The Great Canadian Skyline thread for CMAs 1 million and under

[Acajack]

In order for Portland, Maine to arrive at metro population of 600,000, it encapsulates several counties with more than 100 miles from one end to the other.

If Toronto's metro were measured the same way, it would encapsulate (westward for example) everything all the way to and including Kitchener-Waterloo. Right now Toronto's metro stops at the border of Halton region and doesn't even include Hamilton. It doesn't include Oshawa on the east side either.

[flar]

^^ Toronto CMA includes about half of Halton (the Oakville half, a small technicality, I know). The Burlington half is Hamilton CMA. If Statscan didn't draw arbritary lines, everything from Grimsby through Halton would be part of the same continuous urban area as Toronto (nevermind CMA).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by flar

^^ Toronto CMA includes about half of Halton (the Oakville half, a small technicality, I know). The Burlington half is Hamilton CMA. If Statscan didn't draw arbritary lines, everything from Grimsby through Halton would be part of the same continuous urban area as Toronto (nevermind CMA).

Thanks. It's even crazier than I thought.

[flar]

It's very crazy. Grimsby is part of Hamilton's CMA and urban area, but is in Niagara Region.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by koops65

Here is another point to consider, one that probably gives Regina and Halifax big boost. They are Provincial Capitals, the seat of government offices and all the associated infrastructure that goes along with that. Fredricton and St. John's can also be included in this category. Thousands? (I have no idea of the real numbers) of people work in that sector in those cities, but are completely absent in other cities like Kitchener, London, Saskatoon, etc...

Direct government jobs (ie Province House workers) is the third highest workforce base in Halifax I believe. The number is easily in the thousands.

First place goes to the Armed Forces ( we have a tonne of bases here and not just the navy) which is obvious if one walks through town on a work-day.

Second place is Capital Health (QEII, VG, IWK-Grace, Dartmouth General, ect).

[kirjtc2]

Just an FYI: Portland's real metro pop is 150-200K at most. It's only slightly larger than Saint John.

The MSA includes way too many self-contained urban areas (Biddeford-Saco, Sanford, Brunswick, Bath, etc) that are functionally seperate from greater Portland (much like Hamilton is from Toronto), not to mention a large area that's really more in Boston's commutershed than Portland.

[someone123]

Well, the massive Portland metro is even more suspect than the Toronto metro would be since Portland is so much smaller. There's little reason for it to sprawl 50 miles into other parts of Maine, and the actual core built up area is pretty small. It is similar to Saint John in terms of size.

Something else to consider in the case of Portland's skyline not being that great is that it's an older city with a pedestrian scale and mid-sized buildings.

Provincial capitals don't necessarily have big skylines or office towers. Halifax has office towers because it is the business centre for Atlantic Canada. It has the regional bank offices, law firms, etc. The tallest office towers are basically in a little "financial district" that has been there for about 200 years and is where the Royal Bank and Bank of NS were founded.

Originally Posted by Acajack

In order for Portland, Maine to arrive at metro population of 600,000, it encapsulates several counties with more than 100 miles from one end to the other.

If Toronto's metro were measured the same way, it would encapsulate (westward for example) everything all the way to and including Kitchener-Waterloo. Right now Toronto's metro stops at the border of Halton region and doesn't even include Hamilton. It doesn't include Oshawa on the east side either.

Forgot about that. American MSAs have much more liberal definitions to them. I'm not sure what the rules are because I'm not sure what the American equivalent to Statscan is.

And yeah, that difference is always pointed out the many times that Toronto/Chicago comparisons are brought up.

Originally Posted by flar

^^ Toronto CMA includes about half of Halton (the Oakville half, a small technicality, I know). The Burlington half is Hamilton CMA. If Statscan didn't draw arbritary lines, everything from Grimsby through Halton would be part of the same continuous urban area as Toronto (nevermind CMA).

They're not entirely arbitrary. A major rule Statscan goes by is that a CMA cannot absorb another CMA. While I think Statscan should have an equivalent for American CSAs, I don't see them being of much use outside southern Ontario.

Originally Posted by koops65

Here is another point to consider, one that probably gives Regina and Halifax big boost. They are Provincial Capitals, the seat of government offices and all the associated infrastructure that goes along with that. Fredricton and St. John's can also be included in this category. Thousands? (I have no idea of the real numbers) of people work in that sector in those cities, but are completely absent in other cities like Kitchener, London, Saskatoon, etc...

Perhaps there is some legitimacy to that argument. Kitchener has government buildings downtown, but they are mainly just to do with city and regional administration. Seems that the remainder is largely insurance/finance and a call centre. Some engineering/consulting as well.

Originally Posted by someone123

Well, the massive Portland metro is even more suspect than the Toronto metro would be since Portland is so much smaller. There's little reason for it to sprawl 50 miles into other parts of Maine, and the actual core built up area is pretty small. It is similar to Saint John in terms of size.

Something else to consider in the case of Portland's skyline not being that great is that it's an older city with a pedestrian scale and mid-sized buildings.

Provincial capitals don't necessarily have big skylines or office towers. Halifax has office towers because it is the business centre for Atlantic Canada. It has the regional bank offices, law firms, etc. The tallest office towers are basically in a little "financial district" that has been there for about 200 years and is where the Royal Bank and Bank of NS were founded.

City form across North America is very regionalized. The east coast is known for having dense, pedestrian-scale downtowns and inner cities, but the density tapers off into scattered large-lot developments very quickly after that. Ontario is quite different in that regard.

