The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II - Page 202

kw5150 · #**4021** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:28 PM**

Every city has it's positives and negatives. I am excited for every day that I live in Calgary. It is the people here and the dense urban core that I like. Every year from this point forward will help to connect and infill our somewhat disjointed neighborhoods. We have thousands of office cubicles and condo units coming on to the market soon and everyday there are more people walking and biking and it has been great being a part of the change. This will probably be one of the nicest looking summers in a while as the city has undertaken a vast tree-pruning exercise to take care of our new tree stock. Along with that are a number of pedestrian / cyclist orientated developments that will be finishing up and looking great.

You cant judge Calgary from 5 or even 2 years ago. There have been many great changes since then and I love being a part of it.

If you want I can take you for a nice proper visit when you come here so you arent stuck out in the burbs with nothing to do.

Well, time for lunch. On foot from the beltline to downtown. I am always excited for this!

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Whenever I've been in Calgary, the vehicular traffic was awful. Traffic congestion is a symptom of urban sprawl.

Having lots of space that still requires infill is also a symptom of urban sprawl.

You moved to Calgary because Calgarians are so friendly?... It's been my experience that people choose their living arrangements based on employment, mostly. If 'personality' was your actual reason for moving, you would have moved to one of the municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador.

topdog · #**4022** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:37 PM**

The definition for 'Big City' and 'Urban' is going to vary from person to person. For me it's about street traffic, inner city neighborhoods and retail corridors, retail shopping, restaurants and bars, number of jobs in a downtown area, number of residents in a downtown area. 'Big city' can have those attributes but also include tall buildings, rapid transit, bigger roadways, bigger infrastructure in general.

The big three are easily a notch above the rest of the cities in big city/urban, especially Toronto and Montreal. Vancouver is kind of halfway between Tier I and Tier II.

Tier I
Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver

Tier II
Calgary
Ottawa

Tier III
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec

Tier IV
Hamilton
London
Halifax

Big city and urban don't always mean the same thing. I was just in Edmonton last week, and Edmonton feels like a bigger city to me than QC, but QC feels more urban.
10 years ago, I would have put Calgary and Ottawa in with the rest of tier III, but Calgary and Ottawa have pulled away from the pack. They have better established urban neighborhoods, and have a bigger city feel. I was just in Calgary for the first time in 10 years, and it's gone through some major changes. Same for Ottawa, last time I was there, it was really coming along.

Calgarian · #**4023** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:41 PM**

This thread is getting ridiculous, stop arguing about which city is better than all others in whatever category and post some damn pictures.

Ramako · #**4024** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:43 PM**

I've never been to Calgary, but checking it out in Google Street View, its downtown core actually looks and feels bigger to me than Toronto's. Calgary's core has a lot of tall and strong streetwalls that go on for some distance whereas Toronto doesn't have a lot of strong streetwalls and its density is very tightly clustered. Toronto's downtown core gives way to mid-rise neighbourhoods very quickly.

craner · #**4025** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:44 PM**

Can we move the Urbanity discussion to a different thread please - I came here to see & discuss Canadian Skylines.

Brizzy82 · #**4026** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by topdog

The definition for 'Big City' and 'Urban' is going to vary from person to person. For me it's about street traffic, inner city neighborhoods and retail corridors, retail shopping, restaurants and bars, number of jobs in a downtown area, number of residents in a downtown area. 'Big city' can have those attributes but also include tall buildings, rapid transit, bigger roadways, bigger infrastructure in general.

The big three are easily a notch above the rest of the cities in big city/urban, especially Toronto and Montreal. Vancouver is kind of halfway between Tier I and Tier II.

Tier I
Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver

Tier II
Calgary
Ottawa

Tier III
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Quebec

Tier IV
Hamilton
London
Halifax

Big city and urban don't always mean the same thing. I was just in Edmonton last week, and Edmonton feels like a bigger city to me than QC, but QC feels more urban.
10 years ago, I would have put Calgary and Ottawa in with the rest of tier III, but Calgary and Ottawa have pulled away from the pack. They have better established urban neighborhoods, and have a bigger city feel. I was just in Calgary for the first time in 10 years, and it's gone through some major changes. Same for Ottawa, last time I was there, it was really coming along.

You missed St John's, it should be somewhere between Toronto & Montreal

SignalHillHiker · #**4027** Posted **Mar 11, 2013, 6:56 PM**

It's fascinating to see everyone's perspectives. It seems like we all hold terms such as urban with such affection that we simply associate it with the city attributes we like.

For example, regarding the Tiers above, I struggle with ranking Quebec City below anything west of Toronto. I can only tolerate it because of the significant differences in population between Quebec City and cities like Calgary, Edmonton, etc. Otherwise, I think Quebec City blows them out of the water in just about everything I associate with urbanity: street-level density probably being the most important.

A narrow, winding old street blocked with buildings right up to the sidewalk will always feel more urban to me than the widest modern avenue - no matter the height of the surrounding buildings.