Future Canadian Skylines - Page 123

Innsertnamehere · #**2441** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 1:44 PM**

lookin good Montreal!

RyeJay · #**2442** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 2:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTLskyline

Cadillac Fairview's plans for Montreal

OCPM p.42, http://ocpm.qc.ca/sites/ocpm.qc.ca/files/pdf/P72/3a.pdf

Sweet Jesus! La densité est spectaculaire!

This is what I prefer. Je préfère les tours de hauteurs modestes. Pourquoi supertalls? Certainement, ils ne sont pas nécessaires pour les activités de piétons. Le centre-ville peut mieux s'acclimater.
Montréal is incredible at streetlevel!! These projects will incrementally add to street-life vibrancy.

I'm so happy for the city!!

isaidso · #**2443** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 2:53 PM**

Those white towers look great although Montreal continues to turn its back on the skyscraper. Stumps are fine for small cities, but not one of north America's premier cities. And hopefully those fugly suburban residential blocks can get re-developed in the not too distant future. They belong in Laval, not one of north America's grandest downtowns.

big T · #**2444** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 3:07 PM**

If you're referring to Jardins Windsor in the foreground, they were just completed a few years ago, so likely here to stay for a while unfortunately.

big T · #**2445** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 3:16 PM**

Also, the greatest thing about these developments is that they won't add any significant pressure on our already overwhelmed public transit. In an ideal world our politicians would have the vision to realize the current trend of residential growth downtown is a chance to proactively improve mass transit to slightly farther out neighborhoods, before the growth spreads - which will inevitably happen once we run out of space in the immediate core. In fact our two main metro lines are already at saturation.
I'm not holding my breath though.

RyeJay · #**2446** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 3:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Those white towers look great although Montreal continues to turn its back on the skyscraper. Stumps are fine for small cities, but not one of north America's premier cities.

You size queen.

If more of the island were to develop at the density that's currently under construction and being proposed in the core, you'd be one of the only people still complaining.

The scale of these buildings is fine. With a real estate market less flooded, more private developers may propose more towers that are also relatively modest in density. Ideally we want Montréal to achieve a healthy pace of building construction in the long-term, despite boom and bust cycles of associated industries and markets, and considering the new loan rules Ottawa has been introducing across the board.

These Montréal proposals are certainly not disrespectful to "the skyscraper."

(aka: the SSP god?)

Oh my god, isaidso, we just started a religion.

Rico Rommheim · #**2447** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 5:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Those white towers look great although Montreal continues to turn its back on the skyscraper. Stumps are fine for small cities, but not one of north America's premier cities. And hopefully those fugly suburban residential blocks can get re-developed in the not too distant future. They belong in Laval, not one of north America's grandest downtowns.

Thing is, the middle of the 20th century notwithstanding, Montreal has never been a city opened to the skyscaper, really. Even at its top in the early 20th century, Montreal seemed fine to let Toronto and Vancouver outbuild it in scale and height. Montreal once mused the idea of becoming a skyscraper city, but this will probably never happen again. The businesses don't need it, City hall is indifferent about, and the people don't want it.

I find the 120m towers perfect. And I'm also excited to see new towers pop up between Peel and University, once the highway is struck down and turned into an "urban boulevard".

I'm really happy with this, soon enough, we'll be able to walk from Pine avenue on the slope of the mountain all the way to Wellington street on the shores of the Lachine Canal and bask in a continuous sea of (albeit small) skyscrapers.

MTLskyline · #**2448** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 5:40 PM**

A few more

Source: http://ocpm.qc.ca/sites/ocpm.qc.ca/files/pdf/P72/3a.pdf

Rico Rommheim · #**2449** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 6:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by big T

If you're referring to Jardins Windsor in the foreground, they were just completed a few years ago, so likely here to stay for a while unfortunately.

The Jardins Windsor ain't the problem. Call them ugly, call them cheap, call them mr. vain, but they add thousands of residents to what was before a freight rail yard. At street level, they're quite fine, really.

The real problem is with the truly suburban developments immediately west of the Windsors, I mean we're talking about winding crescents, cul-de-sacs and single family housing and a strip mall....a strip mall!

franktko · #**2450** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 7:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Those white towers look great although Montreal continues to turn its back on the skyscraper. Stumps are fine for small cities, but not one of north America's premier cities.

Those white towers are actually in a location zoned 65 meter tall max - this entire project is under public hearings because they want to go to 120 meters... We have nimbys that will certainly try to disrupt this project during the hearings.

