HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:10 AM
maru2501's Avatar
maru2501 maru2501 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: chicago
Posts: 1,471
I'll have to get back up there. The toronto in my head is from the 80s. Impressive amount of construction. Agree the skyline needs the punch of some signature towers. Even at London Shard height
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:26 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gresto View Post
In the 500'+ metric, Toronto should pass Chicago in the next few years, unless there's a major market crash, which doesn't appear to be in the offing (there have been significant corrections, notably last year). Including proposals, the number of 500'+ buildings for TO is something like 175, though I believe that figure includes Mississauga (I might be wrong about that).
With regard to skyscrapers, Chicago does have a couple of things Toronto does not, which is better architecture - both of the glorious early-skyscraper-era sort and the present-day - and several supertalls under its belt.
There is 178 built + under construction + proposals over 150m in the City of Toronto and 14 in Mississauga
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:33 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 866
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
^ I don’t know how big a factor Chinese money has had or is having on Canada’s housing market, but the price of housing in Toronto and Vancouver particularly is insane.
Every study on the matter says it's an insignificant effect in both Vancouver and Toronto. But that doesn't stop journalists from making a lot of noise about it and mischaracterizing those studies, the whole money-laundering articles are from journalists who don't understand what the studies are talking about.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:36 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
if it's all about international immigration and population growth, then why has chicago built 50 new 500+ footers over the past 2 decades?

if it's all about transit expansion and planning, then why has chicago built 50 new 500+ footers over the past 2 decades?

if it's all about global capital seeking safe haven, then why has chicago built 50 new 500+ footers over the past 2 decades?



there's more to the story here than the overly simplistic hot takes being offered in this thread.
Everything about Chicago is weird to me, in the best way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:39 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 866
Quote:
Originally Posted by maru2501 View Post
I'll have to get back up there. The toronto in my head is from the 80s. Impressive amount of construction. Agree the skyline needs the punch of some signature towers. Even at London Shard height
The One at 309m is under construction and is the same height as the Shard, but you wouldn't see it from the lake skyline as it's at Bloor and Yonge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:41 AM
chicubs111 chicubs111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 994
I don't know...Toronto's buildings all look alike for most part..the architecture is not good and looks cheap (Miami'ish)...just building a ton of residential buildings with mediocre architecture is nothing to aim for... Chicago at least has some highlights in architecture during its building boom cycles (not including its art deco collection which are unmatched in north american by any city outside of NYC)...not saying there all winners but there is usually a handful of excellent designs. Does anyone have the stats comparing Chicago's office market size to Toronto?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:11 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkhanan1 View Post
Visual aid for this discussion...This classic lake view will be changing dramatically in the next 2-5 years. The tallest towers are still to come. Also, the skyline stretches further along the lake than this pic captures and it goes on for miles and miles away from the lake, centred on Yonge St. Plus there are impressive and growing suburban clusters in Etobicoke and Mississauga.

i find it hard to show the size of Toronto Skyline in pictures but video does it better justice

Flying into Toronto's Island Airport from a couple of months ago
Video Link

Last edited by Nite; Jun 18, 2019 at 4:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:56 AM
softee's Avatar
softee softee is offline
Aimless Wanderer
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Downtown Toronto
Posts: 3,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicubs111 View Post
I don't know...Toronto's buildings all look alike for most part..the architecture is not good and looks cheap (Miami'ish)...just building a ton of residential buildings with mediocre architecture is nothing to aim for... Chicago at least has some highlights in architecture during its building boom cycles (not including its art deco collection which are unmatched in north american by any city outside of NYC)...not saying there all winners but there is usually a handful of excellent designs. Does anyone have the stats comparing Chicago's office market size to Toronto?
Lots of office towers on the rise in Toronto now, too.
__________________
Public transit is the lifeblood of every healthy city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 4:15 AM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicubs111 View Post
I don't know...Toronto's buildings all look alike for most part..the architecture is not good and looks cheap (Miami'ish)...just building a ton of residential buildings with mediocre architecture is nothing to aim for... Chicago at least has some highlights in architecture during its building boom cycles (not including its art deco collection which are unmatched in north american by any city outside of NYC)...not saying there all winners but there is usually a handful of excellent designs. Does anyone have the stats comparing Chicago's office market size to Toronto?
It's the condo equivalent of McMansions (McCondos?) and yeah it looks pretty cheap and generic. One of the truisms of architecture is that buildings with balconies never age well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 12:05 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,775
McMansions are examples of people wanting a large and flashy place at all cost and willing to sacrifice things like quality and location in order to afford it. Condos in Toronto's context are examples of people willing to accept small and often much more modest places compared to suburban houses in order to live in a desirable location. The only similarity would be that people are making a trade off for one thing vs another, but that's the case with almost everything for people who aren't actually wealthy.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 12:52 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhun1 View Post
Jacksonville's skyline, though small, is gorgeous, especially at night. Toronto, though tall, strikes me as bland in a number of ways and too much like a number of places.

