Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[WhipperSnapper]

We were gaining around 100,000 more foreign students per year before Covid which has also impacted career college bankruptcies on top of the high price of doing business in Toronto, for example. These students tend to be wealthier than immigrants looking for a better life (opposed to those with other motives to immigrate here) and more likely to make an immediate investment in Canada real estate.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

It's hard for Canadians to imagine right now while we have 400,000 immigrants a year, but one day growth will taper off here too, and the skylines of Canadian cities will be frozen in amber. The early 21st century boom will then form an instantly recognizable typology synonymous with "Canada", and architectural features that we lament, like window wall and spandrel, will have a bit of a cult following.

All of our skylines are kind of converging into one another, but none of them are converging with skylines of cities in other countries. For a country that doesn't have a lot of national unity, it's kind of fascinating to see Halifax, Toronto, Kitchener, Montreal, Saskatoon and Kelowna all build nuanced variations of the same thing, while there's nothing of the sort happening in Portland, Maine or Bismarck, ND or Spokane.

It's kind of like how all Brazilian cities look like they were built in 1964, or all Japanese cities have that "look".

Good post. Never thought of it that way, but you are right, there is a certain Canadian "look" emerging. It's crystal clear in Japan and you can even see it in Australia. I guess it's no surprise that we would get our own too.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by esquire

Good post. Never thought of it that way, but you are right, there is a certain Canadian "look" emerging. It's crystal clear in Japan and you can even see it in Australia. I guess it's no surprise that we would get our own too.

Canadian land use and transit are different too and all of that adds up to really different character. This all goes against the narrative that Canada and the US are converging (although some US cities have a lot of infill and improved transit too, and they have their own strengths) and there's little that is culturally unique in Canada at this point. I think this city planning and development stuff is as important to people's lives as the shows they watch for entertainment, even though people may notice it less.

[Martin Mtl]

Source

[TorontoDrew]

We are losing the view of my favorite buildings with generic condos. A bit like what's happened from certain views in Toronto of it's office towers.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

We are losing the view of my favorite buildings with generic condos. A bit like what's happened from certain views in Toronto of it's office towers.

There is ONE big condo tower UC in this pic. I wish there would be many more.

Also:

A while back: "Montreal is stagnant. Its skyline never changes. It's terrible."
Now: "Montreal's skyline is changing. New buildings are hiding older ones. It's terrible."

[Harrison]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Dubai is crushingly autocentric and that was already before the fun and whimsy was edited out of the fanciful masterplans post 2008 bust. The average development is closer to 15 storeys and is certainly not a higher architectural standards than in Canada.

Cause it's too damn hot to move around the city unless you are in an air-conditioned environment (i.e. a vehicle of some sort).

[Martin Mtl]

Vidéo on Instagram by sky.semijon.aerial

[Martin Mtl]

Photo: @unvegetalienamontreal

[Rico Rommheim]

Montreal Skyline from the Champlain Bridge (1) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr


Montreal Skyline from the Champlain Bridge (2) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr


Montreal from the Champlain Bridge (4) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr


Montreal from the Champlain Bridge (5) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr


Montreal from the Champlain Bridge (6) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr


Montreal Skyline from Champlain Bridge (7) by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr

[MolsonExport]

Montreal's missing teeth skyline gaps are finally being plugged. Hopefully it does not lead to a complete table-top skyline.

[Rico Rommheim]

Funny I was just thinking about that, I can't really call MTL's skyline as "table-top" or "land-locked", it's the teeth gap effect that you referred. But I'm comfortable with this: peaks and valleys that are allowed by breathing spaces in the skyline. That allows for individual buildings to accent out (notice the 1501 McGill, the Sunlife, the Chateau Champlain), instead of blending into a borg-like mass.

I think the term-du-jour on the internets is the term "picket-fence", Montreal has the picket-fence effect.

[MolsonExport]

Strangely, I actually miss the old pole (antenna) on the CIBC tower (one of my favorite international-style buildings anywhere).

back when CIBC had a cool logo:

[Rico Rommheim]

Yeah the removal of the antenna took me off guard (last year?), it really makes the CIBC look smaller and more generic. They should have kept it as a memento.

[MonkeyRonin]

https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2022/06/purple-skies


https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2022/06/pink-skies


https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2022/06/dusky-sky

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

There is ONE big condo tower UC in this pic. I wish there would be many more.

Also:

A while back: "Montreal is stagnant. Its skyline never changes. It's terrible."
Now: "Montreal's skyline is changing. New buildings are hiding older ones. It's terrible."

Yeah I think there's a lot of nuance there. At a basic level, a lot of changes are bitter sweet in that you're losing something at the same time as gaining. But I think it goes beyond that. When most people say that they're tired of the status quo and want a change, it's implicitly assumed to mean a positive change (from the speaker's perspective). In other words, what they're really looking for is best described as "progress." So it's a mistake to see a contradiction in someone wanting change while not being being pleased with a particular type of change. With Montreal, I think what a lot of people wanted was more rather than different. More tall office buildings dominating the skyline and more shorter filler buildings of various types mixed in adding density without detracting from the talls. A lot of people hold office buildings in higher regard, both aesthetically and symbolically. They tend to have higher budgets and therefore high quality materials, they symbolize economic power, they're often larger (thicker) than others of the same height, and have cleaner-looking facades due to lack of balconies.

That being said, so far I'm fairly pleased with the changes in Montreal. I'd prefer if office projects like Deloitte and Manuvie had been bigger and some of the condos smaller, but it's still a net improvement. However, if the skyline gets completely smothered in blue glass that's a different story.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yeah I think there's a lot of nuance there. At a basic level, a lot of changes are bitter sweet in that you're losing something at the same time as gaining. But I think it goes beyond that. When most people say that they're tired of the status quo and want a change, it's implicitly assumed to mean a positive change (from the speaker's perspective). In other words, what they're really looking for is best described as "progress." So it's a mistake to see a contradiction in someone wanting change while not being being pleased with a particular type of change. With Montreal, I think what a lot of people wanted was more rather than different. More tall office buildings dominating the skyline and more shorter filler buildings of various types mixed in adding density without detracting from the talls. A lot of people hold office buildings in higher regard, both aesthetically and symbolically. They tend to have higher budgets and therefore high quality materials, they symbolize economic power, they're often larger (thicker) than others of the same height, and have cleaner-looking facades due to lack of balconies.

That being said, so far I'm fairly pleased with the changes in Montreal. I'd prefer if office projects like Deloitte and Manuvie had been bigger and some of the condos smaller, but it's still a net improvement. However, if the skyline gets completely smothered in blue glass that's a different story.

All true, but so far all the big old office towers in Montreal remain prominent from most angles and it's not about to change with so few new big towers UC.

Also, Maestria and 1 Phillip Square are blacks, and 900 St-Jacque is white, so only Victoria sur le Parc is big condo blue-glass tower. One tower. I guess that was my main point.

[TorontoDrew]

This statement is true. "A while back: "Montreal is stagnant. Its skyline never changes. It's terrible."
Now: "Montreal's skyline is changing. New buildings are hiding older ones. It's terrible."

It's often pointed out here that Toronto has blocked out its old skyline with new towers, it now seems as though Montreal is suffering the same fate. What's being built looks to be good quality architecture its just a bit generic and its removing the view of the much more iconic buildings of the past century. It doesn't help that most of the developers push their buildings to the 200m limit.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Photo: @unvegetalienamontreal

Gawd, that's awful.

[MolsonExport]

really? I think it is a cool shot.