The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Trans Canada

We're comparing a 4.2 million city to a 1.4 million city, of course the 4.2 is going to come out on top almost every time. But the fact that 1.4 is competitive in some aspects is impressive. That's why Calgarians fight back in these debates - because there are aspects where Calgary surpasses Montreal. This is what people are most proud of.

This debate pops up regularly in the skyline thread because one of those few aspects where Calgary comes out on top is in the tall tower department. And I don't think it's all that outlandish to claim that the city with taller towers has a better skyline. You might disagree but it's not a ridiculous claim.

And nobody said Calgary's #1. I think it's widely accepted that Toronto smokes the rest of Canada in almost every respect, with Montreal and Vancouver picking up the scraps.


edit-removed image so that it doesn't take away from my post

Well this is 2015 if you want to get real technical the Population of Calgary's Metro Area today is likely about: 1,441,756 (At present) so a 76,929 Person growth from Statistic's Canada's Previous Estimate of about 1,364,827 (Thats the Metro Area Growing at Just over 4000 People a Month over the last 19 Months) & the Calgary Region is just over 1.5 Million now (so add an additional 80,000 or so people to that 1.4 Number) don't believe me? Even the Metro Calgary has been saying we have passed 1.5 Million in the Region & many Reditor's as well! So start referring to Calgary moreso as 1.5 Million people for the balance of 2015, I'm saying about 1.6 Mil over the next couple of years.

"Metro Calgary" The Calgary health zone, which includes some 1.5 million residents of the city and surrounding area, scores above Canada, as a whole, in eight of nine “health status” ->
http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/1252085...althier-lives-than-other-canadians-cihi/

"Eating early and going to bed early isn't a Calgary specific thing, it's how most people operate everywhere. Being in a city of 1.5 million we have less volume of people driving late night activities compared to cities twice our size." ->
http://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/2k93ua/why_does_everything_in_calgary_start_and_end_so/

I think this Assumption is fair considering that Alberta is basically 4.2 Million people at this present moment in time. (Also I seriously doubt Montreal's Metro is 4.2 Million already) More like 4.1 (According to 2014 Estimates) I don't see how it can grow by 100k in 1 year (like the same rate as the GTA) Wiki Even Lists its as the 9th Largest City in North America now instead of 8th where it last had it! (Infact I believe 4.1 is fairly generous in the population distribution for Montreal in & all its suburbs in general considering I highly doubt if half of the Province of Quebec is truely living in the Montreal area) after all in 2011 Statistic's Canada has Montreal's Metro area pegged at 3,824,221 (so unless there was an undercount of some kind thats one massive jump!) Also Montreal's Population according to Statistics Canada for the CMA was 3,981,802 July 1st, 2013 (Which seems much more likely/ believable to me but it still makes it a huge jump to 4.1 Million today). -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal

Finally about Calgary, the City itself (Proper) I got it pegged at around 1,227,744 People (But remember these are only estimates I'm not a real census taker I'm just factoring the average growth rates).

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Yes, we all know that's your opinion... You said it many times. Let's not start this debate.

But best in North America? No hate on Calgary, but what about New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia? Did you ever travel down south, by curiosity? You seem to have rather limited knowledge of US cities/skylines...

Calgary has more High Rise Buildings Completed in its core than Seattle & Pittsburgh (It also has more than those Cities currently under construction even if u include their suburbs).

Originally Posted by DarthMalgus

To be fair, density in Calgary does drop off quite quickly from the downtown across the river and once outside the super-dense Beltline, at least compared with other large Canadian cities (even places like Ottawa or Hamilton). But it's a city that has grown from probably less than 150,000 after World War 2 to 10 times that population now and in spite of that has maintained a remarkably strong downtown core. In fact, driving around downtown today I was struck by how Calgary looks like a city of 3 million or more when you are downtown; then once you leave it, it becomes apparent that its actually more like 1.5m. that said, there is a ton of intensification happening in the inner ring communities, although most of it (outside of the densest inner city neighbourhoods) is of moderate densities (I was in Portland recently and the scale of development in those inner ring neighbourhoods was quite similar).

