Canadian Maps and Graphics

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Who knew that passing through a city was stalking... Good thing Lio didn't stop in Toronto on his drive across the country - wouldn't want to have to worry about a "stocker" here!

Cities normally try to ATTRACT "stockers" and get them to spend their money there... As Acajack pointed out in the other thread, it is actually 100% thanks to SaskScraper that I ended up filling my gas tank AND having breakfast in Maple Creek.

I'd say that there are only two cases where I can name SSP and one single SSP member as being the driving force making the difference between me actually wanting to take the time to visit a certain city, or not. Those two cases are:

St. John's, NL; due to SignalHillHiker's years of posting activity about it. (Hasn't happened yet.)

Maple Creek, SK; due to SaskScraper's years of posting activity about it. (Happened!)

and maybe a third one, Okotoks, but that's not really the sole work of one single SSPer, though maybe it could be mostly ascribed to Chad (who IIRC is the one who kept insisting that Calgary would immediately be so much nicer if Stat Can would finally stop being sooo biased and add Okotoks to the metro area already).

[niwell]

SHH may be the sole reason I really want to visit St. John's, and feel like I know the place intimately despite having never visited before! I was even able to convince my wife who has been several times before (she was in the music industry) and not a fan of return trips to most places. We actually talked about this summer but obviously something got in the way...

[lio45]

If/when I go to St. John's, I'm pretty sure I'll be crashing at SHH's place (I actually know exactly where it is, due to having been consulted back when he was wondering whether to buy it or not, and I said he should go ahead; I like to think I played a bit of a role in helping him decide to buy it ) ... can you say Epic Stocker Level, vs my Maple Creek visit!!!

The difference in hospitality between Newfoundland and Saskatchewan, I expect to be striking. In the former, (I'm sure that) the stranger/visitor is welcomed with open arms; in the latter, the locals are warned there's a visitor, and that they should worry!

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by lio45

If/when I go to St. John's, I'm pretty sure I'll be crashing at SHH's place (I actually know exactly where it is, due to having been consulted back when he was wondering whether to buy it or not, and I said he should go ahead; I like to think I played a bit of a role in helping him decide to buy it ) ... can you say Epic Stocker Level, vs my Maple Creek visit!!!

The difference in hospitality between Newfoundland and Saskatchewan, I expect to be striking. In the former, (I'm sure that) the stranger/visitor is welcomed with open arms; in the latter, the locals are warned there's a visitor, and that they should worry!

...And i was the very first guest in Sig's place!

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by lio45

Trust me, you don't want to hear what MolsonEx (or, more generally, all the SSPers active in the Soul-Sucking Buildings thread) would have to say about, for example, this section of Jasper Street:

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.9082...7i13312!8i6656

Sad to say, that looks like every main street in every small town across Alsaskatoba. Some small towns were able to get some substantial brick buildings built back in the 1920's. But the depression, the war and then the rural exodus in the 70's resulted in what you see in Maple Creek.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Sad to say, that looks like every main street in every small town across Alsaskatoba. Some small towns were able to get some substantial brick buildings built back in the 1920's. But the depression, the war and then the rural exodus in the 70's resulted in what you see in Maple Creek.

Looks nice. What's the problem supposed to be?

[jamincan]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

That Census Dotmap of North America is interesting, gives the impression that Minneapolis is more populous than LA & San Diego combined,
and Salt Lake City has just as many people as Miami, who knew

The problem with dot maps is that it shows all density above a certain amount the same.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by lio45

I was actually pretty kind to your hometown, all things considered.

Trust me, you don't want to hear what MolsonEx (or, more generally, all the SSPers active in the Soul-Sucking Buildings thread) would have to say about, for example, this section of Jasper Street:

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.9082...7i13312!8i6656


... maybe you're better off having everyone on ignore, in the end

Looks like a typical prairie town, but what human could conceive of a façade like this?

https://goo.gl/maps/ZyatUFiEPdTK3YnDA

[Architype]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

What jumps out at me from that map is how sparsely populated BC is. Makes sense though, not many people live where there are big mountains, just in the valleys below.

This type of map is misleading at best. The population of interior BC is actually about 1 million, which compares favorably to, say, all of Manitoba or all of Saskatchewan.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Sad to say, that looks like every main street in every small town across Alsaskatoba. Some small towns were able to get some substantial brick buildings built back in the 1920's. But the depression, the war and then the rural exodus in the 70's resulted in what you see in Maple Creek.

American "Prairie" towns suffered from the same factors yet their main streets look like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0748...7i13312!8i6656

(Explore that Street View a bit and you'll note that there are many boarded up buildings; worse than Maple Creek even.)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Looks nice. What's the problem supposed to be?

No windows, or really tiny windows with bastard sizes/shapes;
Cheap vinyl siding;
Cheap industrial-style metal siding;
Mismatched siding styles (in both style and colors) on the same building;
Worn or damaged siding;
Store fronts that look dead or empty;
One-story building that's the width of two and that looks like a later addition to the street wall (by someone who didn't give a shit about preserving the feel of the street).

[Architype]

Originally Posted by lio45

American "Prairie" towns suffered from the same factors yet their main streets look like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0748...7i13312!8i6656

(Explore that Street View a bit and you'll note that there are many boarded up buildings; worse than Maple Creek even.)

Areas without natural forests used more brick, etc.. Canadian cities, even the prairie ones, were closer to our northern forest resources, so we built more out of wood. Otherwise, lack of masonry construction indicates a historical shortage of skilled trades. Just a theory.

