Originally Posted by Traynor
Cal I applaud your tenacity and I am a Toronto lover too, but one block of a street does not make a canyon. The above video is an example of what could be, but filling in the rest of it with your imagination doesn't make it so. A canyon either exists or it doesn't.
Even saying Bay street is a canyon from the lake to north of Bloor is a bit of a stretch. The east side of Bay north of City Hall is a cliff for sure, but the west side never matches its consistency and height to be a real canyon. Sections of it work but others don't.
In my opinion Toronto has many short spurts that are canyon like, if you squint and don't think about what happens at the end of the next block (ahem... surface parking lot).
In my humble opinion, a canyon should stretch for many city blocks, have consistent height on both sides of the street and few if any setbacks.
Man, you're strict! If you have kids I'm sure they always get their homework done on time.
As far as the actual "rules" I agree to a point, but I disagree about having consistent height and stretching for many blocks. As long as a section of street is lined with highrises, it should be considered a canyon even if they vary is height. And not all canyons need to be expansive. Short ones can be nice as well. Remember, the rule should be for defining canyons, not NY/Chi caliber canyons in general, which would obviously have much stricter criteria.