Canadian Skyline Thread III

[phone]

I've noticed that effect to, particularly when looking to the north and south (this picture faces north). The city has a somewhat more prominent E-W alignment than N-S, but the main reasons is that downtown is located near the middle of the city as opposed to abutting a geographic obstacle, and 300,000 just isn't that big of a city.

[phone]

Originally Posted by zoomer

I tried using the measure tool in Google Earth, but the numbers shown on the yellow line are totally different from the menu results. It looks like Saskatoon is roughly 15 km by 15 km, yet the yellow line says about 21 by 21. Hmm.

If you were to draw a quadrilateral around Saskatoon it would be an approximate square, but there is more bulk going east and west, with a bit of a northern "chimney" that doesn't fill out the quarters of the square.

[Acajack]

Thanks guys!

[Martin Mtl]

Photo: https://www.facebook.com/REMgrandmtl


Photo: https://www.facebook.com/jfsavariaphotographe


Photo: https://www.facebook.com/jfsavariaphotographe

[MolsonExport]

It is good that the foreground of Montreal, by the river, wasn't blocked off by a wall of substandard concrete/glass monoliths (a la Harbourfont centre in TO). There are plenty of buildings, but they rise in height gradually, and don't block the views of the classic 1960s international towers.

[Hawrylyshyn]

^Toronto's waterfront is truly one of the biggest disappointments of the city

[Zeej]

Originally Posted by Hawrylyshyn

^Toronto's waterfront is truly one of the biggest disappointments of the city

Yes. I hate to say it, having enjoyed living in Toronto for 6 years and having worked directly on the waterfront for 3, but it's by and large a failure.

I was just in Chicago and the difference is profound.

I was also in Milwaukee.... it makes far better use of its waterfront.

It's disappointing that a 5th tier American city had the vision to program its waterfront with generous green space and civic/cultural institutions, whereas our premier city decided to largely privatize theirs. Perhaps Milwaukee was just copying its big brother 1.5 hours away, but the results still speak for themselves.

A truly wasted opportunity.

[someone123]

New webcam showing Halifax Harbour. It pans back and forth, going from Dartmouth over to the North End of Halifax and back:

https://www.novascotiawebcams.com/we...fax-waterfront

[niwell]

I've been to Chicago over a dozen times and confess I don't really get the fawning over the waterfront. It's fine, but after visiting a few times I didn't see the point of going back - like Toronto the best parts of the city aren't really near the water at all. The best feature is the multi-use path system for cycling but it's also largely separated from neighbourhoods by Lakeshore Drive complete with some pretty uninviting underpasses.

People tend to focus on the brief stretch of Toronto's waterfront redeveloped in the 70s but most of the central portion is in fact publicly accessible (minus the Redpath factory), and the pathway system runs uninterrupted from Mimico to the RC Harris Filtration plant. Plus a massive amount of new public space as the Port Lands begins to come on-line. Gets a lot of flak (some deserved) but actually fairly impressive considering the entirety of the Central Waterfront was reclaimed land intended for industrial uses in the 1920s.

[softee]

For being such a failure, Toronto's central waterfront sure is jam-packed with people enjoying themselves in the warm weather months!

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by niwell

I've been to Chicago over a dozen times and confess I don't really get the fawning over the waterfront. It's fine, but after visiting a few times I didn't see the point of going back - like Toronto the best parts of the city aren't really near the water at all. The best feature is the multi-use path system for cycling but it's also largely separated from neighbourhoods by Lakeshore Drive complete with some pretty uninviting underpasses.

People tend to focus on the brief stretch of Toronto's waterfront redeveloped in the 70s but most of the central portion is in fact publicly accessible (minus the Redpath factory), and the pathway system runs uninterrupted from Mimico to the RC Harris Filtration plant. Plus a massive amount of new public space as the Port Lands begins to come on-line. Gets a lot of flak (some deserved) but actually fairly impressive considering the entirety of the Central Waterfront was reclaimed land intended for industrial uses in the 1920s.