[isaidso]

American prairie towns have historically been more prosperous than their Canadian counterparts. It manifests itself in many ways but one of them is grander buildings and better quality materials. Canadian prairie towns were typically more bare bones functional with little to no thought to making things look attractive. You see the same disparity in cities too. The historical relative wealth is on full display when one looks at the older sections of say Toronto vs Boston. It's not hard to tell which was wealthier.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Architype

Areas without natural forests used more brick, etc.. Canadian cities, even the prairie ones, were closer to our northern forest resources, so we built more out of wood. Otherwise, lack of masonry construction indicates a historical shortage of skilled trades. Just a theory.

To me, it also indicates a lack of faith in the long term viability of the town, and a lack of caring about its future. Cheap buildings that are meant to be utilitarian (cheapest sidings, cheapest/smallest windows you can get away with, etc.) are something that's typical of Northern Quebec mining boomtowns, for example.

Conversely, when there are people who decide it's worth it to build more durable and more elegant buildings in the town, it says something.

Also, the area around Maple Creek isn't exactly lumber industry central. It's drier and with even less trees than the area of Oklahoma I posted about.

[lio45]

BTW, during my Maple Creek pit stop I have indeed stocked up on resources to resume my trip (leaving town with both gas tank and stomach full). So, guilty as charged.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by lio45

To me, it also indicates a lack of faith in the long term viability of the town, and a lack of caring about its future. Cheap buildings that are meant to be utilitarian (cheapest sidings, cheapest/smallest windows you can get away with, etc.) are something that's typical of Northern Quebec mining boomtowns, for example.

Conversely, when there are people who decide it's worth it to build more durable and more elegant buildings in the town, it says something.

Also, the area around Maple Creek isn't exactly lumber industry central. It's drier and with even less trees than the area of Oklahoma I posted about.

Climate is often the biggest factor other than economics, it affects how buildings age, and are thus renovated more often. In many climatically harsher places (i.e. northern Newfoundland & the Arctic), windows are typically so tiny that they remind me of fast food take out windows. More wall and less window makes for dull buildings but they're also cheaper to heat.

[Acajack]

I agree with what's been said. Another thing is that cities and towns on the U.S. side of the border often had a 25-50 year or more head start in growing up.

You also see this in the eastern half of the continent where places like Syracuse and Buffalo arguably have better legacy historical and architectural bones (relative to size) than Ottawa and Toronto do.

It is actually very rare that "earlier" doesn't equal "better" when it comes to this stuff.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I agree with what's been said. Another thing is that cities and towns on the U.S. side of the border often had a 25-50 year or more head start in growing up.

You also see this in the eastern half of the continent where places like Syracuse and Buffalo arguably have better legacy historical and architectural bones (relative to size) than Ottawa and Toronto do.

It is actually very rare that "earlier" doesn't equal "better" when it comes to this stuff.

The Canadian Prairies were settled relatively late compared to the US West.

The CPR didn't cross the country until the 1880s. Saskatchewan bloomed in population from 1901 to 1931, going from ~90,000 to ~900,000.

Many northern Ontarian towns have that shambly 'put up by the company at lowest cost' vibe, especially if the company was a lumber company. Why not use your own product to make your company town? Sure, a few homes might be more 'premium' to house the higher-ups, but the majority of them were workers' homes.

I guess it was just easier to ship tons of lumber within Canada along the railway to construct these places. Brickwork is expensive relative to lumber.

I'm still not sure which is worse, to be honest. A better maintained and used shabby exterior or a clearly abandoned brick structure. Comparing the two towns, the Oklahoma one has better 'bones' but worse vibe, but Maple Creek looks like it is inhabited and used. I'm leaning to the one that's inhabited.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by wave46

The Canadian Prairies were settled relatively late compared to the US West.

The CPR didn't cross the country until the 1880s. Saskatchewan bloomed in population from 1901 to 1931, going from ~90,000 to ~900,000.

Many northern Ontarian towns have that shambly 'put up by the company at lowest cost' vibe, especially if the company was a lumber company. Why not use your own product to make your company town? Sure, a few homes might be more 'premium' to house the higher-ups, but the majority of them were workers' homes.

I guess it was just easier to ship tons of lumber within Canada along the railway to construct these places. Brickwork is expensive relative to lumber.

I'm still not sure which is worse, to be honest. A better maintained and used shabby exterior or a clearly abandoned brick structure. Comparing the two towns, the Oklahoma one has better 'bones' but worse vibe, but Maple Creek looks like it is inhabited and used. I'm leaning to the one that's inhabited.

li

I've mentioned before that my wife is from NE Ontario. Most places up there look like they were thrown up fairly quickly with the idea that everyone could pack up and leave on a moment's notice. So "legacy" is rarely top of mind.

Even today (when the permanency of its cities is virtually assured) I find that national and international companies and chains invest little in aesthetics when they build stuff there. Almost all of their stuff there looks noticeably shittier than what these same outfits build in southern areas of Canada.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by lio45

No windows, or really tiny windows with bastard sizes/shapes;
Cheap vinyl siding;
Cheap industrial-style metal siding;
Mismatched siding styles (in both style and colors) on the same building;
Worn or damaged siding;
Store fronts that look dead or empty;
One-story building that's the width of two and that looks like a later addition to the street wall (by someone who didn't give a shit about preserving the feel of the street).

That's what a Prairie town is. It looks intriguing to me. You and your chichi notions ... "the feel of the street" ... good lord.