The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[SignalHillHiker]

Totally agree, Chadillac.

Toronto has always been exceptionally beautiful.

I think most Canadians have trouble recognizing that because we're predominantly a small city country and we associate places like St. John's, Quebec City, Old Montreal, etc. with beauty rather than towering buildings. Combine with that the general "We're NOT Americans!" tone of Canadian identity and Toronto gets pushed aside as too American in appearance... not even counting... in many minds.

But get a Canadian into a... the word in Newfanese would get me banned here, so let's say argument... with a resident of ANY other country, and we bring up Toronto. It's one of the first things we bring up - this beautiful, shining city on the banks of a lake so enormous it might as well be the ocean. And we'll show pictures of island parks just a few minutes from downtown and all of it...

Toronto is a lovely city. It has suburbs devoid of personality and strip mall sprawl just like any other city of its size... but a nice aerial shot of downtown Toronto that includes the lake and some marinas can compete in a beauty competition with any major city on earth.

[le calmar]

^ An aerial shot shows something you can't see at street level, so I would try not to confuse things. (not saying Toronto doesn't look good, but comparing the beauty of different cities with aerials shots seems a bit strange to me)

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by le calmar

^ An aerial shot shows something you can't see at street level, so I would try not to confuse things. (not saying Toronto doesn't look good, but comparing the beauty of different cities with aerials shots seems a bit strange to me)

Why?

It's just two of countless ways to appreciate a city. :-)

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Totally agree, Chadillac.

Toronto has always been exceptionally beautiful.

I think most Canadians have trouble recognizing that because we're predominantly a small city country and we associate places like St. John's, Quebec City, Old Montreal, etc. with beauty rather than towering buildings. Combine with that the general "We're NOT Americans!" tone of Canadian identity and Toronto gets pushed aside as too American in appearance... not even counting... in many minds.

Maybe small town Canada view things that way, but I disagree with your synopsis. We're a nation of immigrants, half of us live in cities over 1 million people, and many of us have lived/traveled to/come from large global cities elsewhere. The idea that our dismissal of Toronto aesthetically is due to a small town mentality or aversion to things American is off the mark completely.

First of all, there's nothing American about Toronto's appearance. All cities in Canada/US have a north American appearance. Toronto is just what a northern north American city looks like when it gets to the size it has. Montreal, Winnipeg, Vancouver, etc. will all look similar when they get to 6 million.

People label Toronto ugly because huge swaths of Toronto are ugly. Travel by bus from Kennedy Station to the Toronto Zoo and you pass through some of the most depressingly ugly stretches of urban dreariness in the western world. It's not some isolated example either. Don't get me wrong, there are spectacularly beautiful things about Toronto but that doesn't mean we should put our blinders on.

Through most of Canada's history, the opulence/wealth/old money has been centred in Montreal. Even today Montreal's attention to beauty is everywhere to be seen. Toronto's roots are blue collar and industrial and its built form reflects that. Toronto has only recently started caring about beautiful sidewalks, lamp posts, the public realm, and architecture. We haven't even buried our electrical wires yet... and I'm not referring to the street car wires.

Perhaps I'm biased having come from London, England but Toronto ain't there yet. It's always been quite an ugly city. That doesn't mean it's boring or provincial though. Toronto's one of the most dynamic, vibrant, booming alpha cities on earth. I've chosen to live here over every other metropolis on the planet. Ugly? It's getting less ugly each passing year as the ugly gets replaced bit by bit by the beautiful.



And please (whoever) don't post photos of Scotia Plaza or University of Toronto. They're not representative of the overall built form here.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by isaidso

...

Everything you said makes sense. I don't think my view is wrong or doesn't matter, but I see how people share yours as well.

Except: "First of all, there's nothing American about Toronto's appearance. All cities in Canada/US have a north American appearance. Toronto is just what a northern north American city looks like when it gets to the size it has."

That, to me, is the equivalent of a Greek saying, "Well, it's not Turkish Coffee. It's Balkan Coffee because we have it too."

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Everything you said makes sense. I don't think my view is wrong or doesn't matter, but I see how people share yours as well.

Except: "First of all, there's nothing American about Toronto's appearance. All cities in Canada/US have a north American appearance. Toronto is just what a northern north American city looks like when it gets to the size it has."

That, to me, is the equivalent of a Greek saying, "Well, it's not Turkish Coffee. It's Balkan Coffee because we have it too."

I do think there are people who view Toronto as ugly because beautiful to them means a small city/large town. Large cities invariably have big highways, overpasses, massive residential blocks, etc. That's jarring when you come from a place like Halifax or Kelowna.

I've always found the classification of Toronto as American to be insulting to our own contribution to this continent's development/culture. Would an American describe one of their cities as looking Canadian? If you can call Toronto American looking, you can call Chicago Canadian looking since they both have that standard grid/skyscrapers/etc.

