The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Vancouver's downtown has the visual advantage of being set on a very flat land, whereas montreal's downtown is built on a hill going from 0 to 100m in height, which makes it seems freakishly small from some angles, and overall complicated to capture. Although the pictures posted by Franks are superb.

While relatively flat compared to Montreal, downtown Vancouver is not flat, it ranges from 0 to roughly 40 meters in elevation.

[Chadillaccc]

http://robmosesphotography.com/2014/06/13/downtown-from-nose-hill-park/

[Monolith]

^That's a nice one of Calgary. Love the contrast with the greenery.

[Robertpuant]

Nice shot of Calgary! It has a muscular chunk of 500' footers like Boston and SF. While still a relatively small city, it is the brightest beacon between the West Coast, Denver, Minneapolis and everything up to the North Pole. The Mongols would've like the territory.

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

While relatively flat compared to Montreal, downtown Vancouver is not flat, it ranges from 0 to roughly 40 meters in elevation.

actually it's even higher than that. the highest point downtown is 70 meters above sea level (where one wall centre is located).

[Villaggio]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jean271972/6578862923/sizes/l

[MolsonExport]

^beautiful.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Terrible news. Edmonton is the last city that can afford to lose a grand old structure. It's one of the few things that give Edmonton a semblance of character and charm.

Not actually.


(Source)

That said, I might have agreed with you if it were being replaced with a bare-bones concrete box girder bridge, but what we're getting is a whole lot better:


(Source)


(Source)


(Source)

[ciudad_del_norte]

^ Yeah, I think its more the High Level/Low Level bridges that we would't want to mess with. I'm not too worried about Walterdale.

[Coldrsx]

(http://i.imgur.com/k0w2xQx.jpg)
by thisisnotmyuseridlol on C2E

[ssiguy]

That's a great shot of Edmonton!

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Daveography

Not actually.

That the new bridge is decent doesn't change the fact that Edmonton will lose one of the few grand old structures it had. Pre war buildings are irreplaceable and a city's architectural diversity goes down a notch every time one is lost. It's troubling that people think just because something is nice that one's heritage is expendable.

A culture is destined to never mature when it doesn't respect where it came from. Every culture of value from Europe to Asia knows this intrinsically. Then again Canada is a very new country so it doesn't surprise me that people don't recognize the folly in it all.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

(http://i.imgur.com/k0w2xQx.jpg)
by thisisnotmyuseridlol on C2E

Is that looking down Jasper Avenue?

[Coldrsx]

Correct.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by isaidso

That the new bridge is decent doesn't change the fact that Edmonton will lose one of the few grand old structures it had. Pre war buildings are irreplaceable and a city's architectural diversity goes down a notch every time one is lost. It's troubling that people think just because something is nice that one's heritage is expendable.

A culture is destined to never mature when it doesn't respect where it came from. Every culture of value from Europe to Asia knows this intrinsically. Then again Canada is a very new country so it doesn't surprise me that people don't recognize the folly in it all.

I agree about architectural diversity, but we have to be careful about considering something valuable just because it's old which really isn't much better than considering it expendable just because it's new. There are wonderful, valuable things that are new, and also subpar, shoddy, expendable things that are old. There are hundreds of bridges practically identical to the older one across NA and they were basically a generic, cookie-cutter design in their day. We have to be careful not to let the veil of time distort our vision.

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by Robertpuant

Nice shot of Calgary! It has a muscular chunk of 500' footers like Boston and SF. While still a relatively small city, it is the brightest beacon between the West Coast, Denver, Minneapolis and everything up to the North Pole. The Mongols would've like the territory.

And add a new 800+ footer (tallest) in the middle of that as well as a Bjarke Ingels designed 700+ footer (3rd tallest) mixed use tower just to the right of The Bow! Lots of new residential along the river in the foreground of the commercial towers too.

[Laceoflight]

Montréal, la ville aux cent soucoupes by Raphaël Thibodeau, on Raphaelthibodeau.com

[csbvan]

That has to be one of the best Montreal shots that I have seen

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I agree about architectural diversity, but we have to be careful about considering something valuable just because it's old which really isn't much better than considering it expendable just because it's new. There are wonderful, valuable things that are new, and also subpar, shoddy, expendable things that are old. There are hundreds of bridges practically identical to the older one across NA and they were basically a generic, cookie-cutter design in their day. We have to be careful not to let the veil of time distort our vision.

Agreed. The bridge has lasted well beyond it's originally designed lifespan, and the cost of preserving it was too high to justify retaining it (and believe me, we saw some very cool and unique proposals for repurposing it). It's old and has plenty of history, but it's not a landmark, it's not an attraction, it's not postcard-worthy photogentic, it's not an architectural masterpiece, nor is it a one-of-a-kind design that isn't replicated anywhere else.

[Monolith]

Vancouver from Burrard Bridge by Miguel Ortiz (Thamur), on Flickr : Taken on January 18, 2015