Chicago's waterfront is undoubtedly grander in that late 19th, early 20th century scale that Canadian cities don't have in significant quantities. It makes a good impression on Google Maps and for someone experiencing the city for the first time visiting the waterfront as a tourist destination. That being said, due to the reasons you mentioned, if I lived in Chicago I doubt I would be walking right along the water very often. Whereas in Toronto, I will happily walk along the boardwalk/Queens Quay to go to a volleyball game at The Docks, to a concert at the Amphitheatre, sit on the patio at Amsterdam Brewery, etc.

I don't have enough experience in Chicago to make such a definitive claim, but my gut feeling is that Chicago's waterfront is a better showpiece, while Toronto's is a more functional interactive place for the people who actually live there. That being said, a historically revisionist dream scenario would include a waterfront showpiece, something like if Coronation Park ran all the way from Ontario Place to Spadina with grand walkways and ornamentation ala Millenium Park. Some will claim that is the void that the Port Lands will fill, and we'll have to wait and see, but I get the feeling that that too will more of a functional space with weekend bicyclists and Cherry Beach goers (which is still a good thing in my mind).

[niwell]

^That's a good summary I think. Though I will note that Chicago's is more on the functional side as well once you leave downtown, though the Beaches probably beats it in accessibility. Grant/Millennium Park is a showpiece that honestly doesn't have a lot going on most of the time.

I wasn't counting it but Chicago's Riverwalk in the Loop is amazing.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

It is good that the foreground of Montreal, by the river, wasn't blocked off by a wall of substandard concrete/glass monoliths (a la Harbourfont centre in TO). There are plenty of buildings, but they rise in height gradually, and don't block the views of the classic 1960s international towers.

This was an issue 20 years ago, not so much anymore. Also some of Montreals best classic office towers are being blocked out now by new glass condos from certain views as well.Toronto's waterfront is a work in progress and when complete it might be one of the best on the continent.

[MonkeyRonin]

Chicago must have the most overrated waterfront of all time. Grant Park looks great from the skyline shots, but at street level is too chopped up by major roads and lacks much of interest - Central Park on the water it ain't. The beachside residential neighbourhoods are better, but are still too cut off from the water by Lakeshore Drive. The best interface with the water is in more peripheral areas like Rogers Park and Evanston. The riverfront is really cool though, and certainly unique. 


Toronto's waterfront has come a long way in being stitched into the fabric of the city, and the actual water's edge is good enough; but given that the central waterfront consists of late 20th-century/early 21st-century development on landfill it will probably always be the core's least interesting neighbourhood. Like Chicago, the peripheral beachfront residential neighbourhoods are better, but it also has the problem of being cut off in the west end by the Gardiner. Its best & most unique waterfront "feature" are probably the islands. 

[MolsonExport]

I wish that Toronto had something like Chicago's riverwalk. The views are stunning.

[Nouvellecosse]

The issue with the central Toronto waterfront (from say, the Billy Bishop tunnel to the Keating Channel) is that much of it is ugly or bland rather than it lacking general functionality or amenities. And while aesthetics are important, it's still just one of several important aspects of urban settings. But with that said, it isn't that ugly; it's just uglier than one would want from an important and highly visible "showcase" area.

[WhipperSnapper]

First impression of the waterfront from visitors is crossing under the Gardiner and then of Harbour Square; a fortress with an open air parking structure on the lake side Second, the wall of condos argument has been drill into native Toronto since Harbour Square was the only condo complex leading to even the biggest skyscraper enthusiasts having NIMBY tendencies towards the built up urban harbourfront.

There's nothing exciting architecturally. There's nothing ugly either. On the plus side, It is a meeting place and more than a place to go for a walk or jog.

Comparing an urban riverfront to a waterfront is a losing proposition. The waterfront has one side and therefore everyone leans towards greenery. In any case, IMHO, the greatest lake/oceanfront can't beat Milwaukee's riverfront and that's not saying Milwaukee's riverfront is the undeniable frontrunner for riverfronts in the US.

Surely a drone launch in Harbourfront with some elevation could replicate the shot over Montreal's post 2000 condo communities .

[Coldrsx]

I miss summer already.

https://twitter.com/aimeok/status/1689831927841452032

[Rico Rommheim]

Whoa!

[Rico Rommheim]

Montreal skyline by -Yaz-, on Flickr