We definitely do not have the dense fabric of streetcar suburbs that the other big cities can claim (except perhaps Edmonton, which is also a young city). However, urbanity discussion aside, the skyline is awesome, and this is, after all, the Skyline thread.

Your exactly right its 1.5 Mil but it feels like 3 Calgary is really gaining alot of Urbanity of late.

[koops65]

Originally Posted by Ashok

I don't want to discredit the work you put into making that list, because it looks like you put in a lot of effort and good effort too.

I agree with your approach of using data, but there is something flawed in what your data represents. According to your data, Calgary has a skyline 25% bigger than what is below... (this mismatch happened because you only considered buildings 90m.) Also, this photo doesn't show the entirety of Montreal's downtown.

OK, lets keep going with this...
Buildings between 61 metres and 91.3 metres:
Montreal - 129
Calgary - 94

Buildings between 35 metres and 60.9 metres:
Montreal - 448
Calgary - 172

This last cut-off is clearly where Montreal flexes its muscle over Calgary...

So, Montreal has more short high-rise buildings than Calgary does.
That will definitely contribute to the density, and overall look, but since Calgary's downtown core is less spread out, it will appear far more dense than you might otherwise imagine. Also, large numbers of those 35 - 61 metre towers are not downtown, in either city, but very likely far more of them are scattered around Montreal than in Calgary.

If you want to compare relatively short buildings (in a skyline context) then Montreal has more than Calgary does, no argument there. But kick 🞵🞵🞵 skylines benefit from having tall buildings (in my personal opinion), the more the better in most cases, and in that department Calgary out-performs Montreal.

We should have a poll on this topic, to see where we all stand on the issue of height vs. density. How many would vote for a single 1000 foot tower as being "better" than ten 100 foot towers, or one hundred 10 foot towers?

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Mrs Sauga

No that's not pretty clear at all actually. CBD height, yes it is clear. but "overall skyline" is much more than CBD height. Ther have countless rankings on Canadian skylines and Toronto ranks #1 in the majority. However, the #2 spot as seen Montreal, Vancouver, and Calgary all have their share in that spot. So no I don't think it's "pretty clear" at all.

I think Vancouver is 2nd Best, why? It looks incredible from almost any Angle, + It has BC Place, something Calgary & Montreal can't match, & the amazing Scenery around it! I also think Vancouver is 2nd Best because of the Color Contrast, most buildings in the CBD are the same Color which makes an incredible reflection in the water (another waterfront view Calgary & Montreal can't beat), It also has the Shang Ri La & Beaches around it, Vancouver looks more like a city of 4 Million to me so Calgary & Montreal should be competing for the #3rd Spot with Calgary just barely beating Montreal.

[Ashok]

Originally Posted by koops65

OK, lets keep going with this...
Buildings between 61 metres and 91.3 metres:
Montreal - 129
Calgary - 94

Buildings between 35 metres and 60.9 metres:
Montreal - 448
Calgary - 172

This last cut-off is clearly where Montreal flexes its muscle over Calgary...

So, Montreal has more short high-rise buildings than Calgary does.
That will definitely contribute to the density, and overall look, but since Calgary's downtown core is less spread out, it will appear far more dense than you might otherwise imagine. Also, large numbers of those 35 - 61 metre towers are not downtown, in either city, but very likely far more of them are scattered around Montreal than in Calgary.

If you want to compare relatively short buildings (in a skyline context) then Montreal has more than Calgary does, no argument there. But kick 🞵🞵🞵 skylines benefit from having tall buildings (in my personal opinion), the more the better in most cases, and in that department Calgary out-performs Montreal.

We should have a poll on this topic, to see where we all stand on the issue of height vs. density. How many would vote for a single 1000 foot tower as being "better" than ten 100 foot towers, or one hundred 10 foot towers?

