Great Canadian Skyline Thread II

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by DAVEinEDMONTON

No new buildings can be taller than the Niagara Escarpment or around approximately 30 floors to keep views of the Lake intact.

Interesting, it never occurred to me that you'd actually be able to see the lake from the escarpment, or that that was something that was generally valued.

There's a similar height limit in Halifax (relating to views from the Citadel to the Harbour) but this is based largely on historical integrity - Citadel would have been useless, from a practical standpoint, without clear sightlines between it and the harbour.

[isaidso]

Are there height limits on top of the Enscarpement?

[kool maudit]

Honestly? Hamilton doesn't need towers. It needs to work on city form. This is a mid-sized industrial city in the GGH; it's not a headquarters city or a regional primate city or a scenic resort city like Benidorm or whatever.

The city has a ton of downtown surface parking and its urbanity is patchy. The limit should be 10 storeys, really. There is no realistic scenario in which Hamilton contributes significantly to skyscraper architecture or develops some sort of imposing skyline. Let Toronto handle that.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Honestly? Hamilton doesn't need towers. It needs to work on city form. This is a mid-sized industrial city in the GGH; it's not a headquarters city or a regional primate city or a scenic resort city like Benidorm or whatever.

The city has a ton of downtown surface parking and its urbanity is patchy. The limit should be 10 storeys, really. There is no realistic scenario in which Hamilton contributes significantly to skyscraper architecture or develops some sort of imposing skyline. Let Toronto handle that.

If Mississauga and Vaughan can build 50+ storey buildings why shouldn't Hamilton?
the most defining characteristic of the GGH is highrises clusters all over the place

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

https://authgram.com/p/B16nHq0hHkz

https://authgram.com/p/Bzo7u2llTLv

https://authgram.com/p/B1k2amHniKC

This........

[Razor]

Originally Posted by DAVEinEDMONTON

No new buildings can be taller than the Niagara Escarpment or around approximately 30 floors to keep views of the Lake intact.

Originally Posted by Hali87

Interesting, it never occurred to me that you'd actually be able to see the lake from the escarpment, or that that was something that was generally valued.

There's a similar height limit in Halifax (relating to views from the Citadel to the Harbour) but this is based largely on historical integrity - Citadel would have been useless, from a practical standpoint, without clear sightlines between it and the harbour.

As most of you know, Ottawa has the same height restrictions.
If it's any consolation, height restrictions create density in a core of a city with these restrictions..I've never been to Halifax, but through pictures it's density looks really good! It's a trade off I suppose. I know that here in Ottawa, there are some real solid urban canyons, albeit with short buildings. Hamilton would do well with keeping their towers under 30 floors, but more of them vs having talls in smaller numbers to fill in that space.

Look at Montreal..I realize that it's a much larger city then all of the three, but the height restriction added a beast of a girth to that city.

[Maldive]

Originally Posted by Nite

If Mississauga and Vaughan can build 50+ storey buildings why shouldn't Hamilton?
the most defining characteristic of the GGH is highrises clusters all over the place

The escarpment is a jewel in the Hamilton area but forgive a cynical tangent: if anyone (other than Harry Stinson) wants to build a 50 storey (mixed) tower in Hamilton then pass out the Depends diapers to council and approve.

It would pay back in so many ways and views aren't an issue (escarpments are very wide).

Height limits that discourage a bit of wow growth in a city that needs an extreme makeover (and some inspiration) won't produce the wise planning results envisioned by experts.

1.Lotsa great pockets of wonderful neighbourhoods- protect of course.

2. Parking lots galore- build if you really have the cash.

3. Get some developer momentum and harvest/manage the public domain benefits that comes with approvals.

Just spent 3 years in the city and often thought "what if they had built Toronto ...in Hamilton?"

Cootes Paradise, Escarpment, Burlington Beach, Harbour...... this all assumes no epic size steel production footprint lol.

(apologies of course to Toronto Island(s), ravines et al)

Content removed

[zoomer]

I never was a fan of Calgary’s skyline in the past - it was boring, earth toned, over-twinned and the downtown walking experience was terrible. However.. is there a better Canadian Big 3 back to back to back than the Bow, Brookfield and Sky?! No - the answer is no. I like Calgary sky better than Vancouver House and Calgary is producing some awesome mid-rises as well right now. Things are looking up.

[q12]

Can you spot the skyline?



https://twitter.com/haligonia/status/1170399530484928512

[Martin Mtl]

https://www.instagram.com/p/B2BupHthK37/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B1-IsF2HLsy/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2D6S8DIMfL/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2D65rsgiPo/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2HopKPg2HB/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2HnA47nTiO/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2FYEaNhUzI/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2FkyzTBlHU/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2FmBZyn3lh/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2E1vDslHxP/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2C_mGlg10Y/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2Axl3UpkN_/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2APXe_J7M8/


https://www.instagram.com/p/B2DZTjMn8FG/

[giallo]

A cool, new perspective of Burnaby and Vancouver from the King's Crossing development.





Thanks to Zepfancouver for the picture and Sp0ckets for the stitch job.

[owenhujb]

Another decade or so and Burnaby's skyline is going to get practically twice at large at Brentwood and a substantial increase in Metrotown too (and Lougheed)

[mcminsen]

Imagine having this as your living room view. Especially on a clear winter day with snow on the mountains.

Originally Posted by giallo

A cool, new perspective of Burnaby and Vancouver from the King's Crossing development.





Thanks to Zepfancouver for the picture and Sp0ckets for the stitch job.

[Chadillaccc]

By Jeff Wallace on Flickr : https://www.flickr.com/photos/wherezjeff/48448333031/

DSC09101 by itspoots, on Flickr

[craner]

Impressive Burnaby skyline.
... and nice Calgary shots too Chad.

[ainvan]

Source


_DSC4930-2 by Petar Loncar, on Flickr

[Razor]

^ Awesome pics of Vancouver!

I can't decide which skyline has the most bang for it's size..Vancouver or Calgary? Regardless, great pics!

[hipster duck]

I'd say Vancouver has more bang for its size, because it's a city about twice the size of Calgary with multiple skyscraper nodes dotting the region. From most vantage points, it's hard to see one skyline without seeing others.

Nevertheless, Calgary has the most impressive skyline for any city of its size, and has the only skyscrapers outside of Toronto where you are at the base, look up, and feel brawniness.

Not too long ago, on the City Discussions subforum, some American poster was talking about how Oklahoma City had a good skyline for a metro of 1.5M. I thought about posting a picture of Calgary as a response, but it struck me as kind of a dick move.

[hipster duck]

P.S. in the category of metros of population 1 - 1.5M, Calgary and Edmonton would have the #1 and #2 skylines in North America in my opinion.

They wouldn't be #1 for urban qualities (that would be New Orleans), but they'd probably be in the top 10; maybe even in the top 5, including Ottawa.

Pound for pound, American cities (metros) are at their weakest in the 1 - 1.5 million range.

Albany, Raleigh, Indianapolis, Hartford, Birmingham, etc. These places might as well be larger versions of London, ON.