The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Gerrard

It sorta did. Montreal was never a "big" city until after Confederation -especially compared to say, Boston. Toronto and Montreal had comparable populations for much of that period (a pop. difference of under 200 thousand people max) and the difference in population is really only striking now (i.e. almost 2 million people). Toronto and Montreal had similar sized historic downtown cores. Toronto did lay waste to that core in the name of progress.

But what's done is done, the thing to do now would be to continue to build new exciting architectural wonders and not dwell on the past.

Old buildings add charm and character but good modern architecture can do that as well.

Big city feel and population is not directly comparable to where the money gets spent on shiny head offices. Most of the downtown was made up of modest accomodations for the massive manufacturing/warehousing operations and Toronto's finanical core circa 1910 still stands almost in its entirety. Bay Street evolved in the late 1920s. Not to say there weren't unnecessary losses and/or quality office buildings however, most of what was removed to make way for the bank towers included massive warehouses and cheap retail buildings.

[caltrane74]

I see the old Financial Core was on Yonge just north of Queen south to Wellington.

[haljackey]

From the -500k skyline thread.... Think it's worthy to show here with the big boys

Originally Posted by bolognium

London Ontario Panorama by Trevor Roberts, on Flickr

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I see the old Financial Core was on Yonge just north of Queen south to Wellington.

Huh? Where are the city's oldest highrises and the oldest hotel?

[caltrane74]

King Street just east and west of Yonge, and south to Front.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by haljackey

From the -500k skyline thread.... Think it's worthy to show here with the big boys

For the 500,000 and below cities in Canada, London has the best skyline without doubt.

This shot proves it.

[isaidso]

For CMAs under 500,000 people, I'd put London in 2nd behind Halifax. If you look at the top 20 tallest buildings in each, they're very similar in height but Halifax has a much better setting with the peninsula, hill, suspension bridges, and historical building stock.

[someone123]

London's skyline is mostly unfortunate concrete slab buildings, and for whatever reason they are still building new ones in that awful style. It's not a very attractive town.

For a smaller city I don't think it makes much sense to be obsessed with building heights to the exclusion of all else. If you want tall buildings, Toronto is a couple hours away.

[Surrealplaces]

Calgary at Twilight by joelaratta, on Flickr


Calgary at Twilight by joelaratta, on Flickr

[Surrealplaces]

_MG_7645 by Steven Coutts, on Flickr

[north 42]

I think London has a great skyline for a city it's size. Sure it could use some colour and some building materials other than concrete, but I'm sure that will happen eventually. The city should really try to get these developers to add some variety when designing any new major structures in the future.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by north 42

The city should really try to get these developers to add some variety when designing any new major structures in the future.

They shouldn't approve buildings clad mostly in precast. Developers will complain but the fact is that they can do better -- they do in many other cities.

From an urban design perspective it's also pretty questionable to have such a smaller market dominated by the annual giant condo development in one spot. London has a lot of parking lots and would be better served with some smaller buildings too.

[Bluenote]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

Toronto might have the second or third largest stock of old structures after Montreal and QC. Most are protected and the people here love them. For the ones that receive facade jobs most have had there interiors gutted over the years or find themselves in the core where the all mighty dollar is what put them there in the first place and what dictates there fate now. Most people outside of Toronto are unaware how many heritage structures this city still has. A lot.

I am just going by what I saw in TO when I was there, and considering all the construction, was afraid of what may happen to your 20th century buildings. As for the comments about Winnipeg having a lack luster of old buildings, we wouldn't have been put on the World Unesco site for our exchange District. Ours remember date back to a time when Winnipeg was the Chicago of the North, we are sitting on a tonne of 19th century Gems. We like Montreal had some rather not bright Mayors in the 50s-60s and they decided to wipe a huge swath of buildings out. But still 80% of our exchange is intact. And the reason so many movies are made here. Most of our buildings date back to the 1800's and of course our fur trading past which goes back to the 1600's, but unfortunatly Federal and Provincial goverments are letting those sites fall apart.

