The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! - Page 55

Chadillaccc · #**1081** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:17 AM**

028A5299 by ajaythomas2000, on Flickr

MolsonExport · #**1082** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:37 AM**

way up high woots for Montreal density. the way grandma used to make them

leftimage · #**1083** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by losername

It would be interesting to see side by side arial photos of Montreal, Vancouver , and Calgary . To compare the densities. I think Vancouver might win this one, then Montreal, Calgary.

You could do it yourself with a bit of google earth-ing. It is more accurate than traditional photography in that you can replicate the scale to a T.

If anyone's up for it I'd also be interesting in seeing the results

i.e. cool material but i am too lazy to do it, I'm sorry

FrAnKs · #**1084** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

way up high woots for Montreal density. the way grandma used to make them

I always like how you speak. You makes me laugh.

Acajack · #**1085** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

No. Montreal's suburbs resemble in no way the slab suburbs of paris. They are closer to those of Phoenix, or any random modern North American suburb, lack of transit, lack of architecture, lack of interesting places to go and things to do. That's the problem.

I find that in some of the most poorly-planned suburbs of Montreal, it almost looks like you're in a working class (though not poor) low-density suburban area of a Latin American city.

SkahHigh · #**1086** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

I find that in some of the most poorly-planned suburbs of Montreal, it almost looks like you're in a working class (though not poor) low-density suburban area of a Latin American city.

Lolwut? Sure Laval and Longueuil are ugly, but I wouldn't say that lol...

Spoolmak · #**1087** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

Montreal's skyline has its fans but let's face it, it is not a city renowned for its skyline. The city's charm lies elsewhere. I don't think I would trade away the city's other attributes for a better skyline.

Exactly what I said. Most people I talk to (everyday people, not on this forum) would agree that Montreal is the best city in Canada for culture, history, nightlife, food, art. I think the city is top notch, however, we let that get to us and sometimes feel shameful when talking negatively about its mediocre skyline.

SkahHigh · #**1088** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spoolmak

Exactly what I said. Most people I talk to (everyday people, not on this forum) would agree that Montreal is the best city in Canada for culture, history, nightlife, food, art. I think the city is top notch, however, we let that get to us and sometimes feel shameful when talking negatively about its mediocre skyline.

I get that the skyline is a bit under-performing, but it surely isn't mediocre. That would be like saying Toronto's skyline is small...

Chadillaccc · #**1089** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:13 AM**

Are you guys seriously still talking about this? Holy christ, it's been like 4 days. Some people like Montreal's skyline a lot, some don't. Not a big deal. On a matter such as this, words are not going to be more convincing to someone than pictures are.

Spoolmak · #**1090** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

I get that the skyline is a bit under-performing, but it surely isn't mediocre. That would be like saying Toronto's skyline is small...

Sorry I'll try to find a better choice of words next time

Spoolmak · #**1091** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Are you guys seriously still talking about this? Holy christ, it's been like 4 days. Some people like Montreal's skyline a lot, some don't. Not a big deal. On a matter such as this, words are not going to be more convincing to someone than pictures are.

Still? Its been a day. And It seems to have been an ongoing conversation since I posted. Which was the last time I was on. Sorry for following up with my statement. Actually I don't even know why I should be apologizing to you... nothing to see here Chadillaccc, you can move on

ssiguy · #**1092** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by losername

It would be interesting to see side by side arial photos of Montreal, Vancouver , and Calgary . To compare the densities. I think Vancouver might win this one, then Montreal, Calgary.

Vancouver's core is certainly dense by any comparison but it is not as dense as it looks from the air.

All those condos certainly hold a lot of buildings and there are a lot of condos but they are deceptive. Vancouver condos basically max out at 35 stories and few are that tall but the real difference is in the footprint. Vancouver has a lot of buildings but those buildings don't house near as many people as a similar height building would anywhere else in the country.

People in Vancouver don't seem to realize just how incredibly skinny their towers are. when I go back to Ontario I am reminded of just a petit Vancouver buildings are. Vancouver's skyline makes the city look the densest in Canada but it's doesn't hold near the population of downtown Toronto.

Some say Vancouver's skyline looks like a pin cushion but in many ways that reflects the reality of how pin-like the buildings are.

SkahHigh · #**1093** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Are you guys seriously still talking about this? Holy christ, it's been like 4 days. Some people like Montreal's skyline a lot, some don't. Not a big deal. On a matter such as this, words are not going to be more convincing to someone than pictures are.

It's the skyline thread, isn't it? I don't think anyone is off-topic here...

Razor · #**1094** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

I get that the skyline is a bit under-performing, but it surely isn't mediocre.

This is a fair assessment IMO..I also feel like it's slightly under-performing but still screams "big city" from those money angles..Montreal's skyline has some good depth as well..I posted some links to some fly overs on a recent post of mine ..Check out Montreal's.

travis3000 · #**1095** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

It's the skyline thread, isn't it? I don't think anyone is off-topic here...

Yeah the discussion here has been nice the past few days. A few disagreements but everyone is managing to remain civil. I've enjoyed the last few pages of this thread.

Razor · #**1096** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:48 AM**

ummm ^ That's like saying a goalie is going to get a shut-out with ten minutes left to play in the game.

SkahHigh · #**1097** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

This is a fair assessment IMO..I also feel like it's slightly under-performing but still screams "big city" from those money angles..Montreal's skyline has some good depth as well..I posted some links to some fly overs on a recent post of mine ..Check out Montreal's.

Luckily, Spoolmak is the only one calling it mediocre. I understand that some people might not find it attractive while some do, but it's a good (not great) and growing skyline. I would rather have a skyline with twenty 150m towers than one with five 200m towers... Density > height IMO.

Comparing Denver (height) with Vancouver (density)

http://imagesci.com/img/2013/11/morning-skyline-25593-hd-wallpapers.jpg

http://rotaractshutterbuginternational.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/img_4981.jpg

Vancouver's (tallest: 200m) looks ten times bigger than Denver's (tallest: 217m)

Acajack · #**1098** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

These aren't mutually exclusive. Having more (and taller) skyscrapers wouldn't take away from Montreal's charm. It would still have all that, plus a more filled-in downtown and a more impressive skyline.

Correct. My point was simply what I'd choose if forced to opt for one over the other.

In this part of the world anyway, there are a lot more cities that have a decent skyline than there are with a a good urban vibe, let alone an awesome one.

isaidso · #**1099** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashok

Place Bonadventure needs to go,

and replaced by a nice modern, glassy superstructure.

No thanks. It's one of the most interesting buildings in the country. Brutalist architecture isn't very popular, but some of the most significant examples of it should be protected.

isaidso · #**1100** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 3:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrAnKs

Looking at the Denver thread, and I start to think that Canadian cities punch over their sizes in matter of Skyline compared to US.
Do you think it's true, or it varies ?

Just a quick comparison makes that quite evident. Canadian metros have far bigger skylines than US metros of the same size. I first noticed the discrepancy back in the 90s and the gap has only widened since.