Canadian Urban Canyons

[logan5]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

It's going to be growing much faster really.

So much of Vancouver's growth is focused outside of the downtown peninsula.

Even with the Broadway Plan now in effect?

Development in downtown Vancouver has slowed considerably, compared to the 90' and 00's because there are not many sites left to develop on.

The Broadway Corridor is basically a 6 sq km blank slate, with every residential property eligible for development into higher density, with the most of the area eligible for high density tower forms. So I would suggest that with such a huge area to work with, Vancouver will outpace Toronto in downtown development in the next few decades, as Toronto will start to hit some roadblocks with finding sites that can be developed. Hence my conclusion that the 2 downtowns will be hard to distinguish in 20 years time. Both will be huge blobs of green towers.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by logan5

The Broadway Corridor is basically a 6 sq km blank slate, with every residential property eligible for development into higher density, with the most of the area eligible for high density tower forms. So I would suggest that with such a huge area to work with, Vancouver will outpace Toronto in downtown development in the next few decades, as Toronto will start to hit some roadblocks with finding sites that can be developed. Hence my conclusion that the 2 downtowns will be hard to distinguish in 20 years time. Both will be huge blobs of green towers.

There are entire neighbourhoods in Toronto planned for towers that don't even exist yet: (eg. the eastern waterfront)


steveve

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by phone

Are you saying that were it not for the height limit, Vancouver's skyline would be superior to Toronto's?

No but the Georgia street canyon would be taller.

[MolsonExport]

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5017...7i16384!8i8192

canyon under construction
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4940...7i16384!8i8192

[Denscity]

^^^ I think that's where I saw the hundreds of smokers at lunch hour! Couldn't believe how many there were.

[TorontoDrew]

Yonge Street Canyon by Jack Landau, on Flickr

[Maldive]

yrt+viva=1system

Bird’s eye-view of the future of the Yonge and Gerrard intersection by steveve.


steveve

[caltrane74]

Yonge and Gerrard may end up being the tallest building cluster(intersection) in Canada

300 meters (under -contruction -- Concord Sky)
275 meters (built) - Aura
255 meters (proposed - Delta Chelsea Proposal)
238 meters (proposed - Delta Chelsea Proposal)

What's that tall proposal north of Gerrard ?

[Nouvellecosse]

That's crazy. Let's just hope the new additions will have decent quality.

I'm actually not sure I like it from a skyline aesthetics perspective though. My two favourite types of skylines as ones where either the overall skyline cluster has a cohesive shape (often like a mountain rising to a central pinnacle) or where there are a few prominent landmark buildings rising from a foundation of shorter infill. With the latter, the prominent landmark buildings need to be a good 50% taller than anything within at least a radius equal to its height. Basically a 300m landmark building wouldn't have any building taller than 200m less than 300m away from it.

Currently, Toronto has a sort of hybrid skyline in that the old core is the mountain style while the rest of downtown is the landmark model with Aura and One Bloor both being far taller than anything nearby. But with some of the new developments, that's being lost. One Yonge, Forma, etc are throwing off the mountain aesthetic of the main core, while The One and new this proposal are crowding the landmarks in the rest of the skyline. I worry that it's becoming just a shapeless mass of buildings. That's why when people talk about Chicago's advantage with its supertalls, it isn't the supertall status that matters. It's that buildings that are significantly above supertall status are spread throughout the skyline and generally much taller than their neighbours. One with a roof height over 440m, two over 350m, two more over 340m, etc. The only one that's a bit crowded is Prudential, but being so open on one side due to the park space offsets the effect. But this isn't an aesthetic that can be achieved with a bunch of buildings just over the supertall threshold in already tall parts of town.

But of course that could all be fixed with a couple of strategically placed mega or near-mega talls.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That's crazy. Let's just hope the new additions will have decent quality.

I'm actually not sure I like it from a skyline aesthetics perspective though. My two favourite types of skylines as ones where either the overall skyline cluster has a cohesive shape (often like a mountain rising to a central pinnacle) or where there are a few prominent landmark buildings rising from a foundation of shorter infill. With the latter, the prominent landmark buildings need to be a good 50% taller than anything within at least a radius equal to its height. Basically a 300m landmark building wouldn't have any building taller than 200m less than 300m away from it.

Currently, Toronto has a sort of hybrid skyline in that the old core is the mountain style while the rest of downtown is the landmark model with Aura and One Bloor both being far taller than anything nearby. But with some of the new developments, that's being lost. One Yonge, Forma, etc are throwing off the mountain aesthetic of the main core, while The One and new this proposal are crowding the landmarks in the rest of the skyline. I worry that it's becoming just a shapeless mass of buildings. That's why when people talk about Chicago's advantage with its supertalls, it isn't the supertall status that matters. It's that buildings that are significantly above supertall status are spread throughout the skyline and generally much taller than their neighbours. One with a roof height over 440m, two over 350m, two more over 340m, etc. The only one that's a bit crowded is Prudential, but being so open on one side due to the park space offsets the effect. But this isn't an aesthetic that can be achieved with a bunch of buildings just over the supertall threshold in already tall parts of town.

