Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I guess I'm the one that gets triggered by statements like this, so I'll chime in. Toronto's residential vernacular looks like nowhere in the US, and the commercial streets look like nowhere in the US save for maybe parts of lower-slung sections of Brooklyn or Queens.

The caveat always being that Toronto still looks North American to people from other continents.

That's my point, I suppose. With Europe and Asia, I can usually immediately identify which country I am looking at by the street vibe. It's much more difficult here, nor do I think there's one element (aside from those very distinctive places) that immediately smack me as 'I'm in Canada' and nowhere else.

Hence, the accent analogy. You're sitting on an airplane going somewhere in North America. You start chatting to your seatmate. Unless they have a very distinctive accent, you're going to have to dig a lot deeper and pay much more attention to subtlety to guess where they're from.

Originally Posted by someone123

It's subjective. If we showed pictures to Martians they could say "yeah, these are all just boxes for earthlings made out of earth plants or earth dirt, whether we're talking Tokyo or Regina". I would hope SSP could do a little better than the level of sophistication/taste in architecture or urban environments of an average TV show or movie audience! And I'm skeptical that average Americans would have no idea if you were showing them a random shot of Toronto or NYC. Of course in practice on SSP we have no problem identifying these buildings as belonging to a given city or region most of the time. This belies the argument that these places are all the same, to a large degree. If they really were the same you would not be able to tell the difference (without non-architectural tells like license plates; the earlier picture was in fact a joke).

Within a lot of regions you can even often tell where the inspiration came from a given building. Those Fergus houses being one example. They really don't count as "Anywheresville" architecture except based on a very limited view of architecture (maybe at the level of "all old-timey stone houses look the same").

It's the degree I'm mostly quibbling on and the fact that our country has no single unique style that's definitive of us.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I guess I'm the one that gets triggered by statements like this, so I'll chime in. Toronto's residential vernacular looks like nowhere in the US, and the commercial streets look like nowhere in the US save for maybe parts of lower-slung sections of Brooklyn or Queens.

The caveat always being that Toronto still looks North American to people from other continents.

The grid system or rectangular blocks of North American cities totally give them away, despite having some European features in certain older buildings and structures.

Another thing is the lack of paint markings on most vehicular roads, as compared to certain places like Germany and the UK.

[Vin]

delete

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by someone123

It's subjective. If we showed pictures to Martians they could say "yeah, these are all just boxes for earthlings made out of earth plants or earth dirt, whether we're talking Tokyo or Regina". I would hope SSP could do a little better than the level of sophistication/taste in architecture or urban environments of an average TV show or movie audience! And I'm skeptical that average Americans would have no idea if you were showing them a random shot of Toronto or NYC. Of course in practice on SSP we have no problem identifying these buildings as belonging to a given city or region most of the time. This belies the argument that these places are all the same, to a large degree. If they really were the same you would not be able to tell the difference (without non-architectural tells like license plates; the earlier picture was in fact a joke).

Within a lot of regions you can even often tell where the inspiration came from a given building. Those Fergus houses being one example. They really don't count as "Anywheresville" architecture except based on a very limited view of architecture (maybe at the level of "all old-timey stone houses look the same").

I'm not sure if this is a reflection of the audience however, filmmakers don't avoid streetcar tracks. Toronto's residential streets have the same vibe as Brooklyns despite very different vernacular. It's hard to replicate the vibe from the majority of the continental US within Toronto and its nondescript suburbs.

Maritime subdivisions are decidedly more anywhere American. Wider lots, cladding, vernacular and, minimal fencing. One storey in the front with two in the back and the front entrance split between the two floors is a popular design throughout (northern) NA

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by thewave46

That's my point, I suppose. With Europe and Asia, I can usually immediately identify which country I am looking at by the street vibe. It's much more difficult here, nor do I think there's one element (aside from those very distinctive places) that immediately smack me as 'I'm in Canada' and nowhere else.

Hence, the accent analogy. You're sitting on an airplane going somewhere in North America. You start chatting to your seatmate. Unless they have a very distinctive accent, you're going to have to dig a lot deeper and pay much more attention to subtlety to guess where they're from.

It's the degree I'm mostly quibbling on and the fact that our country has no single unique style that's definitive of us.

My mind has wandered on a few occasions about how in many countries you could probably forgo passport checks for most returning nationals to the country, and admit them just by speech and accent. (In the absence of course of any other purpose passport controls would have - like apprehending wanted criminals.)

Seriously, who speaks Icelandic or Japanese, looks Icelandic or Japanese, has an Icelandic or Japanese name, and doesn't have a right to enter Iceland or Japan?

