.

Alright then, according to Emporis, Vancouver's downtown has 591 buildings over 12 stories (including proposal, visions, U/C, and demolished). They don't provide the data for Toronto's downtown, however in the former city of Toronto there are 1500 (also including proposal, visions, U/C, and demolished)...most of which are definitely downtown.

Also keep in mind that Toronto's towers are typically much taller and have larger floorplates.

[Calgarian]

They're both dense, 3 pages of discussion has not solved the argument, lets move on.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

They're both dense, 3 pages of discussion has not solved the argument, lets move on.

I'm moving on, arguing with Traynor is pointless.



James Koole

[The_Architect]

They're both dense.
But Traynor, your picture makes it seem like Vancouver's Shangi-la is the same size as FCP.. So it can't be the same scale.

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

They're both dense.
But Traynor, your picture makes it seem like Vancouver's Shangi-la is the same size as FCP.. So it can't be the same scale.

You people need to rub your eyes and look at the actual images and not through the viewpoint of your mind's eye.

Count the pixels that make up the Shangri-la Vancouver and then count the pixels that make up First Canadian Place Toronto. You do realize the FCP continues below what is visible because it is obscured by other buildings.

I made sure these two pictures were the nearly the same scale. As best as can be achieved. Try comparing SL in Van to the Bay Wellington Tower of Brookfield Place. They are nearly the same height in real life and if you cut and past SL it is nearly the exact same size as BW.

Now count the number of buildings over 12 floors you can see centered around those two buildings. Now tell me which has more highrises in the same area?

[dleung]

^^ Pictures have depth and are subjective though.

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Oh, not this again.

Toronto is denser than Vancouver by any measure other than municipal boundary.

...and downtown densities. But otherwise you're correct:

GTA > Greater Vancouver
905 > Surrey/Coquitlam/North Van/West Van (by a wide margin)
Metro Toronto > Richmond/Burnaby
Old Toronto > Vancouver proper
St James Park > West End (though the former is a 2-block spike, compared to 60 blocks in the latter)

But

City of Vancouver > City of Toronto
Downtown Vancouver > Downtown Toronto

Some images showing how much area Vancouver covers relative to other cities.




As I said b4, Vancouver looks denser because the buildings and streetscape throughout the city are finer grain in general. We don't have a lot of hydro corridors and vacant plots surrounding freeways and power centres. There's more highrises here per capita, but a lower percentage of apartment dwellers. Basically point towers don't hold nearly as many people as commie blocks. There's roughly 700 highrises in downtown Toronto, so presumably the rest within Metro Toronto are those bunkers.

vancouver - 739
burnaby - 151
richmond - 108
new westminster - 69
north vancouver - 56
west vancouver - 32
coquitlam - 26
surrey - 24
abbotsford - 10
port moody - 9
white rock - 4
maple ridge - 3
Metro Vancouver total - 1231

toronto - 1958
mississauga - 250
brampton - 65
burlington - 43
markham - 36
oakville - 34
richmond hill - 27
vaugahn - 26
oshawa - 15
ajax - 11
pickering - 5
Greater Toronto total - 2470

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I'm moving on, arguing with Traynor is pointless.

No Cal, arguing is not pointless... Winning that argument may be.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Traynor

You people need to rub your eyes and look at the actual images and not through the viewpoint of your mind's eye.

Count the pixels that make up the Shangri-la Vancouver and then count the pixels that make up First Canadian Place Toronto. You do realize the FCP continues below what is visible because it is obscured by other buildings.

I made sure these two pictures were the nearly the same scale. As best as can be achieved. Try comparing SL in Van to the Bay Wellington Tower of Brookfield Place. They are nearly the same height in real life and if you cut and past SL it is nearly the exact same size as BW.

Now count the number of buildings over 12 floors you can see centered around those two buildings. Now tell me which has more highrises in the same area?

Your reasoning is flawed, as most of the towers over 12 storeys are being blocked from view by our CBD Towers. Now in the photo that I posted, while not an exact scale at least allows a viewer to see that Toronto has many more buildings over 12 stories in the core than Vancouver.

You don't need scale to count. If you want to play games why not make the pictures big enough so we can actually count the towers in plain sight to make a judgment call on density.

[AuxTown]

Now back to skylines....

Here is a cool aerial shot showing the very dense blob that is our CBD, Centretown, and the Byward Market area by Southfacing on Flickr. The very affluent Rockcliffe Park and New Edinburgh neighbourhoods are the heavily-treed areas in the foreground of the photo. Enjoy:

[Bigtime]

I bet Traynor can bench Cal...

[caltrane74]

He probably can, still wouldn't make him right.



(btw: I can bench my own body weight and then some..)

[vanman]

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Now back to skylines....

Here is a cool aerial shot showing the very dense blob that is our CBD, Centretown, and the Byward

But it is not as dense as Toronto so really who cares? /sarcasm

[1ajs]

and now for my calgary pano!




also shot some medium format slide film of this today

[Chad Berry]

Originally Posted by Traynor

BUT THAT'S THE POINT!!!

There are more buildings crammed into the same area in Van than TO. Because if you shift the TO view to include Yonge and Bloor, then you loose the CBD.

ERGO.... NOT AS DENSE!

*sigh*

Are you trying to say NYC is not dense?