G.S MTL · #**2451** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 7:50 PM**

wait until more go up and the next few years! Montreal's skyline will be wayyy up there in North America

mistercorporate · #**2452** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 8:23 PM**

Lovely developments, I like it when developers think big!

vanman · #**2453** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I love how Los Angeles is totally unrecognizable in about 30 years time. Even Dubai would be envious. With that said, nothing tops. The future Vancouver in Continuum. Supertalls everywhere.

Weird there is no mention of LA anywhere in Almost Human. I just skimmed through the first episode and there is no mention of the LAPD or LA on any buildings, police cars or uniforms. Even the wiki article says nothing about the city. I just assumed it takes place in an unnamed American city.

How would you rate Continuum? I watched the first few episodes but sort of lost interest.

big T · #**2454** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Thing is, the middle of the 20th century notwithstanding, Montreal has never been a city opened to the skyscaper, really. Even at its top in the early 20th century, Montreal seemed fine to let Toronto and Vancouver outbuild it in scale and height. Montreal once mused the idea of becoming a skyscraper city, but this will probably never happen again. The businesses don't need it, City hall is indifferent about, and the people don't want it.

I find the 120m towers perfect. And I'm also excited to see new towers pop up between Peel and University, once the highway is struck down and turned into an "urban boulevard".

I'm really happy with this, soon enough, we'll be able to walk from Pine avenue on the slope of the mountain all the way to Wellington street on the shores of the Lachine Canal and bask in a continuous sea of (albeit small) skyscrapers.

Actually 120m is about the typical height for Vancouver condo towers. Of course there are a lot more and they are more densely packed there, but I don't think anyone would seriously contend Van is "not a skyscraper city" even though most if it is residential.

So if these all get built and a few more follow, it looks like Montreal is on the verge of a major transformation, not only in terms of built form but also in terms of perception - cities with significant downtown condo tower habitat are not that common, at least in a NA context.

big T · #**2455** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

The Jardins Windsor ain't the problem. Call them ugly, call them cheap, call them mr. vain, but they add thousands of residents to what was before a freight rail yard. At street level, they're quite fine, really.

The real problem is with the truly suburban developments immediately west of the Windsors, I mean we're talking about winding crescents, cul-de-sacs and single family housing and a strip mall....a strip mall!

Point well taken. Though I disagree that the JW are fine at street level - they're a typical inward-looking development unworthy of this century IMO.

Love the culture beat reference though!

WhipperSnapper · #**2456** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanman

Weird there is no mention of LA anywhere in Almost Human. I just skimmed through the first episode and there is no mention of the LAPD or LA on any buildings, police cars or uniforms. Even the wiki article says nothing about the city. I just assumed it takes place in an unnamed American city.

How would you rate Continuum? I watched the first few episodes but sort of lost interest.

True. I'm not sure where I got Los Angeles. Possibly from the CGI aerials.

Continuum isn't bad. The acting, writing, etc. could be better. I find the second season is better than the first.

WhipperSnapper · #**2457** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by big T

Actually 120m is about the typical height for Vancouver condo towers. Of course there are a lot more and they are more densely packed there, but I don't think anyone would seriously contend Van is "not a skyscraper city" even though most if it is residential.

So if these all get built and a few more follow, it looks like Montreal is on the verge of a major transformation, not only in terms of built form but also in terms of perception - cities with significant downtown condo tower habitat are not that common, at least in a NA context.

The typical Vancouver tower is a lot less than 120 metres. It's closer to 90 metres or about 28 storeys.

vanman · #**2458** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 10:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Continuum isn't bad. The acting, writing, etc. could be better. I find the second season is better than the first.

Thanks. I'm going to give Continuum another shot.

Rico Rommheim · #**2459** Posted **Jan 10, 2014, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by big T

Actually 120m is about the typical height for Vancouver condo towers. Of course there are a lot more and they are more densely packed there, but I don't think anyone would seriously contend Van is "not a skyscraper city" even though most if it is residential.

By TO and Vancouver trumping us I meant back in the early 20th century. Consider that until the late 20's, The tallest buildings in the country were in Toronto, vancouver and Quebec City.

Nouvellecosse · #**2460** Posted **Jan 11, 2014, 7:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

The Jardins Windsor ain't the problem. Call them ugly, call them cheap, call them mr. vain, but they add thousands of residents to what was before a freight rail yard. At street level, they're quite fine, really.

The real problem is with the truly suburban developments immediately west of the Windsors, I mean we're talking about winding crescents, cul-de-sacs and single family housing and a strip mall....a strip mall!

I couldn't agree more! I ran into those suburban developments recently on streetview and almost fainted. Whoever thought that was an appropriate type of development on the edge of downtown and two blocks from the city's busiest metro line should be immediately deported back to Phoenix.