What city skylines do you think underperform for their population?

[Symz]

I've always felt Windsor's skyline could be more than what it is.

I was surprised and impressed with the size and density of Regina's skyline when I first saw it.

I was just wondering what Canadian city skylines of cities under 500,000 you guys thought weren't punching their weight with respects to how large in population they are?

And to add to that, which Canadian city skylines for cities under 500,000 do you think are quite impressive for their population?

[Nicko999]

Montreal could do more... but I'm bias.

[Razor]

Well judging from the sky-line alone, you wouldn't know that Ottawa was a metro of over a million people..It's got fairly large sprawl though. I think it wins (loses) hands down.

[Roquentin]

Quebec City, maybe Saskatoon

[whiteford]

Originally Posted by Roquentin

Quebec City, maybe Saskatoon

Saskatoon has a exciting skyline for its population and it kicks the shit out of most cities in north America that are near anywhere its size or much much larger. it even holds its own right here in good ol skyline crazy canada. dont kid yourself. go check it out for your self, then make your judgement. its huge for a city of 230,000.

[Roquentin]

Originally Posted by whiteford

Saskatoon has a exciting skyline for its population and it kicks the shit out of most cities in north America that are near anywhere its size or much much larger. it even holds its own right here in good ol skyline crazy canada. dont kid yourself. go check it out for your self, then make your judgement. its huge for a city of 230,000.

Yikes.
I currently live in downtown Saskatoon, and I don't find it overly "exciting" skyline-wise. The skyline certainly doesn't reflect the quick growth of the city (most of which is suburban). As the city grows towards 300,000 over the next decade, the skyline will seem increasingly stunted. My hope is that projects around River Landing and the Warehouse District will improve things on that front. The downtown condo market will have to pick up for that to happen, though.

[isaidso]

Ottawa, Edmonton, KW, St. Catharines, Quebec City, and Montreal.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Ottawa, Edmonton, KW, St. Catharines, Quebec City, and Montreal.

Please explain the Edmonton reference. Curious.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Please explain the Edmonton reference. Curious.

On second consideration, Edmonton doesn't deserve to be there. It's more accurate that Calgary over achieves and that Edmonton looks tiny by comparison despite both metros being literally the same size.

[Symz]

I don't think Edmonton looks small at all, it's just Calgary is growing at a mutants pace.

I would have to agree when someone said Yellowknife's skyline punches above it's weight.

[Chadillaccc]

KW, Windsor, Oshawa, St. Catherines and Hamilton are all too close to Toronto and London (the actual major financial centers of Southern Ontario) to need tall business towers.

Regina has an impressive skyline because most major business in Saskatchewan is centered there. Same reason why Calgary has a far denser skyline than Edmonton even though it's only 200 000 people larger.


I would say for how remote they are, Thunder Bay and Sudbury have the most underwhelming skylines in Canada. Keep in mind, Sudbuy's CMA is only 60 000 people smaller than Regina's... and Sudbury is the de-facto capital and resource distribution hub of all of Northern Ontario east of Wawa which is a population of nearly 600 000... so I'd say Sudbury wins when you consider the logistics of skylines and the need for larger buildings.

[feepa]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Same reason why Calgary has a far denser skyline than Edmonton even though it's only 200 000 people larger.

Calgary Metro Population (2006): 1.076 M
Edmonton Metro Population (2006) 1.034 M

Care to explain where you derived the 200,000 mark from? (I believe Edmonton has closed the gap some more in the last 5 years)

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by feepa

Calgary Metro Population (2006): 1.076 M
Edmonton Metro Population (2006) 1.034 M

Care to explain where you derived the 200,000 mark from? (I believe Edmonton has closed the gap some more in the last 5 years)

Edmonton has still lost ground to Calgary over the last 5 years, just not as fast as before.

[Chinook Arch]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

Edmonton has still lost ground to Calgary over the last 5 years, just not as fast as before.

Edmonton has lost a little bit of ground to Calgary (population wise) over the last 5 or so years, but not much, If I recall it's kept a close pace.

As far as the original subject of skylines, Edmonton's skyline is actually above normal for its population. Compare it other cities with similar or larger populations (Buffalo, SLC, Louisville, San Antonio etc.. ) and it's got a much larger skyline.


Edit: just for kicks I looked up the population growth of Edm and Cgy over the last five years, and it is indeed what I thought, pretty close, with Calgary having a slight edge.

Calgary
1076
1242
+166K

Edmonton
1034
1176
+142K

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm

[SHOFEAR]

Originally Posted by Chinook Arch

Edmonton has lost a little bit of ground to Calgary (population wise) over the last 5 or so years, but not much, If I recall it's kept a close pace.

As far as the original subject of skylines, Edmonton's skyline is actually above normal for its population. Compare it other cities with similar or larger populations (Buffalo, SLC, Louisville, San Antonio etc.. ) and it's got a much larger skyline.


Edit: just for kicks I looked up the population growth of Edm and Cgy over the last five years, and it is indeed what I thought, pretty close, with Calgary having a slight edge.

Calgary
1076
1242
+166K

Edmonton
1034
1176
+142K

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm

Where as the previous five years was probably 100K or so difference in Calgary's favor.

Then there was some article out this year saying how Edmonton has created just under 50K jobs in the past year and Calgary a fraction of that. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if over the next couple of years we see higher growth numbers in Edmonton.

[caltrane74]

Kitchener's skyline is pathetic for a city closing in on 500,000 people.

[thurmas]

Ottawa, Quebec, Hamilton, Saskatoon

[MolsonExport]

Underperformers: Kitchener-Waterloo (hands-down the most disappointing "skyline"), followed by Ste. Cath, Ottawa.

Overperformers (if there is such a thing): Regina, Saskatoon, Halifax, Calg.


London has not been a financial centre for two decades, since the hollowing out of the 90s and the migration (due to buyouts) of Insurance/banking HQ to other centres.

[MonctonRad]

Even though I'm a loyal Monctonian, I would have to admit that Moncton is a definite underperformer.

The CMA is nearly 140,000 and yet we only have one building which is 20 stories (and an ugly one to boot). The city is defined by sprawl and, while the downtown area is quite acceptable at the street level, the skyline is pretty pitiful.

Things may change in the future as the city continues to grow at a fairly robust pace, and the downtown is starting to show signs of renewed vigour but it will remain a challenge to promote a proper image for the city on a forum such as this.

[WhipperSnapper]

Guelph, Kitchener/Waterloo, 905 and some others that aren't coming to mind


I disagree on Ottawa. It's not tall but has a sizable dense core surrounded by hundreds of towers in the more suburban areas.