It's not the label that's problematic, but the insinuation that one is copying the other. The only reason people do it is because they view the US as the template and everything else must surely be copying it. We always compare things to something that's more cemented in our consciousness. The only other cities that have skyscrapers like Toronto are south of the border. That doesn't make Toronto American looking, it just means that we've only produced one big north American city thus far.

That, to me, is the equivalent of a Greek saying, "Well, it's not Turkish Coffee. It's Balkan Coffee because we have it too."

The point is that why would a Greek label something Turkish when it's obviously something that's indigenous to the entire Balkans? The answer is that a Greek would only do that if Turkey is the dominant cultural force in the region. It doesn't make the classification correct though.

[telyou]

Originally Posted by isaidso

People label Toronto ugly because huge swaths of Toronto are ugly. Travel by bus from Kennedy Station to the Toronto Zoo and you pass through some of the most depressingly ugly stretches of urban dreariness in the western world. It's not some isolated example either. Don't get me wrong, there are spectacularly beautiful things about Toronto but that doesn't mean we should put our blinders on.

Through most of Canada's history, the opulence/wealth/old money has been centred in Montreal. Even today Montreal's attention to beauty is everywhere to be seen. Toronto's roots are blue collar and industrial and its built form reflects that. Toronto has only recently started caring about beautiful sidewalks, lamp posts, the public realm, and architecture. We haven't even buried our electrical wires yet... and I'm not referring to the street car wires.

Did you just compare Scarberia to Old Montreal???

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

That, to me, is the equivalent of a Greek saying, "Well, it's not Turkish Coffee. It's Balkan Coffee because we have it too."

I loved that. Thank you SignalHill. Memories of back home.

[Andrewjm3D]

If he thinks Montreal isn't plagued with kilometers of depressing urban areas I think he's only speaking from a tourists point of view. Scarborough meet Longueuil , Longueuil meet Scarborough.

Both places to have some great areas as well btw.

[kw5150]

I dont know how people confused this post below (from SignalHillHiker) with something that should be argued about...... I live in Calgary and loved Toronto when I visited.

Nicely said. Canadian cities reflect our beliefs and translate them in blueprints for our cities. Our planners, architects, landscape architects, urban designers (interior designers, environmental psychologists, environmental designers, etc....) have aligned themselves with some of the most sustainable-ideology-influenced cities on the planet. Many citizens of this country have signed on to these new ideas or even create ideas of their own. For all of the crazy, global pollution nay-says out there, there is an equal balance of condo-crazed people. These beliefs we apparently hold (en masse) have resulted in densities that would make some of the "sun comment section" people shat their pants.

Kudos to Canada. Our cites area dense and at least we are trying to keep up with new practices. I go to meetings full of these intellectually advanced environmental stewards and it is great to see the conversations that take place.

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Totally agree, Chadillac.

Toronto has always been exceptionally beautiful.

I think most Canadians have trouble recognizing that because we're predominantly a small city country and we associate places like St. John's, Quebec City, Old Montreal, etc. with beauty rather than towering buildings. Combine with that the general "We're NOT Americans!" tone of Canadian identity and Toronto gets pushed aside as too American in appearance... not even counting... in many minds.

But get a Canadian into a... the word in Newfanese would get me banned here, so let's say argument... with a resident of ANY other country, and we bring up Toronto. It's one of the first things we bring up - this beautiful, shining city on the banks of a lake so enormous it might as well be the ocean. And we'll show pictures of island parks just a few minutes from downtown and all of it...

Toronto is a lovely city. It has suburbs devoid of personality and strip mall sprawl just like any other city of its size... but a nice aerial shot of downtown Toronto that includes the lake and some marinas can compete in a beauty competition with any major city on earth.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

If he thinks Montreal isn't plagued with kilometers of depressing urban areas....

What does Montreal have to do with the fact that Toronto has huge swaths of urban nastiness? The 'oh this city has it too, so we're not ugly' argument was predictable. Paris has lots of depressing urban areas too. If you don't notice the difference between Sydney/Paris/San Francisco/Boston and a city like Toronto there's no point going further.

70% of our main high street is an embarrassing revolting mess. We're not talking some down and out neighbourhood, but our main street! Beautiful? Those are some heavy duty blinders. I must admit that I constantly run into Torontonians who think streets like Yonge or Bathurst look good. Mind boggling.

