Well everything is super this, or deluxe that, or gourmet.

Ain't that the trooth? Advertising has pretty much exhausted its repertoire of superlatives to the point they don't mean anything anymore.

Agree 1 billion % :colgate:

Have these been posted?

http://torontoist.com/attachments/AlixandraGould/20100115toronto_future.jpg
Courtesy of torontoist

http://truecondos.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/new-tridel-building-rendering-120-harbour-street.jpg
Courtesy of truecondos

Holy Fuck that Gardiner Expressway is such a barrier and ruins everything :ohno:

Oh wow ... this is just beautiful ... I don't know which one to LOVE more ... the Ice condo's or the other tall skyscraper that absolutely looks fabulous. That one sure changes the entire area and will have such a greater impact when you enter the city from West

and I love Gardiner Expressway ... that is THE place to be to enjoy the magnificent skyline

Holy Fuck that Gardiner Expressway is such a barrier and ruins everything :ohno:

Every city has expressways and freeways; they are not pretty, but they are a fact of life. Here are some in your city of Melbourne:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/melbourneelevatedhighway.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/melbourneelevatedhighwayi.jpg
http://www.city-data.com/forum/australia-new-zealand/289765-melbourne-australia-freeway-highways-pictures-5.html

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/melbournehighwaysi.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/melbournehighways.jpg
http://www.city-data.com/forum/australia-new-zealand/289765-melbourne-australia-freeway-highways-pictures-6.html

Google images, I had no idea Melbourne had so many downtown freeways and they are still adding to them. We're pretty lucky to only have the Gardiner.
http://www.hyderconsulting.com/en/editorial/PublishingImages/Westgate%20Freeway%20Image%201000990.jpg

http://www.acaa.net.au/images/winner/2012/win01.jpg

In contrast ours looks pretty small.
http://truecondos.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/new-tridel-building-rendering-120-harbour-street.jpg

Yes, they are still building them in Melbourne. Perhaps people notice freeways in other cities more than the ones they are accustomed to seeing in their own city, but freeways and highways are everywhere. Here in Toronto we tend to think we are the only city in the world which has one near the downtown.








awaits the lecture that I must not judge our city by what happens in other cities and I should want my city to be better and not be satisfied with the way it is now, etc.. :storm:

You certainly like to stir the pot! :|

Holy Fuck that Gardiner Expressway is such a barrier and ruins everything :ohno:

Agree completely, but Toronto can't even get a subway built. We'll have to wait till the political climate here changes. It's best just to pretend it ain't there. Squinting helps a little! ;)

Awaits lecture that this is a vanity project and that burying the Gardiner is frivolous and only cosmetic. :storm:

Oh wow ... this is just beautiful ... I don't know which one to LOVE more ... the Ice condo's or the other tall skyscraper that absolutely looks fabulous. That one sure changes the entire area and will have such a greater impact when you enter the city from West

I like them both equally. I was hoping for a tapered wedge of a building for Ten York though.

You certainly like to stir the pot! :|



Agree completely, but Toronto can't even get a subway built. We'll have to wait till the political climate here changes. It's best just to pretend it ain't there. Squinting helps a little! ;)

Awaits lecture that this is a vanity project and that burying the Gardiner is frivolous and only cosmetic. :storm:

Hey Usaidso,

Can't disagree with you on this one.

This is such a badass thread. I wish Seattle had one!

Yes, they are still building them in Melbourne. Perhaps people notice freeways in other cities more than the ones they are accustomed to seeing in their own city, but freeways and highways are everywhere. Here in Toronto we tend to think we are the only city in the world which has one near the downtown.








awaits the lecture that I must not judge our city by what happens in other cities and I should want my city to be better and not be satisfied with the way it is now, etc.. :storm:

Umm that pic that u posted of the west gate bridge fwy were strengthening works being done. It is not downtown but it borders on the neighbourhood 3km from the CBD and bypasses the CBD in the form of a tunnell under the yarra river heading east allowing for an exit into the CBD main thoroughfare just before the tunnel. It's a cracking view of those 5 Yarra's Edge towers and Hilton hotel isn't it? Million dollar homes overlooking the marina with two more skyscrapers of similar size to fill that space in the coming years just before the low rise properties. On the left side of the west gate will be 50-60 story towers in the future and very comparable to Toronto. Maybe i was harsh on the Gardiner but i thought you guys had been wanting to sink it. I know this is really OT but you posted the pics of Melb and it's not like we have much to talk about here at present so we may aswell have a bit of fun with comparisons. Btw i think Toronto is a top city and i'd love to spend some time there as i've said before. I'm sure TB you'd be aware that it's me Manila_Playa87 :cheers:

I like them both equally. I was hoping for a tapered wedge of a building for Ten York though.

