Post some pictures of your city! II

[Nouvellecosse]

Wow those Calgary aerials are so surreal. It's just amazing to this dense, big city downtown plopped right in the middle of suburbia like that. It's like a snowy version of how I always pictured LA when I was growing up.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by DrJoe

I wouldn't say by a mile and frankly disagree. Toronto's semis are almost in a forest like setting, while still being ultra urban, best of all worlds, highly livable. Ultimately a matter of preference.

"Best" anything is of course subjective - perhaps it would be better rephrased as "most urban". Maybe not by a mile, but it's not a close competition either.

Montreal's streets are quite lush as well: https://goo.gl/maps/SqFQKBDV5iN2

And of course a little denser and with fewer setbacks. These kind of neighbourhoods are pretty much perfect, IMO. Not that Toronto's aren't very nice as well, of course.

[TorontoDrew]

You cherry picked that street because the vast majority of Montreal downtown residential streets look like this.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.56663...7i13312!8i6656

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

You cherry picked that street because the vast majority of Montreal downtown residential streets look like this.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.56663...7i13312!8i6656

That's not downtown though. 5km away from downtown in Toronto you also get into similarly newer, less attractive areas.

Perhaps this is a more representative sample of inner city Montreal residential than what I posted earlier, but it's also still very nice: https://goo.gl/maps/iS23t5H6NZM2

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

You cherry picked that street because the vast majority of Montreal downtown residential streets look like this.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.56663...7i13312!8i6656

LOL. Talk about cherry picking yourself! You're crazy.

Treepedia: EXPLORING THE GREEN CANOPY IN CITIES AROUND THE WORLD

Green View Index

36.1% Tampa
29.3% Singapore
28.8% Oslo
25.9% Sydney
25.9% Vancouver
25.5% Montreal
23.7% Durban
23.6% Johannesburg
23.6% Sacramento
21.5% Frankfurt
21.4% Geneva
20.6% Amsterdam
20.0% Seattle
19.5% Toronto
19.4% Miami
18.2% Boston
17.5% Tel Aviv
16.2% Turin
15.2% Los Angeles
13.5% New York
13.4% Cape Town
12.7% London
11.7% Sao Paulo
10.8% Quito
09.4% Kobe
08.8% Paris

And that doesn't take into account very green enclaves like Westmount and Ville Mont-Royal, which are not officially part of the city of Montreal even though they are in the center of the city.

A typical Montreal's residential neighborhood looks like this: dense, very urban, but with trees lining almost every street uninterrupted.


Source

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Montreal's streets are quite lush as well: https://goo.gl/maps/SqFQKBDV5iN2

Jesus...just look at that street. If that's not pretty much urban perfection, I don't know what is.

Absolutely beautiful.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Jesus...just look at that street. If that's not pretty much urban perfection, I don't know what is.

Absolutely beautiful.

Agreed, that's a perfect urban vernacular, and i love the number of balconies in those buildings.

[niwell]

It's a cool site, but I would take Treepedia with a bit of a grain of salt - the algorithms they use are far from perfect. For reference the City's own analysis is 27% coverage with an eventual goal of bringing it up to 40% (not sure what this includes exactly).

For example, this street in Tampa is cited at having 46.1% tree coverage: https://goo.gl/maps/Cwm4rUSvbRK2

While this one in Toronto is 18%: https://goo.gl/maps/UqkzFJrLB4J2

This is 6%: https://goo.gl/maps/RRi8V9BoC212

And this one is only 0.9% for some reason: https://goo.gl/maps/a1YmAHRCPZx


At the end of the day both Montreal and Toronto are pretty green. I'd say the latter has a slightly more expansive tree canopy, but that's more of a function of larger inner-city backyards. Residential street trees are pretty equal, while major commercial streets could use some work in both cities. I have noticed that the residential street trees in Montreal are a bit more equidistant in their planting, but at the same time slightly smaller than those in Toronto. I'm sure a tree person would have a better answer as to why.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

LOL. Talk about cherry picking yourself! You're crazy.

Treepedia: EXPLORING THE GREEN CANOPY IN CITIES AROUND THE WORLD

Green View Index

36.1% Tampa
29.3% Singapore
28.8% Oslo
25.9% Sydney
25.9% Vancouver
25.5% Montreal
23.7% Durban
23.6% Johannesburg
23.6% Sacramento
21.5% Frankfurt
21.4% Geneva
20.6% Amsterdam
20.0% Seattle
19.5% Toronto
19.4% Miami
18.2% Boston
17.5% Tel Aviv
16.2% Turin
15.2% Los Angeles
13.5% New York
13.4% Cape Town
12.7% London
11.7% Sao Paulo
10.8% Quito
09.4% Kobe
08.8% Paris

And that doesn't take into account very green enclaves like Westmount and Ville Mont-Royal, which are not officially part of the city of Montreal even though they are in the center of the city.

A typical Montreal's residential neighborhood looks like this: dense, very urban, but with trees lining almost every street uninterrupted.


