The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! - Page 90

Chadillaccc · #**1781** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 6:57 PM**

I'm not sure if I've posted this, but here's a decent one...

Calgary Skyline Panorama by Chadillaccc, on Flickr

LeftCoaster · #**1782** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolcanadian

I'm not sure how many cities have something comparable.

I love Toronto, and it really does get ragged on a bit too much for being uninteresting, but most cities have something at the very least comparable. I would tend to agree with Beedok that Toronto from a geographic standpoint has the bare minimum to make it interesting, anything less would actually be an issue. Toronto is one of the better cities in the world in a lot of categories, but as far as geography is concerned it's quite mediocre. Sure there are worse, but there are a lot better too.

rousseau · #**1783** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beedok

Hamilton basically has everything Toronto has and an escarpment.

I'm a Hamilton booster and former resident, but this is just ridiculous. Hamilton doesn't have anything like the Scarborough Bluffs, the Don Valley, the Leslie Street Spit or the islands.

Hamilton has tons of waterfalls, which are great. Toronto doesn't have those. Hamilton's escarpment ("the mountain") however, while a really nice feature, is over-rated. Because the city apart from the escarpment is mostly billiard-table flat. And while the Bruce Trail goes through the escarpment, it's not really all that accessible or well-known.

No real attempt has been made to take advantage of what the escarpment offers. There should be a fantastic bike path or MUP path carved into the length and breadth of the escarpment from Stoney Creek right to Dundas. Is such a thing on the horizon? Has it even ever been considered? No. It's a damn shame.

Hamilton does have lots of nearby wilderness-like areas, but they are cut off from the city. The centre of the city and the east end are remote from them. Because they don't add to the city at all, they just compete with it. Wilderness enthusiasts in the Hamilton area love going to Dundas Valley or Cootes Paradise, but otherwise they want nothing to do with downtown itself, and will happily tell you that using choice words for their hatred of anything urban in Hamilton.

The geographical features of Hamilton are essentially a failure.

Calgarian · #**1784** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:40 PM**

Thought I saw another thread for all this natural setting shit.

MonkeyRonin · #**1785** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:42 PM**

eclipse by maroscar0, on Flickr

whiteford · #**1786** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trans Canada

IMO the mountains in Calgary are too far to be considered a "natural setting". And while the river and Prince's Island are nice, Calgary's natural setting is ugly shades of yellow/brown or white/grey most of the year. If you exclude the mountains then Calgary's I put natural setting is pretty low on the national list, definitely lower than Ottawa or even Toronto.

Ottawa

Full size and source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Canada_Ottawa_Panorama.jpg. Photographer G. Baranski.

Full size and source: http://worldcometomyhome.blogspot.ca/2013/07/0746-canada-ontario-rideau-canal-unesco.html. Photo credit "Malak". (Yes this is not exactly "natural" setting)

Full size and source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carleton_University_south_view_2.jpg. Photographer Kristoferb.

calgary is 100 times nicer than what your claiming.

Chadillaccc · #**1787** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:48 PM**

Amazing Mississauga shot Monkey! Just stunning. I wish my camera could do that kinda stuff.

I agree Whiteford, except maybe not 100x. Though I do really love Calgary's natural setting. The mountains may not be in our immediate setting but the foothills most definitely are, and a good 40% of the city has views of the mountains.

Here is a photo I took of the skyline from Bowmont Natural Environment Park within the city, and to me, that park alone elevates our natural setting. It is simply an amazing space. Not to mention the hills, bluffs, cliffs, and numerous rivers and streams that characterize the city's topography, geography, and natural setting.

From the Top by Chadillaccc, on Flickr

Calgarian · #**1788** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 7:58 PM**

I'd take Calgary's setting over Toronto's any day, mountains and foothills one way and the prairies the other. I'd take Toronto's latitude in a heartbeat though lol.

SkahHigh · #**1789** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I'd take Calgary's setting over Toronto's any day, mountains and foothills one way and the prairies the other. I'd take Toronto's latitude in a heartbeat though lol.

This, to me, is amazing to have in a big city like TO, even though it's a basic natural setting.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co..._Park,_Don_Valley_Parkway,_Don_River.jpg

Chadillaccc · #**1790** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I'd take Calgary's setting over Toronto's any day, mountains and foothills one way and the prairies the other. I'd take Toronto's latitude in a heartbeat though lol.

Agreed to all of it. Except for the extremely long summer days we get. Love being out in the sun at 9:30 PM in July

Acajack · #**1791** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trans Canada

IMO the mountains in Calgary are too far to be considered a "natural setting". And while the river and Prince's Island are nice, Calgary's natural setting is ugly shades of yellow/brown or white/grey most of the year. If you exclude the mountains then Calgary's I put natural setting is pretty low on the national list, definitely lower than Ottawa or even Toronto.

.

The times I've been in Calgary I've always been impressed by the "dynamism" of the city but it's never struck me as "oh, this city has a really nice natural setting". I agree with you about the colours and in general I find there is an arid prairie starkness to it that few people find attractive.

Of course the mountains an hour west of the city are absolutely amazing.

Chadillaccc · #**1792** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:13 PM**

The mountains are much less than an hour away, as has been stated many many times here. Canmore is 40 minutes away and is well inside the Rockies.

Calgarian · #**1793** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

This, to me, is amazing to have in a big city like TO, even though it's a basic natural setting.

A river? most cities with a river valley can have a picture just like that. Not saying TO isn't pretty or anything, just that that picture doesn't really show anything you can't get in pretty much every big city in the country.

Acajack · #**1794** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The mountains are much less than an hour away, as has been stated many many times here. Canmore is 40 minutes away and is well inside the Rockies.

Sure. I'm from Quebec and as you know, we drive slow here!

Calgarian · #**1795** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Agreed to all of it. Except for the extremely long summer days we get. Love being out in the sun at 9:30 PM in July

Yeah but with the extremely long summer days come the extremely short winter days. I hate it when it's dark by 4:30.

SignalHillHiker · #**1796** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:15 PM**

Love that Mississauga sunset pic.

Acajack · #**1797** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Yeah but with the extremely long summer days come the extremely short winter days. I hate it when it's dark by 4:30.

If it's any consolation it's not much better on that front anywhere else in Canada.

SkahHigh · #**1798** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

A river? most cities with a river valley can have a picture just like that. Not saying TO isn't pretty or anything, just that that picture doesn't really show anything you can't get in pretty much every big city in the country.

Not a river... Montreal has the St. Lawrence so I wouldn't be impressed by this. I'm talking about dozens of little creeks and wooden areas within the city. The Don River is just an example.

Montreal has a bunch of wooden areas, like Bois-de-Saraguay in the Ahuntsic-Cartierville borough:

http://www.patrimoine-culturel.gouv.qc.ca/rpcq/document/rpcq_bien_100544_206914.JPG?id=206914

Chadillaccc · #**1799** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

Sure. I'm from Quebec and as you know, we drive slow here!

My room mates in Gatineau drove like maniacs, they'd drink beers while driving even :S! But even driving the speed limit, Canmore is only an hour from the city. Canmore's about 20 minutes inside the rockies at that speed (110 km/h is the speed limit).

Calgarian · #**1800** Posted **Oct 28, 2014, 8:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Not a river... Montreal has the St. Lawrence so I wouldn't be impressed by this. I'm talking about dozens of little creeks and wooden areas within the city. The Don River is just an example.

Fair enough.

Fish Creek and Fish Creek park in Calgary would probably be the best comparison here.