Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[Tosin007]

Originally Posted by 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.

Wow that's a good video! Thanks for the share I learn lots!

[Rico Rommheim]

Originally Posted by Tosin007

(Unlike Manhattan that just piles the whole thing onto 1 Island, calls it a borough & forces everyone to live in a congested nightmare). Toronto can better ease the congestion while still maintaining it if u like in a few set area's. (& it's the more Multicultural City but it doesn't matter most people will say I guess simply because it's not as big).

Unbelievable. Truly.

[Rico Rommheim]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

You have to remember that Winnipeg used to be Canada's third largest city. It was the gateway to western Canada with the railroads and was the hub for all banking in the west. It makes perfect sense for Winnipeg to have all those historical buildings. Heck, Winnipeg had the first skyscraper in Canada:

The Winnipeg of old must have been quite a sight. Love the Exchange. But it having the first skyscraper? Never heard of that one before.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

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.

Oh, residential streets. Well, in Montreal they probably appear narrower because they're lined with triplexes that come right up to the sidewalk while in Toronto they're lined by semi-detached homes with a small yard.

The actual width of the road right of way doesn't seem perceptibly different. In that sense, Toronto's residential streets aren't really wide at all. They're wider in just about any city in North America that was built during the same time period.

Also, the wideness of Toronto's streets might be an optical illusion since in Montreal cars are allowed to park on both sides of the street, while in Toronto they're usually only allowed to park on one.

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

The Winnipeg of old must have been quite a sight. Love the Exchange. But it having the first skyscraper? Never heard of that one before.

I agree, would've loved to see it. It was quite the boomtown with the railroad but that era was short lived and terminated in 1914 with the opening of the Panama canal, after which Vancouver surpassed Winnipeg as the third largest city and served as the main export hub in its stead.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Oh, residential streets. Well, in Montreal they probably appear narrower because they're lined with triplexes that come right up to the sidewalk while in Toronto they're lined by semi-detached homes with a small yard.

The actual width of the road right of way doesn't seem perceptibly different. In that sense, Toronto's residential streets aren't really wide at all. They're wider in just about any city in North America that was built during the same time period.

Also, the wideness of Toronto's streets might be an optical illusion since in Montreal cars are allowed to park on both sides of the street, while in Toronto they're usually only allowed to park on one.

Those two shots are good examples. Even without any cars the Montreal street seems a lot more "hemmed in" than the Toronto one.

[Brizzy82]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

The Winnipeg of old must have been quite a sight. Love the Exchange. But it having the first skyscraper? Never heard of that one before.

Re: Winnipeg having Canadas first skyscraper

It has been a point of contention on here before & it's a big can of worms that is best kept closed

I think Toronto also lays claim to having the first IIRC

[ssiguy]

That was a very interesting video but it did omit one big factor that effected and continues to effect the US in urban development............race.

Much of the post-war growth in the suburbs was the "white flight" where whites left behing the black population. This left the inner parts of the cities not only with smaller populations but with a plunging tax bases as the white took their taxes with them to the suburbs. That left US cities having to deal with the social ills of a poorer population with a much smaller budget to do it.

The white also took their political power with them so the politicians made policies that were pro-suburban {read white} and anti-urban {read black} leading to urban freeways that decimated the urban fabric and split inner city communities.

The race issue may not help deviate European and US cities who's development were based on more pre-war issues but does explain why Canada, Australia, and NZ did not suffer the urban decay of US cities. It also explains why urban transit {especially in Canada} remaines viable and embraced eventhough having high car ownership rates...........in Canada transit is seen as a viable alternative and ESSENTIAL service for all while in the US transit, except in very few exceptions, is seen as SOCIAL service for the mostly urban blacks.

[WhipperSnapper]

There's definitely an illusion of much wider road allowances in Toronto (not just pavement but the distance between structures from one side of the street to the other) Montreal's on average are narrower but, it's not to the degree so often posted on the forum. The greater difference is in the size of the rear yards which is seldom discussed.

[FFX-ME]

*Yea sorry, it is simply the oldest existing skyscraper. Toronto built one in 1985 while Winnipeg's first was the Merchants bank building in 1902 (which is now demolished). It was the first skyscraper in western Canada while the Union bank building is the oldest still existing skyscraper and was built in 1904.

[Rico Rommheim]

Originally Posted by Brizzy82

Re: Winnipeg having Canadas first skyscraper

It has been a point of contention on here before & it's a big can of worms that is best kept closed

I think Toronto also lays claim to having the first IIRC

I know Montreal and Toronto both make that claim. Just by curiosity what's Winnipeg's claim?

[Calgarian]

Great Winnipeg shots!

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Those two shots are good examples. Even without any cars the Montreal street seems a lot more "hemmed in" than the Toronto one.

The street width is more or less the same and the buildings actually have fairly similar massing (albeit very different styles), but Toronto has greater setbacks. The small amount of front yard makes a big difference in feel.

The few streets in Toronto with buildings right to the sidewalk have a similar hemmed in feel. Some random examples: https://goo.gl/maps/n9UKM9GP4s12
https://goo.gl/maps/pwFCUhya8TA2
https://goo.gl/maps/iUvx2eFzQjy

[niwell]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

There's definitely an illusion of much wider road allowances in Toronto (not just pavement but the distance between structures from one side of the street to the other) Montreal's on average are narrower but, it's not to the degree so often posted on the forum. The greater difference is in the size of the rear yards which is seldom discussed.

Also a very good point. Toronto's "short blocks" are still quite a bit larger than Montreal's. Usually by at least 20m or so. Largely to do with the way the land was surveyed but there definitely has to be an English influence there too.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

*Yea sorry, it is simply the oldest existing skyscraper. Toronto built one in 1985 while Winnipeg's first was the Merchants bank building in 1902 (which is now demolished). It was the first skyscraper in western Canada while the Union bank building is the oldest still existing skyscraper and was built in 1904.

No.
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=9876

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

I know Montreal and Toronto both make that claim. Just by curiosity what's Winnipeg's claim?

The definitive case is made in this article... I'm not sure if it's paywalled or not:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/give-union-bank-tower-the-crown-412117493.html

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by niwell

The street width is more or less the same and the buildings actually have fairly similar massing (albeit very different styles), but Toronto has greater setbacks. The small amount of front yard makes a big difference in feel.

The few streets in Toronto with buildings right to the sidewalk have a similar hemmed in feel. Some random examples: https://goo.gl/maps/n9UKM9GP4s12
https://goo.gl/maps/pwFCUhya8TA2
https://goo.gl/maps/iUvx2eFzQjy

Every time I've been on streets like those in Toronto I am always surprised that I am in Toronto in fact.

[Rico Rommheim]

Originally Posted by esquire

The definitive case is made in this article... I'm not sure if it's paywalled or not:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/give-union-bank-tower-the-crown-412117493.html

Good article. This guy is truly a skyscraper geek. He's probably even a member of this forum!

In that case I'd like to tell him that he left out the Canada Life building in Montreal, which had a complete steel skeleton, reached 42m and predates the Union Bank by almost a decade. #nerd

[Echoes]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Good article. This guy is truly a skyscraper geek. He's probably even a member of this forum!

In that case I'd like to tell him that he left out the Canada Life building in Montreal, which had a complete steel skeleton, reached 42m and predates the Union Bank by almost a decade. #nerd

He is! He's trueviking.

[Rico Rommheim]

There you go!