Ah so that is how it is called; Ten York. I suppose you are right. A tapered building will be such an extra flashy sleak addition to the skyline.

Maybe i was harsh on the Gardiner but i thought you guys had been wanting to sink it. I know this is really OT but you posted the pics of Melb and it's not like we have much to talk about here at present so we may aswell have a bit of fun with comparisons. Btw i think Toronto is a top city and i'd love to spend some time there as i've said before. I'm sure TB you'd be aware that it's me Manila_Playa87 :cheers:

Most people don't like the Gardiner, however with each new development it feels less like a barrier to the lake as it get's hemmed on all sides. It does provide an amazing vantage point when driving into the city though. One that will be missed by many if they ever bury it. It's getting to the point now where it's blending in with it's surroundings in the core.

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/display-slideshow/images/articles/2011/12/4316/urbantoronto-4316-13093.jpg

Ah so that is how it is called; Ten York. I suppose you are right. A tapered building will be such an extra flashy sleak addition to the skyline.


A tapered building would have had too small a floor-plate to be profitable here. The original design called for a flatiron wedge but the city made them redesign it because the wedge was too wide and view blocking.

I'm sure TB you'd be aware that it's me Manila_Playa87 :cheers:

I'm an admin; you are not supposed to tell me stuff like that! ;)

Oh I see... thanks for explanation Andrew

A tapered building would have had too small a floor-plate to be profitable here. The original design called for a flatiron wedge but the city made them redesign it because the wedge was too wide and view blocking.

If it were tapered, wouldn't it have a larger floor plate than Ten York on the lower floors, and only smaller floor plates near the top? Also a tapered design wouldn't block views of the lake as it would taper from a point to where Ten York sits. It's only views of that condo to the south that would be blocked (a bonus rather than a negative), and only from lower floors from ICE.

Most people don't like the Gardiner, however with each new development it feels less like a barrier to the lake as it get's hemmed on all sides. It does provide an amazing vantage point when driving into the city though. One that will be missed by many if they ever bury it. It's getting to the point now where it's blending in with it's surroundings in the core.

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/display-slideshow/images/articles/2011/12/4316/urbantoronto-4316-13093.jpg

What's that? Is it u/c.

I have to admit that when I first came to toronto many years ago, I hated the Gardner, and thought it messed up the setting...which it did then, but with all these huge towers hemming it in, it is going to become one of the coolest roads in the world, and if that bridge thing and other projects like it connect the south and north sides in a more pedestrian friendly, even dramatic manner, then it could actually become a feature, rather than eyesore. I love driving along it now...just imagine in 5 years time!

ya its U/C. it will bring the PATH south of the gardiner to the new RBC building. (and eventually to the twin 70 floor proposals)

Agreed. One of the most amazing stretches of road to travel on now. Its only going to get better. If there's one benefit to the Gairdner being slow, its that it gives you time to look around at the recent developments.

If it were tapered, wouldn't it have a larger floor plate than Ten York on the lower floors, and only smaller floor plates near the top? Also a tapered design wouldn't block views of the lake as it would taper from a point to where Ten York sits. It's only views of that condo to the south that would be blocked (a bonus rather than a negative), and only from lower floors from ICE.

That's why the first plan was shot down by the city. To make it a wedged shape tower with the max width seen in the latest version it's floor plates in the tower would be about 33% smaller.

http://www.insidetorontocondos.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/120HarbourSt1.jpg

I always get a bit of a thrill driving along the Gardiner. It has one of the most breathtaking views of the city that you can get. What an introduction to our city for anyone coming from the airport. Makes a bigger impression than driving through a two kilometre black tunnel with orange lighting.

So, I'm confused.... what is the latest proposal, then? Has the preliminary design concept just above this, on the right hand side been changed?

