The Great Canadian Skyline thread for CMAs 1 million and under - Page 3

flar · #41 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:03 PM**

Sarnia, Ontario

vid · #42 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:09 PM**

Fort William/Port Arthur/Thunder Bay/Lakehead, 103,000 to 131,000 depending on how and what you count.

Port Arthur, 46,000 © rocket1964

Fort William, 50,000 © rocket1964

Current River, 4,000 © Geekent

Academy Heights/Lakehead University and College Heights, neighbourhoods of Port Arthur, also have skylines (2 or more tall buildings near each other) but there are no real vantage points for them so I don't have any pictures.

Kenora, 15,000:

Some aerial photos of apartment blocks and downtown © Ricky Wilkinson

Best Western Kenora, tallest hotel between Ottawa and Winnipeg. © Scienceduck

Nicko999 · #43 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

Best Western Kenora, tallest hotel between Ottawa and Winnipeg. © Scienceduck

You mean between Toronto and Winnipeg?

Rico Rommheim · #44 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicko999

You mean between Toronto and Winnipeg?

Toronto is (south) west of Ottawa. Actually Vid was wrong, London, Ontario is actually even closer to Thunder bay (in terms of west) and I'm pretty sure Sudbury has a 10-11 storey office block.

vid · #45 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:47 PM**

It is 11 storeys. Sudbury doesn't have any hotels over 11 storeys. Timmins and Sault Ste. Marie both have 9 storey hotels. If you go by road, Highway 17 in Kenora goes to Sudbury, then from Sudbury highway 17 goes to Ottawa. If you turn onto highway 69, that becomes highway 400 around Orillia then goes to Toronto. But you have to turn onto a different road. Technically, Ottawa is just down the street from Kenora, and Kenora is between Ottawa and Winnipeg. (17 becomes 1 in Manitoba.)

Highway 11, which once started in Toronto, does not go to Kenora.

To get to London without going through the US, you have to go through Toronto, unless you take backroads.

If you go east-west regardless of roads, its the tallest in Canada between Windsor and Winnipeg. (Windsor lines up with the midpoint between Sault and Suds)

Metro-One · #46 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:51 PM**

Now this kind of debate is what these forums are all about!

vid · #47 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 7:55 PM**

For the record, I think we should have limited this to CAs and CMAs with under 500,000, to exclude cities that are just separately governed parts of larger urban areas.

Rico Rommheim · #48 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 8:04 PM**

Oh shit, I didn't read the hotel part, sorry.

mmmatt · #49 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 10:48 PM**

Ill throw in my little plug for NB

Saint John ~69,000 (metro ~124,000)

credit: wiki

Moncton ~65,000 (metro ~126,000)

credit: me

dennis · #50 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 11:03 PM**

Brandon, Manitoba, Pop. 41,511 (2006)

by pokoroto on flickr.com

by trogodor420 on flickr.com

by wily14u on panoramio.com

by WpgDavid on panoramio.com

Metro-One · #51 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 11:15 PM**

How come all these small cities in the east (save Halifax) seem to have no new towers. All their recent growth seems to be in the form of sprawl.

Hootch · #52 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 11:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

with the exception of a few short years following forced municipal mergers (rendered moot with the demerger), Westmount was and is an independent city. It is still predominately English-speaking, but today almost all speak French fluently.

Wow, that's really interesting! Weird though.

mmmatt · #53 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 12:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

How come all these small cities in the east (save Halifax) seem to have no new towers. All their recent growth seems to be in the form of sprawl.

Cause we have lots of space, and its cheaper to build in the 'burbs...city government doesnt push urban nearly enough, and not many in the general public seem to really care

That being said in Moncton we have had a few new "tall" (from our small city perspective) buildings go up in the past 20 years.

- Blue Cross center, 9 floors - 1988
- City Hall, 6 floors - 1996
- Moncton Place, 6 floors - 1996
- Chateau Moncton, 6 floors - early 2000s
- Belmar Plaza, 6 floors - 2006
- Marriott, 6 floors - 2008

And we have a couple of towers in the 7-10 floor range that will be going up downtown in the next couple of years.

In Saint John the Mercintile Center @ 8 floors went up in the late 90's and they have a new hotel @ 10 floors going up right now. They also have a few sizable towers on the horizon.

In Fredericton there has been a few buildings in the 6-8 floor range go up since the early 90's and they have a new 6-7 floor office/convention center goin up as well.

Obviously nothing super impressive, but there is some movement

Metro-One · #54 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 12:29 AM**

No complaints there, that is better than nothing.

eemy · #55 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 12:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicko999

The king of skyline for a small city is Yellowknife(pop: 18 700)

I like how the city is fit in between all the rock. Those are huge outcroppings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

For the record, I think we should have limited this to CAs and CMAs with under 500,000, to exclude cities that are just separately governed parts of larger urban areas.

I agree. I implicitly understood this to refer to metropolitan areas (using the CMA definition) because it made the most sense. What's the point of a thread full of photos of Burnaby et. al. that we've seen thousands of times when this thread was specifically created as a platform of those smaller centres that don't get the same attention such as Yellowknife or Peterborough?

Metro-One · #56 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 12:57 AM**

Seen a thousand times? i believe i am probably the only person who has posted any Metrotown pictures and i doubt few here (outside of Vancouver) can say with accuracy what the New West, Coquitlam, Brentwood, etc... skylines look like. For example i have only seen a couple pics of Mississauga and i would like to see more. To me the point of this thread was simply to limit the Downtown Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary and Montreal skylines from taking over, for they account for about 95% of the skyline pictures we see.

sparky212 · #57 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 12:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

I agree. I implicitly understood this to refer to metropolitan areas (using the CMA definition) because it made the most sense. What's the point of a thread full of photos of Burnaby et. al. that we've seen thousands of times when this thread was specifically created as a platform of those smaller centres that don't get the same attention such as Yellowknife or Peterborough?

or London.

Metro-One · #58 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 1:02 AM**

Ok, i will listen to sparky because he is the thread creator, so here he is god

PS - is CMA an Ontario expression?

In BC they are called "Metros or Greater Areas"

I have never seen a local or provincial document use the term "CMA"

crooked rain · #59 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 1:04 AM**

what's with that ugly clock tower on top of Mackenzie Seeds in Brandon?

sparky212 · #60 Posted **Jan 3, 2009, 1:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

PS - is CMA an Ontario expression?

I always called them metro's