[kw5150]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

I am just going by what I saw in TO when I was there, and considering all the construction, was afraid of what may happen to your 20th century buildings. As for the comments about Winnipeg having a lack luster of old buildings, we wouldn't have been put on the World Unesco site for our exchange District. Ours remember date back to a time when Winnipeg was the Chicago of the North, we are sitting on a tonne of 19th century Gems. We like Montreal had some rather not bright Mayors in the 50s-60s and they decided to wipe a huge swath of buildings out. But still 80% of our exchange is intact. And the reason so many movies are made here. Most of our buildings date back to the 1800's and of course our fur trading past which goes back to the 1600's, but unfortunatly Federal and Provincial goverments are letting those sites fall apart.

Im sure if there was a huge boom in the 70s 80s and 90s, Winnipeg would have knocked down a few as well. Thank god it was stagnant, not there are hundreds of heritage buildings which makes for an excellent scene!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[kw5150]

Downtown Calgary Pedestrian only street, today. Note the massive, sculptural wind-calming "tree" sculptures. beautiful.


By kw5150 at 2012-07-05

[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by kw5150

Im sure if there was a huge boom in the 70s 80s and 90s, Winnipeg would have knocked down a few as well. Thank god it was stagnant, not there are hundreds of heritage buildings which makes for an excellent scene!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is actually quite true

It was sort of a blessing in disguise for Winnipeg to stagnate in the latter half of the 20th century for this very reason

[Wooster]

Fantastic views of Calgary.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by Bluenote

I am just going by what I saw in TO when I was there, and considering all the construction, was afraid of what may happen to your 20th century buildings. As for the comments about Winnipeg having a lack luster of old buildings, we wouldn't have been put on the World Unesco site for our exchange District. Ours remember date back to a time when Winnipeg was the Chicago of the North, we are sitting on a tonne of 19th century Gems. We like Montreal had some rather not bright Mayors in the 50s-60s and they decided to wipe a huge swath of buildings out. But still 80% of our exchange is intact. And the reason so many movies are made here. Most of our buildings date back to the 1800's and of course our fur trading past which goes back to the 1600's, but unfortunatly Federal and Provincial goverments are letting those sites fall apart.

I don't recall saying the Peg had a lack luster amount of old buildings however if you want to compare it to Toronto's old stock it can't. The exchange district is nice but small, the Garment District alone has more heritage structures. Ad in the rest of the core, the Entertainment district, Corktown, York, the Annex and more you can't compete. Yes movies were filmed there but it had as much to do with the architecture as it did to do with the cheaper production costs. I know I work in the industry. You say most of your building date back to the 1800's, even QC can't claim that, that would mean the city didn't grow and no new buildings were needed. It's like claiming you have the most festivals, most trees, or your Chicago of the North. Only you think so, Vancouver has the most trees, Montreal and Toronto hold the most festivals, and people from Chicago would feel out of place at Portage and Main.

You can be city proud, just don't say stuff that is easily dis-proven. Your city needs better branding. Even Torontonians know that calling our town New York run by the Swiss is BS.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by kw5150

Downtown Calgary Pedestrian only street, today. Note the massive, sculptural wind-calming "tree" sculptures. beautiful.


By kw5150 at 2012-07-05

I've never seen a picture with so many people here, it really shows how large those sculptures are. I can't help but think the artist is a fan of Calatrava.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

I don't recall saying the Peg had a lack luster amount of old buildings however if you want to compare it to Toronto's old stock it can't.

Toronto doesn't really have a historic district like the Exchange though, and actually there aren't many buildings in Toronto that are comparable to the terra-cotta-clad early 20th century office buildings in Winnipeg.

I would also say that there's a lot more to heritage buildings than the total overall count. Age, architectural uniqueness, and historical importance count. Toronto has more pre-war buildings than Quebec City for example but I think Quebec City's heritage buildings are more interesting. Quebec City's also a much more storied place.