That's why the first plan was shot down by the city. To make it a wedged shape tower with the max width seen in the latest version it's floor plates in the tower would be about 33% smaller.

I wish I knew how to use one of those building model software programs then I could demonstrate what I mean by a tapered tower. That one you showed isn't any where close to what I'm suggesting. First of all it doesn't start at the point, it doesn't taper at all, and it doesn't take up the whole lot. If you take up the whole lot, it's obviously going to have larger floor plates than the square floor plate tower that is getting built. Ten York doesn't take up the whole lot, only the podium does.

This is as close to the what I'm suggesting that I could find online. By tapered, I mean like the building at the back. Something like that with more rounded ends and better materials. Every floor would get successively smaller. Once one got to a floor plate of similar size to Ten York you could stop the taper and round the top off. It doesn't matter though as they've decided on a traditional square tower on a triangular plot.

http://www.adamcoupe.com/resource/dynamic/image/content/ZHA_Wangjing%20Soho_01_1.jpg
Courtesy of Adam Coupe, design by Zaha Hadid

Option 2: a convex taper like a boot. The back end (eastern facade) could be kept straight. Overall I like Ten York, but they've shown no creativity at all. They've built a triangular podium and stuck a square floor plate on top of it. It's a nice tower, but the composition is very awkward and contrived.

http://www.theswellelife.com/.a/6a00e54ef168098833011570523f3e970c-300wi

These 2 options are obviously conceptual and would need to be refined before its presentable.

hmmm... let me see... I guess I know what you mean.

Early 70's the French were pioneers in building such all across Côte d'Azur and Saint Tropez.

They started a trend that has been followed by the rich booming economies of the time like Iran, Lebanon, Egypt and off course across Italy.

My most faves in that regard are the awesome looking apartments of Villeneuve Loubet at Villeneuve, Saint Tropez.

Although the buildings are old now, yet still very prestigious and expensive to live in. Haven't been there for a long time but am sure "Isaidso" would mean something like these which in my opinion, could be of such sight if being built at Lake Ontario's coast to give it more of Saint Tropez look :)

I always get a bit of a thrill driving along the Gardiner. It has one of the most breathtaking views of the city that you can get. What an introduction to our city for anyone coming from the airport. Makes a bigger impression than driving through a two kilometre black tunnel with orange lighting.

So, I'm confused.... what is the latest proposal, then? Has the preliminary design concept just above this, on the right hand side been changed?

I have to admit that the Gardiner has the best views of the city. Definetely leaves our west gate fwy for dead however ours will have the great hemmed in feel in the next 20 years. What i wanna know is what they're doing underneath the Gardiner expressway? Seems like alot of greenspace, walkways and bike paths. Oneway of linking the waterfront to downtown without the cost of dismantling it and borring a tunnel. Also of interest is to the right of the hilton tower in the west gate pic. It's where we had an SSC meeting last year on the foreshore at some restaurant. Don't think i'll be going to any Australian meetings again LoL
.
PS u should have already known that it was me since you're an administrator

ya its U/C. it will bring the PATH south of the gardiner to the new RBC building. (and eventually to the twin 70 floor proposals)

Fab, just what the city needed...nice to see some really good planning materialize.

.
PS u should have already known that it was me since you're an administrator

There are tens of thousands of profiles, and I don't have esp! :lol:

as more buildings are proposed, our future skyline grows larger.

the new lumen building in cityplace has been added;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/3dtoronto_4_2.jpg

the hilton inn proposal added, despite it actually being quite the old proposal. (i spent forever with this model, lots of setbacks, and I tried to get the dimensions as accurate as possible) this is probably the most accurate model in the entire thing.

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/3dtoronto_4_3.jpg

60 colbourne and the new 47 floor proposal beside it. (just a massing model as no renders have been released yet)

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/3dtoronto_4_4.jpg

and saving the best for last, my interpretation of the 277m mega tower going up in yorkville; (this is what it will look like, judging by the singular line drawing we have so far) one bloor is still at 238m, as it will be until i hear an official height for the recent increase to 75 floors.

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/3dtoronto_4_1.jpg

That last pic really strikes me. It's obviously an illusion, as there are a lot of gaps to be filled in the space between Yorkville and the CBD, but if the density were to build up it we would have quite the downtown core. Approaching Manhattan density without the numerous supertalls.