Source

LOL I didn't cherry pick, I zoomed out from the street in the core you chose and randomly clicked on the most prominent street grid pattern you find in Montreal. I could have clicked anywhere in a large area and landed on a street like that. I wasn't even on satellite view and it was the very first spot I dropped. When I think of Montreal typical urban housing stock it's exactly the style from the street I ended up on.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

That's not downtown though. 5km away from downtown in Toronto you also get into similarly newer, less attractive areas.

Perhaps this is a more representative sample of inner city Montreal residential than what I posted earlier, but it's also still very nice: https://goo.gl/maps/iS23t5H6NZM2

How about this?
https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.53990...7i13312!8i6656


or this?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.52184...7i13312!8i6656


or this?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.52684...7i13312!8i6656

or this?

https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.45414...7i13312!8i6656


These are all typical inner city neighbourhoods that ring the core, same sort of style through out Montreal. And the pint was somebody said Montreal Has the best housing stock in the country which has yet to be proven as fact.

[yaletown_fella]

These are all typical inner city neighbourhoods that ring the core, same sort of style through out Montreal. And the pint was somebody said Montreal Has the best housing stock in the country which has yet to be proven as fact.[/QUOTE]
Montreal has the best rowhouse, walkup, and midrise stock without a doubt but I think Toronto takes the cake for SFH/mansions.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

These are all typical inner city neighbourhoods that ring the core, same sort of style through out Montreal. And the pint was somebody said Montreal Has the best housing stock in the country which has yet to be proven as fact. Montreal has the best rowhouse, walkup, and midrise stock without a doubt but I think Toronto takes the cake for SFH/mansions

Does it ? Really ? Have you been to Outremont ? Or Ville Mont-Royal ?

Or Westmount ? Which is, as far as I know, the only large residential area in the country designated as a National Historic Site precisely because (...) it is an exemplary model of suburbs dating from the Victorian and post-Victorian era in Canada because of its diversity and the integrity of its components (...) its characteristics of the City-Beautiful and Garden-City movements, including cohesive organization of plans and
distinctions between residential streets and main arterials; the uniformity of general building design accented by distinctively-shaped buildings; the wide selection of buildings designed and built by noteworthy Montreal architects and builders; the wide variety of Victorian and post-Victorian architectural styles, including neo-gothic, picturesque, Italian,
Second-Empire, neo-Queen Anne, neo-Roman, Beaux-Arts, Chateau, neo-Tudor, Arts and Crafts, neo-Quebec,
and the French regime style; the high quality of exterior finish materials, including wood, stone, and bricks, with decorative wood elements on
porches and balconies or rich sculpted stone details such as columns, newel posts, cornices, sculptures, and
casings; its historical coherence and pleasing viewscapes.

Please tell me what area would "take the cake'" against Westmount or Outremont and I'll gladly explore through Google or by foot on my next visit. And please, no McMansion from the 80's.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by niwell

This is 6%: https://goo.gl/maps/RRi8V9BoC212

And this one is only 0.9% for some reason: https://goo.gl/maps/a1YmAHRCPZx

That second quoted link is probably my ideal in terms on inner-urban residential form. I could do with a few fewer garage portals, but I suppose that's still preferable to having parked cars clogging the street. While rowhouses tend to be fetishized around here, I actually prefer to have small separations between some of the buildings since I love alleyways and find that the increased porosity of the streetwall adds interest to the urban fabric basically giving the city an additional dimension compared to having every building be attached. That's probably just a characteristic of my origins since here the houses are closely pack and there are some attached but many are not. When exploring a neighbourhood I love to peer down into the alleyways as I pass and see the interesting and unexpected glimpses of life that exist. Everything from cool bikes to graffiti and murals, to various types of plants, a gate with a unique carving, additional architectural features such as fire escapes, balcony/landing/stairs to an upstairs apartment, bay window, a view to the backyard or other buildings, or things one could never even think of.

The first link, however, is what frustrates me about Toronto residential fabric. Those houses are just set back to damn far for an area that close to the city centre. You can tell the buildings are old, but the arrangement and street interface just feels like a urban/suburban hybrid that should be at least 10km from the centre of a Toronto-sized city. It would be much improved however if they got rid of all that horrible suburban-looking lawn grass. If they replaced it with lush front gardens enclosed with hedges or short fences it would be much more convincing. Another thing a city can do to repair the effect of overly generous set backs is to pull the sidewalks up toward the buildings and separate them from the roadway with a generous road verge (preferably a well manicured one with landscaping and pedestrian amenities such as benches, art, etc.)

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Does it ? Really ? Have you been to Outremont ? Or Ville Mont-Royal ?

Or Westmount ? Which is, as far as I know, the only large residential area in the country designated as a National Historic Site precisely because (...)

Please tell me what area would "take the cake'" against Westmount or Outremont and I'll gladly explore through Google or by foot on my next visit. And please, no McMansion from the 80's.

Jeez, people here are so defensive! Everyone's city has to have the best apartments, the best tree canopy, the best SFH, the best everything (not singling you out here btw...as we've seen the exact same thing amongst several other recent posts as well).

