The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[Darkoshvilli]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fred514/15719042749/sizes/l

[lio45]

Originally Posted by isaidso

I've never seen it from there and prefer that vantage point as well. It looks superb from there.

Rule of thumb, for any point of view that's at water level with Old Montreal in the foreground (pretty common...), the office tower skyline will be underwhelming.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Villaggio

Magnificent! See how beautiful Quebec City looks without brutalist edifices. Tear those towers down and institute a policy that limits construction in the downtown area to strictly traditional architecture.

[mistercorporate]

By Piotr Poznanski on Flickr

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Magnificent! See how beautiful Quebec City looks without brutalist edifices. Tear those towers down and institute a policy that limits construction in the downtown area to strictly traditional architecture.

There might not be a restriction on new buildings near the Old city, but new offices towers now tend to be located in Ste-Foy. I don't think we will see a new highrise near Old Quebec for a ling time.

[Martin Mtl]

I love Scotia tower from that angle in that Toronto shot above. It looks so tall and slim.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by le calmar

There might not be a restriction on new buildings near the Old city, but new offices towers now tend to be located in Ste-Foy. I don't think we will see a new highrise near Old Quebec for a ling time.

That's a shame. Quebec City shied away from tall buildings after some missteps a few decades ago. Rather than dismiss tall buildings altogether it would be beneficial to acknowledge that the issue was design not height. The failure to do so risks turning Old Quebec into a museum instead of a properly functioning large modern city.

London, Milan, Berlin, etc. all are building tall right next to their historic heritage with spectacular results. Quebec City is making a huge mistake.

[Nouvellecosse]

But I also think a city can be very modern and progressive with high quality lowrise development. Cities like Amsterdam, Stockholm, and Berlin are very lowrise but not generally thought of as museum pieces. Berlin's tallest building is actually about as tall as QC's tallest building yet Berlin is the larger than Montreal.

I agree that tall buildings shouldn't be universally seen as the enemy, but they shouldn't be regarded as essential either.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

But I also think a city can be very modern and progressive with high quality lowrise development. Cities like Amsterdam, Stockholm, and Berlin are very lowrise but not generally thought of as museum pieces. Berlin's tallest building is actually about as tall as QC's tallest building yet Berlin is the larger than Montreal.

Berlin has a population of 3.5 million and it's tallest building is 110m. Yet it's one of the most beautiful and urban cities I've ever visited.

[leftimage]

Originally Posted by Ashok

Is it just me, or Montreal-Ottawa almost touching here. But no, for 2 hours of car ride, and all we see is trees.

Yup, it's a disparaging drive to be sure, and embarassing.

The new autoroute 50 otoh makes the two metros seem reasonably intertwined. It feels more lively and urbanized, more representative of the map you've linked.

Another added bonus is the 50 provides a *much* more scenic drive - I was actually surprised by the rugged beauty I encountered the first time I used it. For one, I will almost certainly be taking the 50 whenever I go to Ottawa (once a year-ish) from now on. More enjoyable.

[SkahHigh]

Montreal & Mont-Royal by Fred_514, on Flickr

[SaskScraper]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Berlin has a population of 3.5 million and it's tallest building is 110m. Yet it's one of the most beautiful and urban cities I've ever visited.

Berlin is one city in Europe that I haven't been to but I'm going to plan for it next time I go
Berlin's population shows as 4.35 million in this listing..

http://www.citypopulation.de/world/Agglomerations.html

in comparison, Montreal is 3.95

[Delirium]

Photo by Martin Zemlak https://www.flickr.com/photos/129708611@N07/

[csbvan]

Love it. The ships in the harbour make it!

[Everyday]

Originally Posted by leftimage

Yup, it's a disparaging drive to be sure, and embarassing.

The new autoroute 50 otoh makes the two metros seem reasonably intertwined. It feels more lively and urbanized, more representative of the map you've linked.

Another added bonus is the 50 provides a *much* more scenic drive - I was actually surprised by the rugged beauty I encountered the first time I used it. For one, I will almost certainly be taking the 50 whenever I go to Ottawa (once a year-ish) from now on. More enjoyable.

I took it one time, and while it is a much more scenic drive, I will never take it again. Quebec government cheaped out and didnt make it 4 lanes the whole way, probably only about half the way if that.

I almost got in 2 or 3 accidents. One time due to people merging onto the highway when theres no other lane to move over to, and another when someone was speeding to pass me before the highway went back to 2 lanes. What a joke of a highway but par for the course in Quebec.

[1overcosc]

From what I've heard, having only two lanes works well enough due to its low AADT. Highway 417 has a much higher AADT simply due to being on the Ontario side.

[le calmar]

I had to google AADT, but I'm not conviced that the fact of being on the Ontarian side is a factor. This area of Eastern Ontario is sparsely populated and there is more population along the Autoroute 50 corridor. I think the reason is highway 417/40 runs through the center of the city of Montreal and brings you couple of blocks east of downtown Ottawa, while Autoroute 50 connects the northern suburbs of Montreal to Gatineau.

Content removed

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by le calmar

I had to google AADT, but I'm not conviced that the fact of being on the Ontarian side is a factor. This area of Eastern Ontario is sparsely populated and there is more population along the Autoroute 50 corridor. I think the reason is highway 417/40 runs through the center of the city of Montreal and brings you couple of blocks east of downtown Ottawa, while Autoroute 50 connects the northern suburbs of Montreal to Gatineau.

Yes, but also the fact that the 417 is in Ontario makes a big difference. Because crossing between Ottawa & Gatineau is a bit of a pain especially during rush hour, most people would prefer the route that takes them to Montreal without having to cross the Ottawa River in Ottawa-Gatineau... so the route that stays within their province, basically. And because the Ontario side of Ottawa-Gatineau has way more people than the Quebec side (~1M vs. ~300k), it naturally follows than any highway on the Ontario side would have higher use.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Yes, but also the fact that the 417 is in Ontario makes a big difference. Because crossing between Ottawa & Gatineau is a bit of a pain especially during rush hour, most people would prefer the route that takes them to Montreal without having to cross the Ottawa River in Ottawa-Gatineau... so the route that stays within their province, basically. And because the Ontario side of Ottawa-Gatineau has way more people than the Quebec side (~1M vs. ~300k), it naturally follows than any highway on the Ontario side would have higher use.

The 417 is also older (has been there since the 70s) and many people have their habits already and won't change them.

Average daily traffic (AADT or DJMA in French) on the two-lane super-2 sections just east of Gatineau on the A-50 is apparently about 7,000 or 7,500 at the moment. I have travelled it numerous times and don't find this stretch particularly dangerous.

The section between Lachute and Mirabel which also super-2 I find much more dangerous, and it's over 10,000 a day, which is the MTQ's standard for a full divided four-lane autoroute.

I suspect that any additional twinning work on the A-50 will happen in that area first.