Good job Insertnamehere (I can only fathom what your name is in actuality)! Maybe when I create new projects I'll forward them your way for a little fantasy mockup ;)

All of those projects, yet that massive parking lot adjacent to Jazz is still there. It's like a zit that won't go away.

Superb work, Insertnamehere! Really a stunning effect; our city is undergoing a complete transformation before our very eyes..

All of those projects, yet that massive parking lot adjacent to Jazz is still there. It's like a zit that won't go away.

What lot is that? The one down by Queen East or that one north of the Central YMCA?

That last pic really strikes me. It's obviously an illusion, as there are a lot of gaps to be filled in the space between Yorkville and the CBD, but if the density were to build up it we would have quite the downtown core. Approaching Manhattan density without the numerous supertalls.

It's great that we're even talking about the downtown filling in between Yorkville and the CBD. 10 years ago, the only large towers were in the CBD. Now we have Four Seasons, One Bloor, Casa, X Condos, Uptown, etc. in Yorkville. AURA progressed the conversation to this discussion.

I know you meant built form, but here's a population density comparison. Downtown Toronto is about 5 times smaller than Manhattan geographically, but the density certainly is moving towards what exists in Manhattan. The population of downtown Toronto increased from 132,434 in 2006 to 175,064 in 2011. That's a 32.2% increase in just 5 years.

By my calculations, downtown Toronto would need a population of 320,000 to equal Manhattan density. We'll likely be up to 230,000 by 2016 so maybe by 2021 it will be comparable. Consider the following:

Manhattan
Land Area: 22.96 sq mi
Population (2010): 1,585,873
Density: 70,951/sq mi

Downtown Toronto
Land Area: 4.5 sq mi
Population (2011): 175,064
Density: 38,903/sq mi

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i406/maximan99/dttoronto.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1486697

As we're fond of looking at Chicago, I thought I'd add that too. I wasn't sure what to add and what not to add. The Chicago Loop was too small an area so included to the north and south of it. It seems that downtown Toronto is almost twice as dense as downtown Chicago while Manhattan is almost twice as dense as downtown Toronto. All data below was taken off wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Loop

Lincoln Park---Near North Side---Chicago Loop---Near South Side---Downtown Chicago
Land Area: 3.19 sq mi---2.72 sq mi---1.58 sq mi---1.75 sq mi---9.24 sq mi
Population (2010): 64,116---80,484---29,283---21,390---195,273
Density: 21,133/sq mi

What lot is that? The one down by Queen East or that one north of the Central YMCA?

Queen East and Mutual. It takes up a whole city block.

I think Toronto needs 50 years of this type of growth to even approach Manhattan.

However, I think Chicago can be beaten by 2025 Toronto keeps this up.

We are already well ahead of Chicago.

^^ I don't think so; not by a long chalk. Chicago is a lot bigger. Maybe you just have to be there to get a feel for it. Why bother even worrying about these comparisons? We are who we are and that should be good enough! There is more to a city than bricks and mortar.

One problem with the Manhattan-density fantasy is how exactly will people get around? Unless we start building two more subway lines asap there is no way the transit system and the roads can handle double the number of residents.

I don't think so; not by a long chalk. Chicago is a lot bigger. Maybe you just have to be there to get a feel for it. Why bother even worrying about these comparisons? We are who we are and that should be good enough! There is more to a city than bricks and mortar.

I think we were talking about the density of our downtowns. Toronto is denser than Chicago. There are simply more people living downtown. I wasn't trying to start a pissing context or anything. Just stating a fact. Chicago isn't even the second densest in the US. Last I checked, that was San Francisco.

The Downtown Relief Line will (hopefully) have been built long before downtown Toronto doubles its density.

Chicago is denser in terms of buildings, but not necessarily residents as far as downtown goes.

we certainly haven't beat Chicago yet, but if the boom continues at this rate until 2017-2018, with all proposals at that time completed, of course with a couple new tallest buildings, and 1 over 350m, I think we will have them beat. if the boom earlier, we will probably surpass them in the earlu 2030s. Yew York of course is in a whole other league.

in the meantime, I'd say toronto has beat Atlanta in this boom, along with LA, and if all the proposed buildings get built, It'll have beat out all beat all western countries skylines exept for New York and chicago.