Obviously in our bureaucratized world things can't work like that, but you wouldn't make that many mistakes (ie you wouldn't hardly ever let anyone in who doesn't belong there) if you were to have that as one of your screening criteria.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I'm not sure if this is a reflection of the audience however, filmmakers don't avoid streetcar tracks. Toronto's residential streets have the same vibe as Brooklyns despite very different vernacular. It's hard to replicate the vibe from the majority of the continental US within Toronto and its nondescript suburbs.

Maritime subdivisions are decidedly more anywhere American. Wider lots, cladding, vernacular and, minimal fencing. One storey in the front with two in the back and the front entrance split between the two floors is a popular design throughout (northern) NA

I actually find that the modern Toronto burbs often look like US Sunbelt suburbs in the way they're laid out (think those of Phoenix, Vegas and in inland Greater LA). With radically different vegetation and building materials of course.

[WhipperSnapper]

Could be. I've never been to Phoenix or Vegas off the strip.

Is there really that much difference between a master planned Chinese shipbuilding city and a South Korean one? Ignoring reading the advertisements, of course.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

My mind has wandered on a few occasions about how in many countries you could probably forgo passport checks for most returning nationals to the country, and admit them just by speech and accent. (In the absence of course of any other purpose passport controls would have - like apprehending wanted criminals.)

Seriously, who speaks Icelandic or Japanese, looks Icelandic or Japanese, has an Icelandic or Japanese name, and doesn't have a right to enter Iceland or Japan?

Obviously in our bureaucratized world things can't work like that, but you wouldn't make that many mistakes (ie you wouldn't hardly ever let anyone in who doesn't belong there) if you were to have that as one of your screening criteria.

You could even reduce your criteria list even further and stick to speech for many countries - for basically every country that's the only one on the planet to have that language, anyone speaking the language perfectly and unaccentedly is almost certainly going to have the right to be in the country.

Black dude shows up at customs in Helsinki airport and starts talking naturally in perfect unaccented Finnish, if you have to guess you're almost certainly not wrong letting him in without further control.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by thewave46

It's the degree I'm mostly quibbling on and the fact that our country has no single unique style that's definitive of us.

I don't disagree although I think Canada actually has become a bit more distinctive over time, and the minimum for architectural distinctiveness relative to the US may have been as far back as about 1930.

American cities don't really follow the same pattern of infill for the most part and there are almost no historic cities that allow a lot of urban infill. There's may be only 1 North American city that has lots of colourful historic wooden houses and lots of new highrises going up next to them. I didn't plan this out but here's another angle taken a few years back of those same buildings. Anywheresville, Northeastern US:



(Note that I'm not arguing this is amazing, just that it doesn't look like it could be wherever, or really even in the US probably. They would murder you if you tried to build these new buildings in Charlestown.)

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Maritime subdivisions are decidedly more anywhere American. Wider lots, cladding, vernacular and, minimal fencing.

I'm not sure around the region but in metro Halifax this style of construction went the way of the dodo around 2014 and these days new housing is around 3/4 multi-unit. It was mostly multi even in the early 2000's. The median new unit, urbanity-wise, is probably a concrete slab type building in a semi-suburban area.

[WhipperSnapper]

I was ignoring multi-family altogether.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by thewave46

I'm curious about what that 'Canadian look' is.

The skylines of most of our major cities look pretty standard North American to my eye. International-style towers with a smattering of apartment blocks and condos. The occasional Art Deco tower in older parts of the country with New York being the most distinctive example. Take away the signature pieces that define certain Canadian cities, paste them against a blank backdrop, and they're pretty generic. Which was the whole point of the International Style.

If we're talking street-level vibe, the shift from northeast to southwest is more the pattern. Someone might confuse parts of Brooklyn and Montreal as being in the same country, or even the same city. It's less a 'country' thing and more a pre-WWII development thing in North America.

Quebec City, old Montreal and Victoria are outliers. Vancouver might have a slightly more Asian tinge with the generic condo skyline.

Sorry slow reply, got busy at work yesterday.

Unfortunately I am not the best at describing these things.

For me it’s not one or two major elements that separate them but dozens if not more smaller details that culminate into a different vibe.

The same way how Australian cities have their own vibe, despite having many similarities to their Canadian and American counterparts.

I can even feel the difference between New Zealand cities and Australian.

Or how Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese cities all have their own style despite looking very similar at first glance. Hence many on here just say “Asian vibe” rather than a specific Asian country. But they all do have their own aesthetic style.

So, how Canadian cities feel different than American.

Maybe for me the pieces are as fallows:

First is the architectural style. There is a difference. For example the recent generation of condo towers (starting with Van in the 90s) built in Canada do look different to the average current condo stock built in the US. Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal, Halifax, they all have a Canadian condo tower look. The same way that Canadian brutalist architecture to me has its own distinctive vibe, and then there are features such as the Railway Hotels and Legislative buildings that are all very non American in style.

