The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Montreal is reportedly the world's busiest inland port, and the current tourist waterfront was once a major shipping and industry area. Even today, the contemporary port facilities are just up the river from the old port. That being said, I don't believe that those tracks are used very often. When I walked around there in 2010, the tracks were kinda rusty and surrounded by weeds and stuff.

The tracks are use everyday, connecting the port of Montreal (not the old one, but the real one) to the CN railways westward. It's true that thte tracts are more active in the nightime. That being said, the tracks don't have a very negative effect on the waterfront visually. They kind of disappear between the trees.

[Martin Mtl]

The Bow is really fantastic, but what about those fugly condo towers all around downtown? Ouach.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

The Bow is really fantastic, but what about those fugly condo towers all around downtown? Ouach.

Yeah there are some pretty bad ones. It looks like the next batch will be much nicer.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Totally see your point and totally 100% agree. I have also stated these facts before too.. lik how Dallas metro is apparently more populated than Toronto's... yet Dallas' metro is like 3x the area of Toronto's... hence a MASSIVE discrepancy.

Though with most cities I would agree with you, problems with comparisons are going to rise. With Dallas the reason it is probably around 3 times the area, isn't because they are cheating and adding more little towns into the equation. It is because it has far less density and is one of the worst sprawled out cities in the world. If a comparison is going to be made regarding cities you can't just exclude certain stat's because they coincide well with Toronto. Just because Manhattan is insanely dense doesn't mean it can't be compared to a sprawling neighbourhood in Dallas or Houston.

Toronto is a fairly dense city so saying that its not fair to include Dallas because it is 3x larger is kind of mute.

Also, you should be proud that your city has an incredible population for its land area consumed. Be proud of the fact that you have such great density in the city. Not all metro's are as lucky.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Yeah there are some pretty bad ones. It looks like the next batch will be much nicer.

Great. Let's not waste the boom :-)

[Martin Mtl]

by nicogag on Flickr

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Though with most cities I would agree with you, problems with comparisons are going to rise. With Dallas the reason it is probably around 3 times the area, isn't because they are cheating and adding more little towns into the equation. It is because it has far less density and is one of the worst sprawled out cities in the world. If a comparison is going to be made regarding cities you can't just exclude certain stat's because they coincide well with Toronto. Just because Manhattan is insanely dense doesn't mean it can't be compared to a sprawling neighbourhood in Dallas or Houston.

Toronto is a fairly dense city so saying that its not fair to include Dallas because it is 3x larger is kind of mute.

Also, you should be proud that your city has an incredible population for its land area consumed. Be proud of the fact that you have such great density in the city. Not all metro's are as lucky.

Moot.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

The Bow is really fantastic, but what about those fugly condo towers all around downtown? Ouach.

We like to have colour, sometimes not all in the right places though....and the recession hit lowering the quality of some projects.
We welcome the new density. There are a lot of choices if you want to be in a high rise literally downtown. The views are very urban as well.

[Coldrsx]

Edmonton

[240glt]

^ back at'cha

[Chadillaccc]

What's goin on in Eddy?

[softee]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Though with most cities I would agree with you, problems with comparisons are going to rise. With Dallas the reason it is probably around 3 times the area, isn't because they are cheating and adding more little towns into the equation. It is because it has far less density and is one of the worst sprawled out cities in the world. If a comparison is going to be made regarding cities you can't just exclude certain stat's because they coincide well with Toronto. Just because Manhattan is insanely dense doesn't mean it can't be compared to a sprawling neighbourhood in Dallas or Houston.

Toronto is a fairly dense city so saying that its not fair to include Dallas because it is 3x larger is kind of mute.

Also, you should be proud that your city has an incredible population for its land area consumed. Be proud of the fact that you have such great density in the city. Not all metro's are as lucky.

That's why urban area is a much better way to measure a city's size. Toronto is about 3 million behind Chicago and several hundred thousand ahead of Dallas-Fort Worth in population among NA cities according to this, while covering far less land area than both.
http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf

[240glt]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

What's goin on in Eddy?

Big mining conference and trade show starts this weekend

[Symz]

Hey Caterpillar's there! Are they laying people off or something?

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Edmonton

It's too bad there's no Alberta based company that makes big mining, construction, farming equipment like Caterpillar or Deere. Alberta is a huge purchaser of this type of equipment and it would be a perfect industry for Alberta to move into. After all, I doubt Alberta wants to be a one trick pony. They should make this stuff themselves.

[lucci]

goodnight by ronnie.yip, on Flickr

[Martin Mtl]

Fantastic shot.

[Darkoshvilli]

by milboul from mtlurb.com

[Razor]

^ I really liked those Edmonton shots.

[sonysnob]

Cliche vantage point, but I had to give it a try: