The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[Dirt_Devil]

Originally Posted by davidivivid

Great pics leftimage, especially the one at dawn!

Ste-Foy - Currently U/C are two 10-story midrises (plus 2 others scheduled to break ground later this year)

Terrasses du plateau & Krystal are UC right now.

What are the 2 others to break ground this year? 925 Mainguy and.........? [/QUOTE]

[Witty Nickname]

Riverfront Property of Eau Claire by Witty nickname, on Flickr

Riverfront Property of Eau Claire by Witty nickname, on Flickr

[davidivivid]

Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline

Would it be far to say Ste-Foy is to Quebec City as what Mississauga is to Toronto? Just trying to get an idea of how far away those skylines are and how big of a suburb Ste-Foy is.

I am not sure if such a comparison is totally accurate because I believe Ste-Foy is more integrated in Quebec City than Mississauga is to Toronto. First of all, Ste-Foy doesn't exist anymore since it fusionned with Quebec almost a decade ago, to great success I might add. I'd say that its pretty much an integral part of the city nowadays. Also, about 7-8 km separates downtown Quebec City to Ste-Foy compared to almost 30km for the two Ontario cities.




This somewhat newer part of town was basically created following the implementation of three buildings/institutions: the modern Laval University campus, the Laval University Hospital Center and finally, one of the first big shopping mall in Canada, Place Laurier. The shift from the historic downtown was also facilitated because of the city administration's mistakes of the 70's, when many beautiful victorian mansions as well as whole city blocks were destroyed to make way to modern, aka concrete towers. I would say that it left a scar in the collective psyche of the inhabitants. No towers have been built in downtown Quebec city in over 30 years. Of course, there was still a need for new office space in Quebec city so new economic poles have started to emerged in the last decades, one of which is Ste-Foy.

There are yet other reasons why this newer district is attracting highrises instead of the old city. First of all: height regulations, which tend...tend to be less stringent then those in the Quebec's downtown.

Also, the presence of the bridges next to the Ste-Foy district. Many big Montreal corporations have offices in Quebec City and there is a lot of going back and forth between the two cities. By having its offices in Ste-Foy instead of Quebec (which is farther and finding parking can be difficult), companies save time and money. Anyway, that is what I've been told.


That being said, the old town still attracts some investments (Insurance company headquarters, condos) but no where near what you will see in newer part of town. You can clearly see Ste-Foy in the background and it will be even more visible once the 29-story tower is completed:



Quebec city from above - Québec vu du ciel par www.digitaldirect.ca, sur Flickr


http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...146150&page=15


The rate of growth of this economic pole has really started to increase in the last few years. Many more towers will be built here in the coming years. One insurance company in particular has bought a lot of land and real estate in this area and is planning to build a new highrise in the near future. Cominar Real Estate Investment Trust, the largest commercial property owner and manager in the province of Quebec (based in Quebec City) also has bought huge land properties in the area.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/4373310...n/photostream/

I'm still not sure how I feel about a city the size of Quebec having multiple economic...nodes. However, it may have helped preserve the unique character of the old city so I guess it has its advantages. It seems that in a few decades, skyscraper enthousiasts will have to look at Quebec City from a different point of view in order to see a typical North American skyline.

The city just unveiled its masterplan for the future of the Sainte-Foy district, a very important undertaking, stretching from the bridges all the way to Laval University. This vision was long overdue and I am very pleased with what the city has envisionned. Construction in this district has been very strong during the last decade but unfortunately, it didn't follow any guidelines. Hence, it is now very patchwork-like and honestly, not easy on the eyes.

The district was divided in four different sectors to reflect the different realities of each one: residential vs commercial vs educational vs sport infrastructure...

Here's some of the renderings presented in this plan:




http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...961230&page=38



Finally, here's more pics of the plan if you are interested: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...961230&page=38

[someone123]

Ste-Foy is more like the North York of Quebec City. It would look more impressive to have one cluster of office buildings and in some ways it would be more convenient, but where would the new buildings go in older parts of the city? It would be hard to avoid disrupting existing neighbourhoods and tearing down heritage buildings.

I sort of wish Halifax had established a "new" downtown, because many of the office towers built during the 1960-1990 period replaced old stone buildings from the 1860s and earlier that are in pretty sort supply today.

[MexiQuebecois]

Honestly I think they're doing the right thing in Québec City. The old part of town is just too beautiful, and as much as I love skyscrapers, I would wrap chains around my body and tie myself to a threatened old building just like a hippie would!

It kinda reminds of me of planning done in some Latin American cities (obviously in this case done right, and not with your eyes closed!) where the historic downtown is preserved, and that area is actually "downtown" many times being the geographical centre of the city, and another area solely used as a Central Business District.

If done properly, it can work great, as long as there are appropriate methods of transportation to the CBD.

Does Québec City have any future public transit plans such as LRT and such? Or are they just going to stick to hybrid/electric buses?

[davidivivid]

Originally Posted by someone123

I sort of wish Halifax had established a "new" downtown, because many of the office towers built during the 1960-1990 period replaced old stone buildings from the 1860s and earlier that are in pretty sort supply today.

As beautiful as downtown Halifax is nowadays, I'm still saddened to learn that such a thing happened.

Originally Posted by MexiQuebecois

Does Québec City have any future public transit plans such as LRT and such? Or are they just going to stick to hybrid/electric buses?

PLans for a LRT have been in the works for quite some time. Here is the proposed (and hotly constested) route:

• Video Link

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by MexiQuebecois

Honestly I think they're doing the right thing in Québec City. The old part of town is just too beautiful, and as much as I love skyscrapers, I would wrap chains around my body and tie myself to a threatened old building just like a hippie would!

Quebec City risks turning into a museum rather than a properly functioning modern city. Surely, development can take place downtown without destroying the heritage buildings. If London can do it, why can't Quebec City? I'd rather Quebec City concentrated development in the core rather than this hollowing out we see now.

[MexiQuebecois]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Quebec City risks turning into a museum rather than a properly functioning modern city. Surely, development can take place downtown without destroying the heritage buildings. If London can do it, why can't Quebec City? I'd rather Quebec City concentrated development in the core rather than this hollowing out we see now.

Well, people have different perspectives on what is better, and I'm not a big fan what London is doing. I think Québec City can do well by preserving its core, and keeping the highrises somewhere else (ste foy) Also I imagine it's a pain to get a highrise approved in the old town. If you ask me I also believe those ugly ass concrete towers that Québec City has don't help much.

I prefer something like this (One big cluster outside of the "centre"):


http://www.wallpaperhill.com/wp-cont...-Skyline-1.jpg

Than this:

http://www.freefoto.com/images/801/1...London_web.jpg

[Nouvellecosse]

Conservation, is wonderful, but at what cost?

I have very mixed feelings about it since I'm concerned that having a modern business district away from historic areas may increase auto dependence. Afterall, the easiest type of transit to provide is the hub and spoke setup focusing on a single CBD. Without having a single place to focus transit, it's much tougher to provide good service.

Not only that, but having the bulk of development in historic areas forces efficient land use. It may seem counter-intuitive since there is often a backlash against tall buildings in historic areas, but the way it tends to work out is that office buildings built away from the main CBD are shorter and stubbier and are surrounded by under-utilized space for things like surface parking and grass.

Not to mention that the beauty, synergy, and texture created by the wonderful combination between old and new is one of the most appealing things that can exist in a city. I think if I were to make an example of a CBD that successfully integrates the modern with the historic, I'd suggest Sydney. I'm sure they've lost a lot of grand old gems over the years too, but just scroll down through this thread here and here and decide if it really feels like it would be better with less modern development.

I definitely agree that tall buildings should not be built in the old walled town or the lower town, but there are much closer and more central places where offices can be built than Ste. Foy.

[mike474]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Conservation, is wonderful, but at what cost?

I have very mixed feelings about it since I'm concerned that having a modern business district away from historic areas may increase auto dependence. Afterall, the easiest type of transit to provide is the hub and spoke setup focusing on a single CBD. Without having a single place to focus transit, it's much tougher to provide good service.

Not only that, but having the bulk of development in historic areas forces efficient land use. It may seem counter-intuitive since there is often a backlash against tall buildings in historic areas, but the way it tends to work out is that office buildings built away from the main CBD are shorter and stubbier and are surrounded by under-utilized space for things like surface parking and grass.

Not to mention that the beauty, synergy, and texture created by the wonderful combination between old and new is one of the most appealing things that can exist in a city. I think if I were to make an example of a CBD that successfully integrates the modern with the historic, I'd suggest Sydney. I'm sure they've lost a lot of grand old gems over the years too, but just scroll down through this thread here and here and decide if it really feels like it would be better with less modern development.