And by the way, I'm quite aware I get laughed at and berated for that opinion by the majority. It almost makes it more fun. If Toronto gets a little more colorful, I might change my opinion.

Image from dapimaging.com

Image from vantagevenus.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 12:59 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 18,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
^ chicago has transit, but no recent significant transit expansions.
and transit ridership in chicago has fallen over the last 2 decades, so by doady's theory, chicago shouldn't be building any skyscrapers at all, but it is building them, shitloads of them in fact.
I don't think transit has much to do with highrise construction, at least in 2019, in the North American context. Chicago highrises aren't concentrated around transit hubs.

But transit is indirectly relevant in that it makes Chicago's core possible, and the desirability of the core feeds housing demand.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:48 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Jos Connaissant
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 39,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Obviously when I say tower I mean skyscraper.

And lets be honest here the CN tower is no beauty made with nice materials, it's an ugly concrete mast.

Toronto needs something like the John Hancock Center.
I find that a tower like Scotia Plaza looks as good as the John Hancock.

Looked it up and the John Hancock wouldn't really tower over Scotia. I though the difference would be much greater.

Perhaps it's that Scotia is buried in the middle of other towers, whereas the Hancock is more of a focal point of the skyline.
__________________
Si j'aurais su, j'aurais pas venu!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 1:58 PM
suburbanite's Avatar
suburbanite suburbanite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,520
Toronto's office core is extremely dense and compact and even the 300m First Canadian Place gets lost in the crowd from many angles now. Toronto's new office builds are all high-quality for the most part, but the square footage is spread out across numerous ~200m towers as opposed to one or two supertalls as that's what fundamentally makes sense in this market.

Chicago's core covers that much more ground and allows the Sears Tower, Trump, and Hancock to each be the focal point of their respective areas.
__________________
Discontented suburbanite since 1994
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:00 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 20,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Looked it up and the John Hancock wouldn't really tower over Scotia. I though the difference would be much greater.
the height difference looks fairly significant to my eye, especially with hancock's antenna's extending up to 1,500'. those sticks don't count in the official height measurement according to the CTBUH's "rules", but from a strictly visual perspective, they do draw the eye ever upward into the sky, as does the tower's tapering form.



as for which is the "nicer" building, scotia plaza is a handsome enough tower, but JHC is one of the world's great skyscrapers, one of the most sublime examples of its era.

as nice as it is, i wouldn't put scotia plaza in that same category. and i don't think many architectural historians would either.
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:17 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
McMansions are examples of people wanting a large and flashy place at all cost and willing to sacrifice things like quality and location in order to afford it. Condos in Toronto's context are examples of people willing to accept small and often much more modest places compared to suburban houses in order to live in a desirable location. The only similarity would be that people are making a trade off for one thing vs another, but that's the case with almost everything for people who aren't actually wealthy.
They're like McMansions in the sense that they are cookie cutter designs that you pick out of a catalog.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:25 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite View Post
i find it hard to show the size of Toronto Skyline in pictures but video does it better justice

Flying into Toronto's Island Airport from a couple of months ago
Video Link
Jesus.

I wish Chicago had the depth from the lake that Toronto has and Toronto had the stretched out skyline on the lake as Chicago has. It would be a match made in heaven.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:43 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
Life enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Barcelona, NYC, California
Posts: 3,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by maru2501 View Post
I'll have to get back up there. The toronto in my head is from the 80s. Impressive amount of construction. Agree the skyline needs the punch of some signature towers. Even at London Shard height
The shard is basically a 250 meter building with a hat. Toronto needs a 400+, something like Sears or WTC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 2:59 PM
skysoar skysoar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
Jesus.

I wish Chicago had the depth from the lake that Toronto has and Toronto had the stretched out skyline on the lake as Chicago has. It would be a match made in heaven.
I have been to Toronto and have always been impressed with their skyline. But I would say its not New York or Chicago impressive, and for some reason I don't feel it ever will be. Its something unique about the N.Y and Chicago skylines beyond their numbers, that is hard to describe but you know it when you see it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2019, 3:05 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by skysoar View Post
I have been to Toronto and have always been impressed with their skyline. But I would say its not New York or Chicago impressive, and for some reason I don't feel it ever will be. Its something unique about the N.Y and Chicago skylines beyond their numbers, that is hard to describe but you know it when you see it.
They are mature skylines with buildings from different eras and architectural styles. You really can't compare them. It's like the difference between being in a neighborhood of McMansions vs being in a neighborhood of century old custom homes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:04 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.