Then again, 'Ugly Toronto' isn't something just noticed by tourists or myself. The industry and those interested in the built form regularly debate it with the consensus being that the city has always been ugly, but getting better: The Torontoist and The Walrus are just 2. Here's another:


http://www.blogto.com/city/2011/10/is_toronto_destined_to_remain_ugly_forever/

[dleung]

Inner city Toronto is as good if not better than most other cities, potholes, wires and all. It's the huge ratio of Markhams and Vaughans compared to other Canadian cities that make it ugly. New sprawl is a million times worse than grit. Compare the concentration of new builds in Canada's major cities. Generally anything before 1970 has mature trees, whereas suburbs 1980 and beyond are dense dry swaths of asphalt. Calgary and Toronto both have more clearly defined concentric patterns of growth, whereas Vancouver and Montreal mostly intensified within its existing area.









http://env-blogs.uwaterloo.ca/atlas/?page_id=106

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by dleung

Inner city Toronto is as good if not better than most other cities, potholes, wires and all. It's the huge ratio of Markhams and Vaughans compared to other Canadian cities that make it ugly. New sprawl is a million times worse than grit. Compare the concentration of new builds in Canada's major cities. Generally anything before 1970 has mature trees, whereas suburbs 1980 and beyond are dense dry swaths of asphalt. Calgary and Toronto both have more clearly defined concentric patterns of growth, whereas Vancouver and Montreal mostly intensified within its existing area.









http://env-blogs.uwaterloo.ca/atlas/?page_id=106

Cool. The amount of blue in Winnipeg is staggering!

[giallo]

^Awesome .

[SignalHillHiker]

Awesome maps, thanks for sharing!

I'm not surprised Winnipeg has a lot of blue. The residential areas of the city are quite nice.

And I couldn't believe how many trees there are in the traditionally working class areas. (Coming from St. John's, I associate any sort of lawn with wealth. You could probably get $5,000 more selling a house in downtown St. John's if you put a couple of potted plants on the front step.) The canopy of trees over the houses is really nice.

[SignalHillHiker]

The St. John's one surprises me just a little bit...


http://env-blogs.uwaterloo.ca/atlas/?page_id=59

The scale of the old town core of the city seems a little exaggerated to me. The blue is most dense around St. John's Harbour, which looks incredibly small at this scale. That's the extent of downtown. It doesn't go any farther southwest or northeast than the harbour.

That means the blue extends so far west it includes the sprawling Memorial University campus as well as newer suburbs, the Avalon Mall, etc. I didn't think these areas were that old.

It's interesting that so much of the east end is new, out around Torbay Road. I wouldn't have guessed that. I'd have thought it'd be mostly green.

And you can really see the boom in the western suburbs here - from the cities of Mount Pearl and Conception Bay South, to the towns of Portugal Cove-St. Phillips and, of course, Paradise (which represents the biggest concentration of red on the map).

Really interesting to see this. Thanks again for sharing!

[Martin Mtl]

By Joh63 on Flickr


By onesidedcoin on Flickr

[The_Architect]

Found on my Facebook newsfeed, from the recent lightning storm:

[Ramako]

I've posted a larger version in the Toronto sub-forum.

[rousseau]

Toronto doesn't look American. You could say it looks North American, but not U.S.-American. In fact, and it's a bit bizarre that this isn't more well-known or accepted among Canadians, or at least people in Ontario, there is a distinctive southern Ontario vernacular of shop fronts and residential side streets full of detached and semi-detached houses done up in brick that Toronto is very much a part of.

Most southern Ontarians have had the revelatory experience of seeing Buffalo for the first time and realizing that, wow, the place is really different in every way imaginable. Which brings to mind the pet theory that Canadians are more "vertically" aligned than "horizontally," whereby it is held that people in Vancouver have more in common with people in Seattle, etc.

Is that really true? No. Well, okay, it may be partly true for the west and maybe a bit for the Maritimes. I recall visiting a former girlfriend's relatives in southern Manitoba once; her cousins casually mentioned playing baseball and golfing and grabbing a six-pack "over the line." Grand Forks could easily be in Manitoba. I've heard people in Vancouver feel a kinship with their counterparts in Seattle (but not really the other way around--Seattle looks to Portland first, and, of course, the U.S. in general). But Toronto like Buffalo or Detroit? Montreal like, what, Plattsburgh? No. Not even close.

There is a peculiar truism on and off these boards that Toronto's doppelganger is Chicago, but the truth is, Toronto doesn't have one. And now these two Great Lakes cities are looking less and less alike from the sky because of the decade-long frenzy of building in one of them. Witness the photos in this thread.

Toronto isn't ugly. It's not pretty, sure, but it's not ugly. It's a jumbled, utilitarian mess produced by Presbyterians who frowned on continental extravagance, resulting in a very specific charm that subsequent waves of un-Presbyterian newcomers have built upon, resulting in a jumbled, not always utilitarian mess with pockets of sublime extravagance. Works for me.



Yes, I know, my periodic homilies to Toronto on this forum have become a cliche. Next month my better half and I will be vacationing in Montreal for a few days, so I'll be sure to post a rapturous report about it!

[SignalHillHiker]

^ Wow, okay. I officially change my opinion to that.