I definitely agree that tall buildings should not be built in the old walled town or the lower town, but there are much closer and more central places where offices can be built than Ste. Foy.

I would normally agree with this, but I think development in Ste-Foy makes sense in Quebec. It really isn't that far from Ste-Foy to the old city and the east-west corridors are relatively dense so I hope decent transit will develop one day. Having Université Laval there means that that area is already a pretty major hub. I just hope new development makes it denser and creates greater impetus for transit.

I also don't see the old city (including outside the walls around the National Assembly) risks becoming a museum. There are tons of government offices and some nice new lowrise developments which integrate well into the neighbourhood without desecrating it like the development in the 70s.

[vegeta_skyline]

Thanks for all the information, much appreciated.

Originally Posted by davidivivid

Finally, here's more pics of the plan if you are interested: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...961230&page=38

That's quite impressive and very urban indeed, hope it comes to pass.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Surely, development can take place downtown without destroying the heritage buildings. If London can do it, why can't Quebec City?

You seem to be forgetting the part where most of London's core was wiped out in the second World War. They're not finding space to build new buildings without destroying their heritage stock by opening up new gateways to alternate dimensions...they're doing it by replacing the post-war concrete bunkers with modern towers. Quebec City doesn't have that ability.

[MexiQuebecois]

Originally Posted by mike474

I would normally agree with this, but I think development in Ste-Foy makes sense in Quebec. It really isn't that far from Ste-Foy to the old city and the east-west corridors are relatively dense so I hope decent transit will develop one day. Having Université Laval there means that that area is already a pretty major hub. I just hope new development makes it denser and creates greater impetus for transit.

I also don't see the old city (including outside the walls around the National Assembly) risks becoming a museum. There are tons of government offices and some nice new lowrise developments which integrate well into the neighbourhood without desecrating it like the development in the 70s.

+1

It's only 7-8 km to Ste. Foy from Vieux-Québec. I agree with the current plan. They have plans to set up a LRT and I'm sure transportation will be dealt with accordingly (several plans already). Plus I also think Ste. Foy is a much better location since it's located close to the bridges and people from the south shore can easily commute there (the LRT will be expanded to the south shore apparently)

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by mike474

I would normally agree with this, but I think development in Ste-Foy makes sense in Quebec. It really isn't that far from Ste-Foy to the old city and the east-west corridors are relatively dense so I hope decent transit will develop one day. Having Université Laval there means that that area is already a pretty major hub. I just hope new development makes it denser and creates greater impetus for transit.

Transit is the key word. Quebec City has a huge dependance on car. A tramway along boulevard Laurier and Grande-Allée, from Ste-Foy to the heart of the old town would be a good start. And the sprawl has to end. Densify!

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by mike474

I would normally agree with this, but I think development in Ste-Foy makes sense in Quebec. It really isn't that far from Ste-Foy to the old city and the east-west corridors are relatively dense so I hope decent transit will develop one day. Having Université Laval there means that that area is already a pretty major hub. I just hope new development makes it denser and creates greater impetus for transit.

I also don't see the old city (including outside the walls around the National Assembly) risks becoming a museum. There are tons of government offices and some nice new lowrise developments which integrate well into the neighbourhood without desecrating it like the development in the 70s.

If the area develops like in the renderings David posted, then ok. But I'll believe that when I see it. I have to wonder if the renders aren't a little overly optimistic considering that I honestly can't think of a single suburban business district in NA that I find truly enjoyable, There are certainly some that aren't as bad as others, but that's it.

[Wooster]

From the Frinkprof - on top of an U/C building at Calgary's SAIT.

[HomeInMyShoes]

EAP is awesome from that view.

[tele75]

Yeah, and pretty soon there will be two!

Good stuff Calgary.

[Chadillaccc]

London from the Viarail train near arrival.


The Delta London Armouries. A modern hotel with its base being the original, century year old, London Armoury.


London Skyline from Richmond Street.


Richmond Street skyline.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

You seem to be forgetting the part where most of London's core was wiped out in the second World War. They're not finding space to build new buildings without destroying their heritage stock by opening up new gateways to alternate dimensions...they're doing it by replacing the post-war concrete bunkers with modern towers. Quebec City doesn't have that ability.

I admit that I'm not as familiar with Quebec City as I am with London, but surely Quebec City has 10-20 lots in the core that wouldn't mean the loss of a significant historic building?