From there is the built form, larger cores on average than their American counterparts.

Then there are the highways. Most American downtown cores are completely encircled by massive multi leveled super wide freeways. This is not seen in Canada. Even the highway networks in Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal have a much more subdued feel. Relatively narrower, nearly no full stack interchanges, and often more weaved through the urban fabric than plowing thorough it.

There are many more attributes that come together to give a skyline / aerial view of a Canadian city a distinctive vibe from those in America.

Yes, there are always outliers and blurred lines, but that’s true comparing cities of any country to each other.

And I do find it interesting how Victoria is always forgotten when people say “west of Ontario.”

Victoria has never given me an American vibe at all. If anything it’s far more akin to New Zealand or Tasmania in vibe if we must give it a foreign comparison.

[Martin Mtl]

Source: https://www.facebook.com/PHotographies-102656485281184/

[Metro-One]

Damn I’m good at killing these conversations…

[Monolith]

The calm between the storms - Vancouver by James Drummond, on Flickr

[davee930]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Damn I’m good at killing these conversations…

You do it in style though.

I just crash and burn.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Damn I’m good at killing these conversations…

You could have just said "same meat, different potatoes & sauce".
Bit overall, a very good explanation.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by davee930

You do it in style though.

I just crash and burn.

Glad to know I’m not the only one.

Originally Posted by Architype

You could have just said "same meat, different potatoes & sauce".
Bit overall, a very good explanation.

Dang, you summed up my thoughts better than I ever could!

[Architype]

@Monolith, the new & taller building designs add some much needed texture in the Vancouver skyline, and different from the blue/green glass, still very much Vancouver, but with more modern panache.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Sorry slow reply, got busy at work yesterday.

Unfortunately I am not the best at describing these things.

For me it’s not one or two major elements that separate them but dozens if not more smaller details that culminate into a different vibe.

The same way how Australian cities have their own vibe, despite having many similarities to their Canadian and American counterparts.

I can even feel the difference between New Zealand cities and Australian.

Or how Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese cities all have their own style despite looking very similar at first glance. Hence many on here just say “Asian vibe” rather than a specific Asian country. But they all do have their own aesthetic style.

So, how Canadian cities feel different than American.

Maybe for me the pieces are as fallows:

First is the architectural style. There is a difference. For example the recent generation of condo towers (starting with Van in the 90s) built in Canada do look different to the average current condo stock built in the US. Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal, Halifax, they all have a Canadian condo tower look. The same way that Canadian brutalist architecture to me has its own distinctive vibe, and then there are features such as the Railway Hotels and Legislative buildings that are all very non American in style.

From there is the built form, larger cores on average than their American counterparts.

Then there are the highways. Most American downtown cores are completely encircled by massive multi leveled super wide freeways. This is not seen in Canada. Even the highway networks in Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal have a much more subdued feel. Relatively narrower, nearly no full stack interchanges, and often more weaved through the urban fabric than plowing thorough it.

There are many more attributes that come together to give a skyline / aerial view of a Canadian city a distinctive vibe from those in America.

Yes, there are always outliers and blurred lines, but that’s true comparing cities of any country to each other.

And I do find it interesting how Victoria is always forgotten when people say “west of Ontario.”

Victoria has never given me an American vibe at all. If anything it’s far more akin to New Zealand or Tasmania in vibe if we must give it a foreign comparison.

You raise a lot of good points here.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Then there are the highways. Most American downtown cores are completely encircled by massive multi leveled super wide freeways. This is not seen in Canada.

I think it's easy to dismiss each individual thing as being minor or something (else) somebody might not notice but they can and do add up to large differences. I find Seattle and Portland to be very different from Vancouver even though "on paper" they should be similar (similar size, same region). The highways and transit alone create a big difference in how each city functions.

People tend to focus on the nicer stuff but there are a lot of unique mundane aspects too, one Vancouver example being Vancouver Specials and all those packed in houses in East Van that are fairly distinctive even though I would not call them beautiful. In 1910 I would guess that Vancouver was building more similar houses to Seattle than in 1980, i.e. there was less distinctiveness in early industrial housing (Craftsmen houses and many styles that were basically made from kits, even brick apartment buildings) than in some modern era stuff.

Another subtle difference that I think affects a lot of things is how Canadian urban construction (both buildings and infrastructure) seems more likely to be aimed at average or middle class people. The US has more gold-plated grand construction and then areas that are falling apart, while Canada has more modest condos or "cheap and cheerful" looking developments. American developments often look scaled up by about 20%. Often the Canadian scaling is more like say London than Chicago.

Yet another comment I will make is that there aren't really that many cities so it's not that hard for them to be relatively unique. Many regions of North America have only a handful of major cities. There are arguably around half a dozen Toronto-sized cities in North America in total.