Canadian Skyline Thread III

[zahav]

Burnaby is really pushing their rapid transit hubs, hence such large clusters developing independently. And both are growing a lot, Metrotown moreso as it is the official downtown.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by zahav

Burnaby is really pushing their rapid transit hubs, hence such large clusters developing independently. And both are growing a lot, Metrotown moreso as it is the official downtown.

Bingo. Not to mention that both areas have always been quite different and not really 'one centre'.

[hipster duck]

I don't really follow plans in the Lower Mainland anymore but Willingdon Avenue, the arterial that links Brentwood on the left (north) with Metrotown on the right (south), would be a natural corridor for intensification in the future, and should probably get some kind of rapid transit. In between Metrotown and Brentwood, there's the BCIT campus and a major office cluster that includes things like EA Canada's HQ.

There needs to be more north-south rapid transportation corridors in the region - especially east of the CoV.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

DSC01813 by Foofoo MacShoe, on Flickr

The layers of history in Montreal are amazing!

[abbymk]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't really follow plans in the Lower Mainland anymore but Willingdon Avenue, the arterial that links Brentwood on the left (north) with Metrotown on the right (south), would be a natural corridor for intensification in the future, and should probably get some kind of rapid transit. In between Metrotown and Brentwood, there's the BCIT campus and a major office cluster that includes things like EA Canada's HQ.

There needs to be more north-south rapid transportation corridors in the region - especially east of the CoV.

Yup and that’s why after the current round of skytrain construction the next most likely build will be the “purple line”. This’ll be a skytrain from Metrotown to the north shore with connections in Brentwood.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/nort...-approval-plan

In the mean time one of the first three new BRT lines is the predecessor to that skytrain line. So we’ll be seeing some sort of rapid transit connecting the two centres soon.

https://www.translink.ca/news/2023/n...ro%20vancouver

[cranes]

Northdale Waterloo

The last couple months occupancy has been taking place @ 308 King Street North & 298 Hemlock Street. Chick'n Cone & DoughBox have opened @ 203 Albert Street. In and Out Convenience (24hours) opened at 239 Albert Street. Major 13-tower proposal announced for 446 Albert St etc...

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...rt-st-waterloo

[kool maudit]

The K-W area is just ridiculously ugly. I thought Edmonton looked bad in terms of its residential vernacular, but this is a spit-shined Norilsk.

There are areas of outer Stockholm that look like this. It starts badly, but ages like absolute shit.

It is actually bad for the soul of a country to contain places where they build things like this. It brings something in. You might think I am being fussy and excessive, but modern Sweden is a certain way because of too many things like this. It has a cultural effect.

[905er]

I don't think Kitchener is ugly. Waterloo on the otherhand... My goodness!! what the actual fuck??

[kool maudit]

Perhaps it is just Waterloo. I don't know the area so I thought this sort of thing was throughout.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by 905er

I don't think Kitchener is ugly. Waterloo on the otherhand... My goodness!! what the actual fuck??

These buildings may be ugly, but, are they also affordable???

I bring this up as in Moncton, like clockwork, when a new apartment complex is announced, social media is immediately flooded by people whining that these new buildings will be unaffordable, and will not solve the housing crisis. It gets just so bloody tedious at times............

[905er]

even so, I don't know why affordable almost always has to by synonymous with ugly in Canada.
I think a lot of these are student housing if I'm not mistaken. Even so, look at McMaster's new student housing complex.. at least there is some design elements. These look like the mistakes of communist countries from the 60's and 70's. no excuse.

[hipster duck]

I haven't experienced that neighbourhood of Waterloo in the flesh recently, but I kind of have a soft spot for the zany colour palette. It could be worse: these blocks could all be a monolithic grey.

This is also one of those rare cases where the sidewalk isn't meeting the buildings well, rather than the other way around. Would it have killed the city to ask the developers to upgrade the sidewalks to reflect the fact that it's no longer a low density bungalow neighbourhood and that there are now thousands of pedestrians?

