Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

OMG this is ridiculous. How do you not know that cities out east are denser because they are older. Pre-car-era cities are much denser because people didn't drive and thus wouldn't live in large swaths of land away from downtown. It's also why Canadian cities are denser than american ones, since they built more freeways, allowing people to come from further. If Saskatoon was a port and Halifax wasn't, Halifax would still be much denser, it's one of the oldest cities on the continent for God sakes.

I dunno what u mean by "Denser" Saskatoon Sprawls ALOT! (Infact in terms of Arable Land, correct me if I'm wrong but the Entire Saskatchewan is one of the highest in Canada "Per Capita). So just because the CBD of both Regina & Saskatoon appear to be dense, doesn't mean the whole City is that way & they don't still sprawl ALOT! I'll agree with u that Canadian Cities are Denser than US Cities. However I won't agree with u that Halifax is More Dense than Saskatoon just because it's older. Their are ALOT of factor's.
Halifax is a Port City. (& wherever their are Port Activities, large & thriving CBD's Pop up near those areas for that reason), & a greater commitment to Residential High Rise Living exists in Cities like this. see Boston, NYC, Hong Kong, Singapore etc. It's all Supply & Demand & strategic advantageous settlement patterns.
Saskatoon is NOT a Port, & for that reason their aren't nearly as many of it's residents living in/ around its downtown core as Halifax would have.
What I am saying is if it WAS. Then it would likely have a Skyline more on Par with Halifax (If not bigger). House Prices in Saskatoon are not so expensive, relative to most places in Canada. (& is another reason the City is growing as fast as it is). Because Single Family detached Homes PROMOTE Sprawl. Whereas Condo's/ Apartments do NOT! (Halifax Sprawls too don't get me wrong). But it's still more dense & built up in & around it's core than Saskatoon would be. & Population, Location, as well as AGE plays a huge part of that. U take away @ least 1 or 2 of those factor's & ur looking @ similar sized Skylines. It's another reason why Vancouver's Skyline is bigger than say Charlotte North Carolina. (Despite Similar
Metro Populations).
The Presence of a PORT, makes the Skyline much, much bigger. (For obvious reasons). Most people do not Build The CBD's Miles away/ apart from where their vessels ARE. it wouldn't make any sense to do that right?

[FFX-ME]

• Video Link

Hey Tosin, here is a nice video explaining why older cites are denser than younger ones. Saskatoon was founded in the early 1900s while Halifax was founded in 1749, well before the car era.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

It's probably not due to the scale of the buildings but the street widths.

Probably. When I'm in Toronto, I'm always struck by how much larger the streets seems to me in general. In Montreal, a street with only one line of traffic, lined with triplexes, tends to be be immersive.

[softee]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I just think that for an average small town, small city or suburban Canadian, this

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6590309,-...VqYDcK3IAdmVA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

is a more familiar, more intuitive, and even less "big city intimidating" living environment,

than this

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/La+Font...7!8m2!3d45.5263638!4d-73.5693448!6m1!1e1

If I think of my parents and inlaws, who have never lived in the inner city of a really big city, that based on urban form and feel alone, they'd pick to the Toronto example as a place to live over the Montreal one.

Funny you picked Pembroke Street, since I happen to live on that street. It's probably the most "airy" looking street in that neighbourhood, but it is certainly not typical of what all the streets in that part of the city look like. All you have to do is go one street over to George Street and most people from small towns would indeed be terrified, since it's regarded as one of the worst, most intimidating streets in the city. https://goo.gl/maps/jvQCNXLc6wA2

If you go one street over in the other direction, you're on Sherbourne street, which also has a bad reputation.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by softee

Funny you picked Pembroke Street, since I happen to live on that street. It's probably the most "airy" looking street in that neighbourhood, but it is certainly not typical of what all the streets in that part of the city look like. All you have to do is go one street over to George Street and most people from small towns would indeed be terrified, since it's regarded as one of the worst, most intimidating streets in the city. https://goo.gl/maps/jvQCNXLc6wA2

If you go one street over in the other direction, you're on Sherbourne street, which also has a bad reputation.

A street doesn't have to be "terrifying" in order for non-big city Canadians to be unlikely to want to live there.

George St. isn't so much terrifying as it is simply ugly.

Sherbourne actually isn't that bad looking though sure, it's more packed and a major thoroughfare in comparison to Pembroke.