But of course that could all be fixed with a couple of strategically placed mega or near-mega talls.

That's just the most Toronto way of doing things. Haphazard, sort-of-but-not-really planned. It's fitting that the skyline should reflect that ethos.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

That's just the most Toronto way of doing things. Haphazard, sort-of-but-not-really planned. It's fitting that the skyline should reflect that ethos.

I wouldn't say it's haphazard, it's just that the shape of the skyline aside from shadow coverage isn't really a priority when it comes to planning what goes where.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by logan5

Even with the Broadway Plan now in effect?

Development in downtown Vancouver has slowed considerably, compared to the 90' and 00's because there are not many sites left to develop on.

The Broadway Corridor is basically a 6 sq km blank slate, with every residential property eligible for development into higher density, with the most of the area eligible for high density tower forms. So I would suggest that with such a huge area to work with, Vancouver will outpace Toronto in downtown development in the next few decades, as Toronto will start to hit some roadblocks with finding sites that can be developed. Hence my conclusion that the 2 downtowns will be hard to distinguish in 20 years time. Both will be huge blobs of green towers.

You should check out what's going in in Toronto's downtown, it's nuts.

Vancouver has a lot of construction going on, much much more than it appears from just being on the Canada section, but it's spread across so many nodes that it just pales in comparison to what's going on in central Toronto (Downtown, Yonge and College, Yorkville, King west etc...)

Originally Posted by Denscity

No but the Georgia street canyon would be taller.

Taller than Toronto? Huh?

Even with height limits removed I doubt towers in Vancouver would be taller than Toronto. The floorplate size restrictions Vancouver enforces really limit a towers height.

If restrictions in Vancouver were fully removed on all design related items sure Vancouver would easily be as tall as Toronto (maybe taller but really tough to say there) based off project economics, but that's never going to happen.

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I wouldn't say it's haphazard, it's just that the shape of the skyline aside from shadow coverage isn't really a priority when it comes to planning what goes where.

Toronto's planning is pretty haphazard, especially what goes on at grade. The skyline looks great IMO because of it but the general livability standards and public realm enforced by Toronto's planning department is pretty bad.

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

It feels odd to say this is an urban canyon considering this is in my neighbourhood and is so close to me, but I think this can be said to be urban by now with how much construction has been going on in this area in the last 15 years.
This is Redpath Avenue, a sidestreet east of Yonge and Eglinton (where a new LRT line is going), and the only NS route directly inside this apartment neighbourhood which has grown exponentially in that same time frame.
I took this 8 days ago. There are proposals to tear down the apartments seen to the left, in the foreground, in front of the under construction (40 floor) building.
Construction from Erskine by Draulerin Photographics, on Flickr

It's nearly 1 kilomentre long by now.

[Coldrsx]

https://twitter.com/SingleYegChick/s...65631166164992

[J.OT13]

More a cliff than a canyon. Parkdale and the perpendicular Scott Street will feature these lines of towers over the next decade, with a dozen+ proposed or u/c. Brought on by the Transitway conversion to rail around Tunney's, Westboro and Dominion (Kitchi Sibi).

Originally Posted by Harley613

I couldn't be more excited about this one making it's mark

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

I took this yesterday. Queen street has always had a (partial*) canyon west of Toronto city hall, but recently, it's been really growing into a true canyon. It'll take time to genuinely become one, but in sections, it can appear to be one already. The amount of public spaces and various plazas diminishes the effect, unlike a street like say King, or John.With the Queen street subway starting, I can't imagine how varied it'll be in two decades.
Wednesday, Downtown by Draulerin Photographics, on Flickr

[MolsonExport]

Just got back from a week in Chicago. Wholly Shit, there is so much skyscraper eye-candy. In my worldly travels, Chicago is, hands-down, the second best skyscraper city on the planet, bested only by New York City. The variety of skyscrapers, of every style, from every era, is unparalleled in the world. It even beats New York on this metric. Oh and the canyons....

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Just got back from a week in Chicago. Wholly Shit, there is so much skyscraper eye-candy. In my worldly travels, Chicago is, hands-down, the second best skyscraper city on the planet, bested only by New York City. The variety of skyscrapers, of every style, from every era, is unparalleled in the world. It even beats New York on this metric. Oh and the canyons....

Yeah it’s a beautiful city. New York and Chicago had an unrivalled head start when it comes to skyscrapers. The architectural riverboat tour is well worth the time.

[yaletown_fella]

Dalhousie Street Canyon

[shappy]

Amazing that's what little Dalhousie street looks like now. It was like this for years: https://maps.app.goo.gl/1byaDBP9sxocbokH7