The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! - Page 80

MolsonExport · #**1581** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.S MTL

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pierreethier/

I like this one.

MolsonExport · #**1582** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delirium

amazing pano

Photo by SWorldGuy https://www.flickr.com/photos/sworldguy/15220954427/sizes/k/

Sublime. I miss this view from skiing at Grouse.

MolsonExport · #**1583** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashok

That last set of Montreal is simply amazing!

Second that. The density is astounding, the views are superb. Enhanced by the power of the river.

MolsonExport · #**1584** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:08 PM**

Holy Density, Batman!

Quote:

Beedok · #**1585** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Holy Density, Batman!

Yet people acted like I was crazy for thinking Montreal was in the same category as Philadelphia for skyline.

Ashok · #**1586** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:34 PM**

What Philly has is a few very tall building. People always seem to forget how densy and extensive the Montreal skyline is... Montreal def. has a much more impressive, bigger and dense skyline than Philly.

SkahHigh · #**1587** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:41 PM**

^ that's often the case with major U.S cities (except NYC and Chicago). Look at Philly, Denver, Minneapolis, Cleveland, Cincinnati... A few supertalls but very little density around them to create a "big city" impression.

Ashok · #**1588** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:44 PM**

^ Montreal is more like Boston in terms of its desensity and development.

north 42 · #**1589** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 4:52 PM**

Wow, that's crazy how you go from skyscrapers to SFH's so abruptly, with almost no mid rise in between! Completely opposite of Montreal!

LeftCoaster · #**1590** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:02 PM**

Very little of that is SFH, Philly's downtown is ringed with pretty dense walkups similar to the plateau (but not nearly as nice architecturally).

Nouvellecosse · #**1591** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:06 PM**

^ Single familey homes doesn't necessarily mean "detached" single family homes though. In Montral most of the walkups are actually apartments and a bit different than attached SFH townhouses and rowhouses.

Overall I'd say Philadelphia skyline is certainly just as large (or larger) but it's more dominated by large buildings with fewer smaller highrises.

lio45 · #**1592** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

This is why I find most skyline shots of downtown Montreal boring, because (nearly) all of them fail at showing the core's true width, diversity and bulk that we see here:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5604/15573556081_968cef2836_o.jpg

I mean, do you really get the impression of a large, long and dense skyline when looking at this picture here?:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5606/15343321839_616ac2048c_b.jpg

It's almost unbelievable that those two pics are of the exact same downtown. The angle from the river really makes it look smaller.

LeftCoaster · #**1593** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

^ Single familey homes doesn't necessarily mean "detached" single family homes though. In Montral most of the walkups are actually apartments and a bit different than attached SFH townhouses and rowhouses.

So is Philly. Drop a pin anywhere in south philly and tell me it isn't just a run down plateau. The density seems quite similar. I've only visited Philly twice (Montreal tons of times) but I definitely got a gritty Montreal vibe in Philly.

kool maudit · #**1594** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:16 PM**

philly looks great, though. a lot of its 15-25 storey guys are pre-war. there's less 1955-1980 stuff because it's not canada, but you trade a bit of johannesburg clutter for that lean manhattan thing.

i honestly think the philly skyline is a bit nicer than montreal's. they're of the same type and category, but philly has the edge.

i bet montreal is more lively down in there though.

MonkeyRonin · #**1595** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

^ that's often the case with major U.S cities (except NYC and Chicago). Look at Philly, Denver, Minneapolis, Cleveland, Cincinnati... A few supertalls but very little density around them to create a "big city" impression.

Did you see the photo above? Just look at all that density around the tallest towers. It was one of the biggest of the first wave of American cities (it hit a population of 1 million by 1890, 2 million by 1930), but had an (informal) 167 m height limit until the 1980s. As a result, it has a pretty large core of mid-rise and <167 m high-rise buildings ringed by tightly packed rowhouses for a few hundred square kilometres around that. Philly is nothing like the Midwestern & Sunbelt cities.

caltrane74 · #**1596** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:19 PM**

That Philly shot is quite amazing!! I love it.

Nouvellecosse · #**1597** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

So is Philly. Drop a pin anywhere in south philly and tell me it isn't just a run down plateau. The density seems quite similar. I've only visited Philly twice (Montreal tons of times) but I definitely got a gritty Montreal vibe in Philly.

The building stock I've seen in Philadelphia is mostly 2-3 story townhouses where there is one entrance on the ground floor for a home with 2-3 floors of living space, whereas in Montreal most of the buildings I've seen in places like the Plateau were 3 floors with one apartment on each level and a ground floor entrance for the bottom level and two entrances at the mid level with one for the middle floor unit and one for the upper floor unit.

In either case the building density may look similiar but I'm not sure how the actual human density compares. I suspect Montreal's inner neighbourhoods would have the edge there.

Nouvellecosse · #**1598** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:23 PM**

But of course in Montreal it's mostly on one side of downtown where there's really high density neighbourhoods. It also has the huge green space of Mont Royal on one side, and the medium density neighbourhoods to the south and west.

logan5 · #**1599** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:36 PM**

Speaking of underrated cities, Philadelphia's definitely one of them. It has the reputation of being dirty but the neighbourhoods I looked at look comparable to Montreal and Toronto. Very nice looking, dense neighbourhoods.

MonkeyRonin · #**1600** Posted **Oct 20, 2014, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The building stock I've seen in Philadelphia is mostly 2-3 story townhouses where there is one entrance on the ground floor for a home with 2-3 floors of living space, whereas in Montreal most of the buildings I've seen in places like the Plateau were 3 floors with one apartment on each level and a ground floor entrance for the bottom level and two entrances at the mid level with one for the middle floor unit and one for the upper floor unit.

In either case the building density may look similiar but I'm not sure how the actual human density compares. I suspect Montreal's inner neighbourhoods would have the edge there.

The areas immediately adjacent to downtown are (or at least were) presumably comprised of multi-family dwellings, where 3 and 4-storey townhouses and pre-war tenements and towers dominate:

You have to go out a ways before getting into the quintessential Philadelphian single-family rowhouse type streetscapes:

Historically, Philadelphia most likely would have been denser, but, given post-war population movements & development trends I'm sure it's Montreal today.