The street in Montreal I showed isn't terrifying either BTW.

As for the uniqueness of Pembroke, central Toronto is reasonably full of streets like that, as opposed to central Montreal (except for Westmount, which is an exceptional case and an exclusive enclave like Rosedale is.)

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Probably. When I'm in Toronto, I'm always struck by how much larger the streets seems to me in general. In Montreal, a street with only one line of traffic, lined with triplexes, tends to be be immersive.

That's interesting. I have the opposite impression vis-a-vis Montreal. I think that some of the main drags like Park and St. Denis are quite wide compared to comparable streets in Toronto like Bloor or Queen. Then there are the one way streets without utility poles on them like St. Laurent and St. Urbain that feel more vast. Then there are the wide residential boulevards like St. Joseph which have no equivalent in urban Toronto. The downtown streets have a midtown New York grandeur to them, and some of it owes to their wideness: Rene Levesque, Sherbrooke, McGill College.

The most Torontoesque Montreal street, to me, is Mont Royal: one lane in each direction, a weird brew of two storey buildings overwhelmed by garish, backlit signage.

There are, of course, exceptions: Spadina and St. Clair are wide roads, as is College in places.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I have to admit that Manhattan looks impressive in those pictures. I walked around Times Square, went up in the Empire State Building and was down in the financial district close to the NY stock exchange building. I was in Manhattan within several months of 9/11, so it was over 15 years ago. I have been though Laguardia airport since then, but haven't been to Manhattan since.

I have been through Chicago several times, and it is just my personal preference over Manhattan; for one reason, I like the densely packed early 1900's highrises in downtown Chicago. However, of all the cities in the US that I have visited, I like San Francisco the best with its old streetcars, hilly streets, suspension bridges and surrounding scenery.

In any case, this is just personal preference, I am sure there is a reason why some people like Manhattan best.

It's your opinion. I'm not trying to change it. There are things I like about Chicago over Manhattan.

However, you haven't seen Manhattan at all.

It's abundantly clear since this is the second time you brought up densely packed 1900's era high rises.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

That's interesting. I have the opposite impression vis-a-vis Montreal. I think that some of the main drags like Park and St. Denis are quite wide compared to comparable streets in Toronto like Bloor or Queen. Then there are the one way streets without utility poles on them like St. Laurent and St. Urbain that feel more vast. Then there are the wide residential boulevards like St. Joseph which have no equivalent in urban Toronto. The downtown streets have a midtown New York grandeur to them, and some of it owes to their wideness: Rene Levesque, Sherbrooke, McGill College.

The most Torontoesque Montreal street, to me, is Mont Royal: one lane in each direction, a weird brew of two storey buildings overwhelmed by garish, backlit signage.

There are, of course, exceptions: Spadina and St. Clair are wide roads, as is College in places.

Same here.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Acajack

A street doesn't have to be "terrifying" in order for non-big city Canadians to be unlikely to want to live there.

George St. isn't so much terrifying as it is simply ugly.

Sherbourne actually isn't that bad looking though sure, it's more packed and a major thoroughfare in comparison to Pembroke.

The street in Montreal I showed isn't terrifying either BTW.

As for the uniqueness of Pembroke, central Toronto is reasonably full of streets like that, as opposed to central Montreal (except for Westmount, which is an exceptional case and an exclusive enclave like Rosedale is.)

Be hard pressed to find another residential street in Toronto with such high degree of abandonment including burnt out houses. This is likely do to the largest homeless shelter being their neighbour. Most people would be terrified to walk down it at night.

2009
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6585424,-...5s20090501T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

2016
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6585942,-...5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It's your opinion. I'm not trying to change it. There are things I like about Chicago over Manhattan.

However, you haven't seen Manhattan at all.

It's abundantly clear since this is the second time you brought up densely packed 1900's era high rises.

In the post that you quoted where did it say that Chicago or NYC had more early 1900's skyscrapers? I said that I like Chicago because of its its early 1900's skyscrapers; I didn't say that it was lacking Manhattan.

Maybe you just don't know what you are talking about. Maybe you just haven't seen Chicago at all.

This discussion is pointless, I prefer San Francisco over Chicago or NYC. San Francisco is a much more interesting city than either.