Tsk, tsk, you go through this data driven approach, and you come to a subjective solution.

[Beedok]

You guys are all just jealous your cities aren't Hamilton.

[Martin Mtl]

Montreal's skyline is small, dated and rather ugly, while Calgary is big, very modern and strikingly beautiful. There. Can we move on ?

[OTSkyline]

Urgh, 5 pages of this stupid sh*t I had to read/scroll through?

Please... enough is enough. Go bicker in the "Great Canadian debate thread".

Thanks.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

It annoyed me when I thought he made that statement based on a picture but it turned out he didn't.

What rubbed me the wrong way is the conviction with which you argue about a place you've never been.

Sorry for that. I am firmly of the opinion that, for example, an aerial shot of LA reasonably suffices for a New Yorker to declare something like "wow, considering it's the #2 metro, that downtown looks tall but very small". Which for the record I didn't even say, I just stepped in to elaborate after someone said it and got laughed at for it...

And yes, there's going to be PLENTY of street-level info missing in the aerial shot (Broadway was a hive of activity --and FWIW, I don't think Calgary has anything that comes close to the pre-WWII urban fabric of Broadway-- and so was the Market, but the CBD itself was totally devoid of pedestrians, I and a few homeless people were pretty much the only ones, my observations mirror yours there) but if you're not getting into that, and just saying that the tall towers quickly give way to much lower density neighborhoods, seems to me you can very well make that statement from pictures only and be correct.

If you've never been somewhere, you obviously have to be more careful about what you say, but even if you have been somewhere, it might have changed since (for example, LA, you've been much more recently than me), and even if you were there recently, you might not be as thoroughly familiar with it as others... where does it stop? If no one dared say anything about anywhere unless they've personally lived there for a reasonably long while, the Canada section would be pretty empty, users would just stick to their hometowns' subforums.

On that note, I suppose we can agree to agree, or agree to disagree. Back to skylines... until someone says something that rubs someone else the wrong way.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by martin mtl

montreal's skyline is small, dated and rather ugly, while calgary is big, very modern and strikingly beautiful. There. Can we move on ?

+1

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

Urgh, 5 pages of this stupid sh*t I had to read/scroll through?

Please... enough is enough. Go bicker in the "Great Canadian debate thread".

Thanks.

Pretty one sided bickering to me. Can we say .."No sense of place"?

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Exactly. We have Mission, Cliff Bungalo, Lower Mount Royal, Sunalta, Kensington (Sunnyside and Hillhurst), Centre Street, Inglewood, and Ramsay all literally surrounding the downtown/beltline city core. Anyone who thinks we go directly into suburbia outside of downtown has no clue what they're even talking about. Beyond those neighbourhoods lie many others with densities of 2000 - 5000/km2 (hardly suburban density) ringing downtown such as Mount Pleasant, Altadore, South Calgary, West Hillhurst, Renfrew, Rosedale, Bankview, Kilarney, Erlton, Windsor Park, Richmond, Scarboro, Parkdale, Crescent Heights, Tuxedo Park, Hounsfield/Briar Hill, etc... Maybe read something about what you're talking about first before barfing out words on the internet.

That's fine that you like to promote Calgary as urbanized, but these areas you listed, a lot of them are not dense at all compared to the other larger cities. Sorry, but posts like this I don't like because it's almost flagrant misinformation coupled with a snarky remark.

You just seem unwilling to accept that Calgary has a lot of building up to do. There are 170 000 people living in the 5.2 sq km's that make up dt Vancouver and Central Broadway. Similar numbers for Toronto and Montreal. Go Calgary and all, but try to keep it real and maybe you'll get some positive feedback.

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

Why do people think Calgary goes from skyscrapers to single family houses immediately? Has anyone commenting on this even been there? I was there 2 weeks ago and I found the downtown's periphery to be pretty much like any other major city I have lived in.