Edit: wrong thread

One problem with the Manhattan-density fantasy is how exactly will people get around? Unless we start building two more subway lines asap there is no way the transit system and the roads can handle double the number of residents.

It's a given that we'd need more subway as population density in the core increases. We'll eventually get a group at City Hall that will get it done.

Rob Ford:

“I’m not going to support the LRTs, I’ll tell you that right now. I’m going to do everything in my power to try to stop it,” he said.

“This is an election issue. Obviously the campaign starts now. I’m willing to take anyone to fight streetcars against subways in the next election, and I can’t wait for that.”



“The people of the city have spoken loud and clear. They want subways folks. They want subways, subways, subways,” he told councillors.

“People hate the St. Clair. They hate these streetcars. You can call them what they want. People want subways folks. They want subways, subways. They don’t want these damned streetcars blocking up our city,” shouted the mayor.



It may cost more than LRT, but building more subway lines is really what this city needs as it's just going to get bigger and bigger. We'll see what happens...

It may cost more than LRT, but building more subway lines is really what this city needs as it's just going to get bigger and bigger. We'll see what happens...

I agree and welcome aboard. Subways cost what they cost, but that's what this city needs on many of our major streets. We need the DRL, we need a Queen Line, we need an Eglinton line, and that's just for starters. LRT is a band aid solution that's only going to prolong the inevitable: subways.

Money does exist, but it's the distribution of tax dollars that's bankrupting cities. Don't load most of the responsibility for services on municipalities, but deny them taxation powers. If Ottawa wants to take in most of the taxes, they have to start paying for some of the services we need. No wonder our cities have no money. The political power in countries is shifting from national capitals to cities. Canadian mayors need to employ a common front and force Ottawa to:

A. Give up some taxation powers to the municipalities/provinces and/or
B. Start paying for most of the transit needs of Canadian cities.

The status quo is untenable. Cash strapped municipalities need to force Ottawa's hand. If our current mayors/City councillors aren't up to the task of confronting Ottawa, they need to step aside so others up to the task can.

Toronto has one of the worst funded Public Transportation Systems in North America.

If Toronto wants to compete with the big boys like Chicago, New York or Sydney. It needs to get its act together and build proper Transportation Infrastructure.

Toronto Subways are a joke. No wonder the TTC is called Take the Car. :)

If Toronto wants to compete with the big boys like Chicago, New York or Sydney. It needs to get its act together and build proper Transportation Infrastructure.


Sydney is a "big boy"? And the CTA is hardly worth emulating.

I don't think Toronto's subways are a joke at all; I'm actually surprised that this has become the general belief of our city. It is a very good system, but just hasn't been allowed to grow like it should have over the past generation, due to being starved by rather greedy senior governments that are happy to fund transit anywhere other than Toronto.

And, I never thought I'd see "Sydney" in someone's list of "big boys" when it comes to transit. Sydney doesn't even have a subway system!!! :lol: Having bits and pieces of their train system travel underground for a bit does not make a "subway". They have an excellent suburban train system, because Sydney is much more of a suburban city than Toronto.

Have you ever been on the subway in Chicago? :eek:

Brace yourself for when you visit London. It is an extensive system, but the actual ride on the narrow crowded non-airconditioned cars is awful:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP7980.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP7983.jpg

You are just going to have to trust me that it is nothing like this:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP8342inewsubwaycars.jpg

I don't think Toronto's subways are a joke at all; I'm actually surprised that this has become the general belief of our city. It is a very good system, but just hasn't been allowed to grow like it should have over the past generation, due to being starved by rather greedy senior governments that are happy to fund transit anywhere other than Toronto.

And, I never thought I'd see "Sydney" in someone's list of "big boys" when it comes to transit. Sydney doesn't even have a subway system!!! :lol: Having bits and pieces of their train system travel underground for a bit does not make a "subway". They have an excellent suburban train system, because Sydney is much more of a suburban city than Toronto.