Chicago skyline 1920:

(source: http://s933.photobucket.com/user/Taterda...rightSummertownSun_Chicago20sky.jpg.html )


1915 Manhattan skyline:

(source: https://www.favrify.com/new-york-skyline/ )

[Rico Rommheim]

edit.

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It's your opinion. I'm not trying to change it. There are things I like about Chicago over Manhattan.

However, you haven't seen Manhattan at all.

It's abundantly clear since this is the second time you brought up densely packed 1900's era high rises.

I prefer Downtown Toronto over Manhattan as well.
Both of them have a number of Tall Building's,
I just like that Toronto doesn't have as many & thus it
doesn't have to take
u nearly as long to leave the CBD. (Which I see more
as a plus) for reasons such as
Fires, Flooding, Traffic Jams, Construction, Delay's etc.
I just don't like how far Manhattan's Sea of Tall Buildings
goes it's a bit much.

[Laceoflight]

March in Montreal


A Glimpse of Light by Dom4Good, sur 500px

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I just think that for an average small town, small city or suburban Canadian, this

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6590309,-...VqYDcK3IAdmVA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

is a more familiar, more intuitive, and even less "big city intimidating" living environment,

than this

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/La+Font...7!8m2!3d45.5263638!4d-73.5693448!6m1!1e1

If I think of my parents and inlaws, who have never lived in the inner city of a really big city, that based on urban form and feel alone, they'd pick to the Toronto example as a place to live over the Montreal one.

You Cherry picked Neighborhoods, Montreal is dense in some Area's but can't maintain it for as long as Toronto can, but I agree with you. Surprisingly Toronto feels more comfortable to me based on ur 2 Google Street View's.

[softee]

Originally Posted by Acajack

As for the uniqueness of Pembroke, central Toronto is reasonably full of streets like that, as opposed to central Montreal (except for Westmount, which is an exceptional case and an exclusive enclave like Rosedale is.)

That block of Pembroke is a bit of an outlier being so close to downtown, there are more than a usual number of detached houses (although most are now subdivided into apartments), and the homes are set back a little farther from the street allowing for bigger than usual front lawns compared to surrounding streets in the area. When the street was first built up, it was considered somewhat of an upperclass street for the area.

[Brizzy82]

Winnipeg aerial (from summer 2016)


Winnipeg From Above by Ben Senior, on Flickr

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

That's interesting. I have the opposite impression vis-a-vis Montreal. I think that some of the main drags like Park and St. Denis are quite wide compared to comparable streets in Toronto like Bloor or Queen. Then there are the one way streets without utility poles on them like St. Laurent and St. Urbain that feel more vast. Then there are the wide residential boulevards like St. Joseph which have no equivalent in urban Toronto. The downtown streets have a midtown New York grandeur to them, and some of it owes to their wideness: Rene Levesque, Sherbrooke, McGill College.

The most Torontoesque Montreal street, to me, is Mont Royal: one lane in each direction, a weird brew of two storey buildings overwhelmed by garish, backlit signage.

There are, of course, exceptions: Spadina and St. Clair are wide roads, as is College in places.

All your exemples are about commercial streets, while I was more talking about residential streets lined with triplexes. In Le Plateau, boul. Saint-Joseph is the exception to the rules.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

You Cherry picked Neighborhoods, Montreal is dense in some Area's but can't maintain it for as long as Toronto can, but I agree with you. Surprisingly Toronto feels more comfortable to me based on ur 2 Google Street View's.

I depends what kind of density we're talking about. The mid-density level of Montreal's traditionnal triplexes has not match anywhere in Canada. In Montreal, you go from downtown to miles and miles of that kind of density. But there is very little highrises there in the mix though, contrary to Toronto. But in Toronto, I find you get to single detached homes quite a bit quicker than you do in Montreal.

For Montreal, I'm talking this kind of density:

Originally Posted by Leaceoflight

An interesting non-skyline picture.
I was kind of scared of posting it under the interesting skyline pic I just posted in the skyline thread... so here it is !


Montreal by Dom4Good, on 500px

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Brizzy82

Winnipeg aerial (from summer 2016)


Winnipeg From Above by Ben Senior, on Flickr

Winnipeg looks good. I like the baseball stadium next to the river and all the green spaces around the downtown core.

Does Winnipeg have many early 1900's highrises or midrises? At one time (long ago) wasn't it considered to be the Chicago of the North?

Content removed