[vid]

Most of Sudbury's large offices are government buildings. The largest office building in Thunder Bay's downtowns is a government building, and the second largest is owned by the city.

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by kirjtc2

Just an FYI: Portland's real metro pop is 150-200K at most. It's only slightly larger than Saint John.

Originally Posted by Acajack

In order for Portland, Maine to arrive at metro population of 600,000, it encapsulates several counties with more than 100 miles from one end to the other.

Portland

Population
62 561 in city and 619 917 in metro

http://www.emporis.com/application/?...ng=3&id=101732

Originally Posted by koops65

Here is another point to consider, one that probably gives Regina and Halifax big boost. They are Provincial Capitals, the seat of government offices and all the associated infrastructure that goes along with that. Fredricton and St. John's can also be included in this category. Thousands? (I have no idea of the real numbers) of people work in that sector in those cities, but are completely absent in other cities like Kitchener, London, Saskatoon, etc...

What you're saying makes sense but I'll bet I can find at least as many examples of capital cities that have lousy skylines. Victoria is a great example-our tallest office building is twelve stories! Edmonton's skyline has nothing on Calgary's, either.

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

What you're saying makes sense but I'll bet I can find at least as many examples of capital cities that have lousy skylines. Victoria is a great example-our tallest office building is twelve stories! Edmonton's skyline has nothing on Calgary's, either.

Victoria's tallest office building is only 12 storeys? Wow, the downtown looks bigger in the photos, but maybe that's just the density that's greater and the buildings aren't actually that tall.

True about Edmonton. It does not have as much of a corporate base as Calgary. It's still a decent skyline though.

Re: Fredericton: It may be the provincial capital of NB, but Saint John's skyline totally dwarfs the non-existant skyline of Fredericton.

Ottawa is the national capital, but its skyline is squat, as is Washington DC's (though I realize both places have height restrictions).

[koops65]

All these posts tell me one thing... there is no hard n fast rule for explaining why some cities (in the under 500 000 category) have a great skyline and others dont. Some have awesome density, others are tall (Niagara Falls springs to mind) and some have a classic look to them. On the flip side of that are cities that have a weak skyline for their size, with no easy explanation for it. Maybe it boils down to previous city administrations policies, combined with NIMBYism?

[Dylan Leblanc]

little ol' Victoria BC

CIBC is that 12 storey office building



Brandon Godfrey on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/vicfan/3214538454/



Brandon Godfrey on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/vicfan/3213691255/



Brandon Godfrey on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/vicfan/...7616277820135/


Sketch of downtown from Vicwest by mc_bds. Remarkably accurate.


mc_bds on flickr - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mc_images/3040037706/

[Metro-One]

I love the Victoria Skyline. It is the one western city in Canada that looks more as if it belongs in New England.

It also has an amazingly large, dense, and active downtown core for a metro of only 340 000. Although the towers are not tall, they have many many mid rise buildings (around 10 floors) but have also built many 15 to 20 floor condos in the past 5 years.

Downtown is definitely growing.

Victoria is great for pub crawling.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Phil McAvity

Portland

Population
62 561 in city and 619 917 in metro

http://www.emporis.com/application/?...ng=3&id=101732

Really? You think Emporis is a source regarding city data?! Using those stats one would think Duluth is a city of almost 300,000 but in reality, the municipalities around it and with an economic relationship to it makes it barely larger than Thunder Bay.

The smallest unit the US uses for determining metropolitan areas are counties, so the measure is virtually useless and almost always overstated. Look at a map of the municipalities in and around Portland, Maine. Include all municipalities and township covering the urban sprawl, and all rural municipalities and townships bordering that. There is your metro population for Portland Maine. It will be around 250,000 people.

[le calmar]

^ I was in Portland Maine a couple of weeks ago, and it's definitely not a city of 600,000. If feels more like a city slightly bigger than Sherbrooke QC (pop 200,000), but with taller buidings in the core. Same for Boston, there's no way it's bigger than Toronto! Boston should be slightly bigger than Montreal.

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I love the Victoria Skyline. It is the one western city in Canada that looks more as if it belongs in New England.

It also has an amazingly large, dense, and active downtown core for a metro of only 340 000. Although the towers are not tall, they have many many mid rise buildings (around 10 floors) but have also built many 15 to 20 floor condos in the past 5 years.

Downtown is definitely growing.

Victoria is great for pub crawling.

Do you or does anyone else know whether or not downtown Victoria has height restrictions? It seems like there is a high density of buildings that are of similar heights.

[craneSpotter]

Originally Posted by Cambridgite

Do you or does anyone else know whether or not downtown Victoria has height restrictions? It seems like there is a high density of buildings that are of similar heights.

Yes. Downtown Victoria has a building height restriction of 43.5m.

However, council does have discretionary guidelines that allow for approvals of building heights up to 58.7m. They have recently approved buildings over 50m in the downtown Humboldt valley. We are working on a new downtown plan which recommends building heights of up to 72m within certain areas. Wow, eh

Victoria's skyline does not photo all that well from many angles and can look uniform due to varying base elevations - the heights are more varied when on the ground.

As one poster mentioned, Victoria's downtown area is surprisingly large, dense and busy for its population. The pubs downtown are numerous and great too!!!

[vid]

Thunder Bay's height restriction is 45m.

(Except in every zone other zone besides RM3, where it is 10m...)