[suburbanite]

It's also good to keep in mind that Waterloo is an example of the market actually working to keep up with an ever increasing amount of students. Don't get me wrong, most of the developments are god awful and I'm glad I finished school there before the transition really took hold, but the alternative is sending students into SFH rentals further and further from campus and constricting supply in the entire metro.

[WhipperSnapper]

Not all student housing is alike. McMaster is directly involved with the building in Hamilton. It would not look like it is if it was fully for profit private.

More than half of these units in Waterloo are sold as condos and the design/build developer is from Eastern Europe. Developers are people with their own design aesthetics.

Kitchener isn't much better. Development has been dispersed throughout suburbia rather than concentrated in neighbourhoods. London is similar in that regard and I would guess most are unaware of the high rise boom that has taken place over the past 20 years there. They are only aware of the recent tall downtown development. The recent Kitchener downtown boom is still early and is a similar mixed bag as Waterloo. It will take another decade or two of sustained development to really get a feel of it.

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Not all student housing is alike. McMaster is directly involved with the building in Hamilton. It would not look like it is if it was fully for profit private.

I guess I should caveat my original statement by saying "The alternative as long as schools hold no responsibility in directly accommodating their ever increasing student populations".

Student housing doesn't have to be ugly, but it likely will be if private investors have to be the ones to supply it.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by suburbanite

It's also good to keep in mind that Waterloo is an example of the market actually working to keep up with an ever increasing amount of students. Don't get me wrong, most of the developments are god awful and I'm glad I finished school there before the transition really took hold, but the alternative is sending students into SFH rentals further and further from campus and constricting supply in the entire metro.

Agreed, although, like you, I'd consider this to be a somewhat pyrrhic victory.

When YIMBYs and urbanists talk up "missing middle" they imagine fine-grained brownstone neighbourhoods with mature trees. In reality, you get shite like this that doesn't exactly win the general public over to our cause.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by suburbanite

I guess I should caveat my original statement by saying "The alternative as long as schools hold no responsibility in directly accommodating their ever increasing student populations".

Student housing doesn't have to be ugly, but it likely will be if private investors have to be the ones to supply it.

Ugly is the least concern with schools holding no responsibility to accommodating housing a rapidly expanding student population requiring local housing.

I'm on the fence that schools would do much better than the private sector if they were responsible for housing at the scale needed. We'll never know. There is no way any of the trade schools can afford to build housing. We simply wouldn't be in the current situation. Enrollment would have likely remained more stable and we also wouldn't be talking about shoe box skyscrapers resolving the housing crisis

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

The K-W area is just ridiculously ugly. I thought Edmonton looked bad in terms of its residential vernacular, but this is a spit-shined Norilsk.

There are areas of outer Stockholm that look like this. It starts badly, but ages like absolute shit.

It is actually bad for the soul of a country to contain places where they build things like this. It brings something in. You might think I am being fussy and excessive, but modern Sweden is a certain way because of too many things like this. It has a cultural effect.

These apartments are hideous and soul-sucking. They must have been assembled from Ikea kits. Järvfjället. RIKTIG ÖGLA

[MolsonExport]

Waterloo looks like the sort of lego village you make when you have too many left-over blue bricks.

[kool maudit]

Cheap accommodations built quick-and-dirty for waves of newcomers:



Don't even worry about the cornices and brickwork. The only issue is scale.

Look at that middle building and imagine it clad in whatever red or blue material the Waterloo builders are using. It wouldn't make a difference, really. You don't need brownstone and trees.

Build them four windows wide, seven windows high and right up to the lot line. Clad them however you like. 3-D print a cornice or some decoration if you're feeling fancy: that's a city. That's Manhattan and that's Naples. The rules are old and they are simple.

There is nothing that says we have to live in these pitiful landscapes except legacy 20th-century thinking.