Toronto was traditionally the more middle class/upwardly mobile of the two cities, and as a result tends to have a more comprehensive stock of SFH/duplex/rowhouse-type typologies - just as Montreal, as the more built up, historically urbane city has a better stock of plexes and walk up-type typologies.

Victorian-era neighbourhoods like Cabbagetown, the Annex, Parkdale, Rosedale, and Summerhill are all good representatives of this class; as are later examples found in the numerous upscale early 1900s-era neighbourhoods like Lawrence Park, Forest Hill, High Park, Wychwood, Riverdale, Beaches, and Dufferin Grove.

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The first link, however, is what frustrates me about Toronto residential fabric. Those houses are just set back to damn far for an area that close to the city centre. You can tell the buildings are old, but the arrangement and street interface just feels like a urban/suburban hybrid that should be at least 10km from the centre of a Toronto-sized city.

That's about 6 km from the city centre - close enough?

To be fair though, that street is not typical. That's a fairly major thoroughfare in what was traditionally a very wealthy area. I do know what you mean in generaly though - I wish this type of small/zero-setback street were more common than it actually is: https://goo.gl/maps/eYeSdWnHcmo

[ZeDgE]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Some pics from today, not the greatest window seat but better than aisle I guess

whats with the mound? is it a park or something?

Thats nose hill park. You will often see this view from there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nose_Hill_Park



https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...-hill-view.jpg *source

Cool pics, hate how it looks covered in snow though, so much nicer when its all green.

Thats a good capture of the zoo.

[Chadillaccc]

Lol mound? Back east it would be considered a mountain It is one of the two single largest urban parks in the nation at 12 km2, the first being Fish Creek Park in the southern half of the city at 13 km2.

[SpongeG]

its a mound, isn't that what they call them?

Here is "downtown" Coquitlam

2018-12-04_10-04-43 by snub_you, on Flickr

2018-12-04_10-04-35 by snub_you, on Flickr

2018-12-04_10-04-26 by snub_you, on Flickr

2018-12-04_10-04-16 by snub_you, on Flickr

2018-12-04_10-04-07 by snub_you, on Flickr

2018-12-04_10-03-58 by snub_you, on Flickr

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

That's about 6 km from the city centre - close enough?

To be fair though, that street is not typical. That's a fairly major thoroughfare in what was traditionally a very wealthy area. I do know what you mean in generaly though - I wish this type of small/zero-setback street were more common than it actually is: https://goo.gl/maps/eYeSdWnHcmo

Somehow I was thinking it was closer in, more like in the range of the Annex or Riverdale but that's not too bad.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Does it ? Really ? Have you been to Outremont ? Or Ville Mont-Royal ?

Or Westmount ? Which is, as far as I know, the only large residential area in the country designated as a National Historic Site precisely because (...) it is an exemplary model of suburbs dating from the Victorian and post-Victorian era in Canada because of its diversity and the integrity of its components (...) its characteristics of the City-Beautiful and Garden-City movements, including cohesive organization of plans and
distinctions between residential streets and main arterials; the uniformity of general building design accented by distinctively-shaped buildings; the wide selection of buildings designed and built by noteworthy Montreal architects and builders; the wide variety of Victorian and post-Victorian architectural styles, including neo-gothic, picturesque, Italian,
Second-Empire, neo-Queen Anne, neo-Roman, Beaux-Arts, Chateau, neo-Tudor, Arts and Crafts, neo-Quebec,
and the French regime style; the high quality of exterior finish materials, including wood, stone, and bricks, with decorative wood elements on
porches and balconies or rich sculpted stone details such as columns, newel posts, cornices, sculptures, and
casings; its historical coherence and pleasing viewscapes.

Please tell me what area would "take the cake'" against Westmount or Outremont and I'll gladly explore through Google or by foot on my next visit. And please, no McMansion from the 80's.

I thought I said Montreal wins for craftsmanship. The homes just tend to be smaller and lack grandeur. Dosent make it better or worse than Toronto. The two cities just have different assets. Toronto punches above its weight because it got such a rediculously late start historically.

Other than being in a great location I found most of Outremont underwhelming and a lot of it is full of 1940s/50s homes with a modernist look. I should explore it more thorougly next time.

I agree with you that Westmount has prime quality and grandeur but its quite a small area compared to the great examples you see across the Toronto area:

Here are some areas worth Visiting:

Rosedale Road, Chestnut Park in Rosedale. Clarendon Avenue in South Hill
Teddington Park and Riverview Drive in Lawrence Park/Hoggs Hollow., Edenbridge Dr in Etobicoke , The Kingsway in Etobicoke. 9 Versailles Court.

Toronto punches above its weight for huge homes.

I can say without a doubt Montreal wins for high quality medium-large size and semi detached houses. It just seems to lack the over-the-top huge scale houses.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

its a mound, isn't that what they call them?

The term mound is usually for much smaller (the footprint of a house-ish) type of raised topographical feature. What you are mistaking for a mound, is one of the foothills of the Rocky Mountain front ranges. The summit is over 200 meters higher than downtown Calgary, and the foothill itself is 5 kilometers north - south by 4 kilometers east - west.