The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[whiteford]

they both rock in them pics.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Enjoying the aesthetics of a skyline is like enjoying a painting, or a book. It is entirely subjective. I myself don't particularly like the Calgary skyline as much as its the SSP fan base, although it's impossible not to admire its size and ambition. Oddly enough I love Edmonton's skyline, but that may be because I lived there for 3 years and followed its development throughout. I actually prefer skylines that are balanced with the nuances of history and variety; throw in church spires and domes from the 18th century, late 19th century skyscrapers and classic 1920's art deco buildings. I like this because I have been hard-wired since childhood to admire such things, probably because I myself was born and raised in a city that has a skyline full of history. As a child was in absolute awe of the skylines of Chicago and New York, not those of Los Angeles or Phoenix. Does this make Calgary's skyline shit? Of course not. It's all personal taste. Arguing about it is petty. SSP, Sky scraper pettiness?

Well said..And I agree..This is why I like Winnipeg's, and Philadelphia's skyline.
Personal taste..I like eclectic skylines.

Calgarians are just rightfully proud of how their city is booming right now, and I always maintained that for a city of it's size it's doing a remarkable job of building the height and keeping their towers centralized..Sure it's skyline does not have the depth of a huge city, but when the depth eventually does fill in as the city grows, it will look even better. I can see where Montrealers can get defensive tbh..Like Calgarians, they are rightfully proud of their city, so when some posters from a way smaller metro start comparing the skylines or dissing Montreal's skyline, I can understand Montrealers playing the "street level" card once the pissing match gets started.Fair enuff.
Posters on here are just proud of their respective cities....

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

You Montreal guys are really thin-skinned. Every single time someone makes the suggestion that our skyline could be bigger/nicer than yours, you can't help but bring up the "all the other things that make a big city" line. Even though nobody else made any comparison except in terms of skyline. And this in the friggin' skyline thread.

nearly choked on my drink at the thin skinned line..Calgarians, not Montrealers on here are by far the most skin thinned posters as far as I'm concerned. Say anything un -towards about the Stampede for example. Also make sure you acknowledge their standing as Canada's fourth largest metro as they surpassed Ottawa's in a 2013 estimate adjustment calc.or something like that.Don't slip on that little factoid or the Stampede acknowledgment thing.

[ssiguy]

I really like the Calgary skyline and considering how relatively new it is, it has a great variety of architectural styles and colour. This is in sharp contrast to Toronto where everything built in the last 20 years over 20 stories is a sterile looking blue glass.

Montreal's skyline looks mature without all the horrid McDevelopments that llok like a slum waiting to happen ie CityPlace. That said one of my favorite skylines in the country is in Toronto but Bloor/Yorkville where the buildings are better spaced and of greater variety.

[SignalHillHiker]

Toronto might look a little sterile from the water these days, but even that has its charms. It's the entire skyline identity of Vancouver, for example. And from the backside, Toronto's skyline is very impressive - grand office buildings in a variety of styles, with a backdrop of glass condos, the lake, and the islands. That's very impressive.

[1overcosc]

To me, those so-called "sterile glass boxes" are gorgeous. I love them. CityPlace is beautiful.

[RyLucky]

Skylines - yes, they might convey symbols of identity, those icons that connect us to the places we live, they may orient us within our towns and make a city recognizable from the pack, they may display for the world the vigour of our economy or the might of our institutions - clearly, for many of you, your city's skyline is near and dear to your identity - but, beyond that, does a city's skyline matter at all?

So long as the buildings let a little light to the sidewalk, let people enjoy the rivers and parks, attract customers to local businesses, house people the people who work in the city, and are oriented around sustainable modes of transportation, that's a good skyline by me. I could care less to see some soaring utility company or bank logo. What ought to matter more than how a city looks is that there are many protected public places from which to look at it - be it the "mountain" or McHugh Bluff, Ste Catherine Street or Stephen Avenue. Take a lesson from the Calgary Tower: the skyline will constantly change, so don't get too used to it, don't be too proud of it, and don't be too insecure if another skyline surpasses yours by whatever phony metric you measure. It's all subjective anyway.

[north 42]

I just love how people claim to hate all the new condo towers that have gone up in Toronto the last decade, but would probably kill to have even some of those towers built in their own city's downtown!

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by north 42

I just love how people claim to hate all the new condo towers that have gone up in Toronto the last decade, but would probably kill to have even some of those towers built in their own city's downtown!

Wow that is so untrue... What fits in Toronto wouldn't necessarily fit in Montreal, so I wouldn't want it, for esthetical reasons.

We're not saying every new construction in Toronto is bland, but because there are so many projects going up (compared to the rest of Canada), there are more of them which are boring in appearance than in other cities.

I actually love how Aura turned out!