You obviously live in Vancouver. Without trying to sound defensive, but it's not even close to the same as Vancouver TO or YUL. Another post that is just flat out wrong.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

Calgary has more High Rise Buildings Completed in its core than Seattle & Pittsburgh (It also has more than those Cities currently under construction even if u include their suburbs.

You don't get it do you... Ranking skylines is not only about height, it's also about density and quality... So saying Calgary's is better than Pittsburgh's or Seattle's just because it has more tall buildings is idiotic. I hope you understood my point now.

Back to skylines now please.

[Trans Canada]

^ Yes, we all know that's your opinion... You said it many times.


IMG_7748beautiful morning off deck Edmonton by russhayes1948, on Flickr


Cold night in Edmonton Alberta by Barry Ryziuk, on Flickr


2014-11-07 Footbridge by bulliver too, on Flickr (regular on SSP Edmonton)


Untitled by madeline.kruschke, on Flickr

[SkahHigh]

^ that third Edmonton shot is great

[TownGuy]

This is from someone's backyard on the island


The Door to Toronto by renejsmith, on Flickr

[Mrs Sauga]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

You don't get it do you... Ranking skylines is not only about height, it's also about density and quality... So saying Calgary's is better than Pittsburgh's or Seattle's just because it has more tall buildings is idiotic. I hope you understood my point now.

Back to skylines now please.

What?? Calgary is definitely better than Pittsburgh! Not Seattle though. Maybe I'll have to check out more Pittsburgh pics, but it looked small.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by TownGuy

This is from someone's backyard on the island


The Door to Toronto by renejsmith, on Flickr

Jaw-dropping. I was amazed by these cottages when I visited the Toronto Islands back in 2011. How much do they cost you think?

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Mrs Sauga

What?? Calgary is definitely better than Pittsburgh! Not Seattle though. Maybe I'll have to check out more Pittsburgh pics, but it looked small.

Yeah you could say that. I like Pittsburgh's setting with the Ohio river though. Plus I love One PPG Place.

[Mrs Sauga]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

I think Vancouver is 2nd Best, why? It looks incredible from almost any Angle, + It has BC Place, something Calgary & Montreal can't match, & the amazing Scenery around it! I also think Vancouver is 2nd Best because of the Color Contrast, most buildings in the CBD are the same Color which makes an incredible reflection in the water (another waterfront view Calgary & Montreal can't beat), It also has the Shang Ri La & Beaches around it, Vancouver looks more like a city of 4 Million to me so Calgary & Montreal should be competing for the #3rd Spot with Calgary just barely beating Montreal.

I'm glad you mention BC Place because yes buildings like that (and Canada Place, and bridges, and church spires) are not skyscrapers and don't count when talking about height, but they are part of a skyline and they do add to it.

I'm still of the belief that natural setting is something different though. Which is why I wouldn't rank Vancouver high because of its surroundings. I would judge it on it's height, density, balance, architecture, shape etc.

And Canada's #2 is definitely subjective as evident by your post. You state Vancouver's "same color buildings" as a plus.. well that's probably the one thing I hate about Vancouver the most lol.

[Mrs Sauga]

And that is an AMAZING Toronto shot.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

You don't get it do you... Ranking skylines is not only about height, it's also about density and quality... So saying Calgary's is better than Pittsburgh's or Seattle's just because it has more tall buildings is idiotic. I hope you understood my point now.

Back to skylines now please.

I always find it amusing how people try and use this technique to end an off-topic or tedious discussion. They don't have the willpower themselves to let it go and can't resist making whatever point they want, but then expect the other side to resist the bait and get back on topic!

"Now that I've had my say, repeated my position and declared the opposing argument stupid or idiotic, let's all just move on and let me have the final word!"

In reality, if you want to end a particular discussion, the most effective way is to simply stop discussing it. Adding anything contentious will only fuel it further and bait others to continue to respond.

Not that I haven't semi-enjoyed the circus, but not really because of the actual content and more because it's so amazing how people can have the same discussion so many times without seeming to get bored with it or even remember the previous times.