[Martin Mtl]

Eastern downtown. The first phase of the CHUM is partially hidden, but the next phases will be very much visible from that angle.


Montréal by Guy F. Raymond on Flickr

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by north 42

I just love how people claim to hate all the new condo towers that have gone up in Toronto the last decade, but would probably kill to have even some of those towers built in their own city's downtown!

Funny you say that, the V Condo tower in Montreal was the previous 355-377 King West design in the Entertianment District by Mirvish. Tell me the Montrealers don't just love their luck on that one. Very odd a Montrealer was the first to respond to your post in defence of not wanting any Toronto leftovers. Weird, luck.

[Rico Rommheim]

The CHUM just keeps on giving. Another 6 years of construction, insane. I'm only hoping it will help the eastern end of Rene-levesque boulevard to build up a bit. So far, this stretch of R-L is devoid of height, interesting architecture and street life.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Funny you say that, the V Condo tower in Montreal was the previous 355-377 King West design in the Entertianment District by Mirvish. Tell me the Montrealers don't just love their luck on that one. Very odd a Montrealer was the first to respond to your post in defence of not wanting any Toronto leftovers. Weird, luck.

Dont' you mean l'Avenue ?

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Funny you say that, the V Condo tower in Montreal was the previous 355-377 King West design in the Entertianment District by Mirvish. Tell me the Montrealers don't just love their luck on that one. Very odd a Montrealer was the first to respond to your post in defence of not wanting any Toronto leftovers. Weird, luck.

What design are you talking about? I was talking more about not seeing projects like the L Tower or Emerald City Condos fit well in Montreal, given the look of the older highrises in Downtown...

Content removed

[Rico Rommheim]

I think the L tower would be a great fit for Montreal. Actually, it's probably one of only a handful current TO projects I'd accept. After coming back from Toronto last week, I realized that Toronto projects look way too similar. Driving down the Gardiner, it was like witnessing a parade of bland, identical clones. These towers were way too ordinary. The blue glass became annoying. But the L tower, I don't know, I like it a lot.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

What design are you talking about? I was talking more about not seeing projects like the L Tower or Emerald City Condos fit well in Montreal, given the look of the older highrises in Downtown...

What !?!? I would LOVE to see L-Tower in Montreal. It would fit right in. What you're saying doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting we should stop building modern high-rises just because our skyline is older ? According to your statement, then, L'Avenue, Icone, Roccabella, Deloitte... all of them will not fit ? Would you prefer that we only build crappy pomo building ? I don't get what you're saying at all. Sorry.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

What design are you talking about? I was talking more about not seeing projects like the L Tower or Emerald City Condos fit well in Montreal, given the look of the older highrises in Downtown...

355-377 King West



I mistakenly thought this was the V Condo design for Montreal. MtlMartin is correct it os called l'avenue. Mirvish flipped the property to Gupta and the Remington / Easton Group, and the design team took the blueprints to Montreal as a project there.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

What !?!? I would LOVE to see L-Tower in Montreal. It would fit right in. What you're saying doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting we should stop building modern high-rises just because our skyline is older ? According to your statement, then, L'Avenue, Icone, Roccabella, Deloitte... all of them will not fit ? Would you prefer that we only build crappy pomo building ? I don't get what you're saying at all. Sorry.

That's just a personal opinion Martin. Like I previously said, I love the L Tower. And I love all the developments around the Bell Centre. It's just my opinion!

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

That's just a personal opinion Martin. Like I previously said, I love the L Tower. And I love all the developments around the Bell Centre. It's just my opinion!

It's all good.

One thing I'm grateful about Montreal's new crop of modern towers is the fact that the Ville-Marie borough (downtown) strongly encourage promoters to not use protuberant or wrap-around balconies in their design. Only loggia-type balconies are readily accepted by the borough, which I much prefer.

That being said, I think Montreal will never have to deal with the "sameness" problem of blue/green glass towers, like Toronto or Vancouver, if only because we'll never see such intense developments here. So in that respect, I think we can afford at least a few such towers without problem.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

It's all good.

One thing I'm grateful about Montreal's new crop of modern towers is the fact that the Ville-Marie borough (downtown) strongly encourage promoters to not use protuberant or wrap-around balconies in their design. Only loggia-type balconies are readily accepted by the borough, which I much prefer.

That being said, I think Montreal will never have to deal with the "sameness" problem of blue/green glass towers, like Toronto or Vancouver, if only because we'll never see such intense developments here. So in that respect, I think we can afford at least a few such towers without problem.

I agree with that. And I'm not at all a hater of modernism. It's really nice to see modern glass (but not too glassy) towers like Altitude, TOM, Roccabella and Icone pop up in the CBD. And hopefully YUL's next...