Have you ever been on the subway in Chicago? :eek:

Brace yourself for when you visit London. It is an extensive system, but the actual ride on the narrow crowded non-airconditioned cars is awful:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP7980.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP7983.jpg

You are just going to have to trust me that it is nothing like this:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP8342inewsubwaycars.jpg

Hehe...I think it could be the banner that influenced me to include Sydney :) :lol: :nuts:

:lol: I was thinking maybe it was too many Foster's Lagers! ;)

Nice building designs! I think just need more unique architectural designs though such as the Marilyn twin towers in mississauga, something with round shaped structures as well.

Hehe...I think it could be the banner that influenced me to include Sydney :) :lol: :nuts:

It was a nice photo. Btw, no city in Australia has a subway yet. They do beat us in intercity rail though. GO Train is puny compared to the equivalent in Sydney or Melbourne. Regarding London's Underground, Taller is correct in that Toronto trains are far more spacious/comfortable but the size of their system absolutely dwarfs what we have. The TTC could quadruple its km of track and the London Underground would still be considerably bigger.

The Big Boys, by km of Subway Track


01. Shanghai-----425
02. London-----402
03. Seoul -----389.3
04. Beijing-----372.0
05. New York-----337
06. Berlin-----331
07. Moscow-----305.7
08. Madrid-----293
09. Paris-----215
10. Guangzhou-----215.0

11. Tokyo-----195.1
12. Delhi-----189.63
13. Shenzhen-----178.4
14. Mexico City -----176.8
15. Valencia-----175
16. Hong Kong-----174.4
17. Chicago-----173
18. Washington, D.C.-----171
19. Copenhagen-----170
20. San Francisco-----167

In regards to subways, if we want to rival the Valencias and Copenhagens of this world our subway would have to triple in size. According to Wikipedia, Toronto is 50th biggest in the world by track length. We're not even largest in Canada, we're 3rd! When places like Newcastle, UK and Bucharest, Romania have more track than Toronto something's terribly wrong.

48. Montreal-----69.2
49. Vancouver-----68.7
50. Toronto-----68.3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metro_systems

How is Vancouver ahead of Toronto on that list? It doesn't even have a subway. Clearly they must be counting LRT as part of the "metro system", in which case Toronto will be adding about 70km over the next decade with the Spadina extension and the Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard LRTs. That would bring us to about 140km.

In regards to subways, if we want to rival the Valencias and Copenhagens of this world our subway would have to triple in size. According to Wikipedia, Toronto is 50th biggest in the world by track length. We're not even largest in Canada, we're 3rd! When places like Newcastle, UK and Bucharest, Romania have more track than Toronto something's terribly wrong.Don't forget though that Valencia and Copehhagen both have commuter/metro hybrids. The Copenhagen "metro" is a tiny light metro system and the bulk of their rapid transit is the S-Tog which is basically a very high frequency, grade separated GO system. In other words, it's a mainly surface running suburban focused systems that runs in mainline railway corridors. Valencia is similar. Both are comparable to SF's BART (ie just a step above Sydney's Cityrail).

You'll find this is the case with most cities that have a very high ratio of subway trackage to population (ie more than 1km for every 45,000 people in the metro area). London also has significant stretches that runs on the surface on mainline tracks like high frequency railroad. The metropolitan Line for instance was actually an independent suburban railroad linking London to commuter towns before it was absorbed into the sprawling Underground. In terms of pure metro systems and not hybrids, Toronto isn't as far behind as it may seem. All it needs is one more line of about 30km (similar to YUS line) and it would have the same length per capita as NY, Montreal, Chicago, et al which is between 1km for every 50,000-60,000 people.

How is Vancouver ahead of Toronto on that list? It doesn't even have a subway. Clearly they must be counting LRT as part of the "metro system", in which case Toronto will be adding about 70km over the next decade with the Spadina extension and the Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard LRTs. That would bring us to about 140km.In order for a line to be considered rapid transit it has to be fully grade separated mean no at grade crossings. If all the extensions you mention have that characteristic, then they'd qualify. The Vancouver system is the same as the Scarborough RT which is included in Toronto's numbers, so if you don't accept its eligibility, then Toronto falls even further behind from 68.3km to 61.9.

How is Vancouver ahead of Toronto on that list? It doesn't even have a subway. Clearly they must be counting LRT as part of the "metro system", in which case Toronto will be adding about 70km over the next decade with the Spadina extension and the Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard LRTs. That would bring us to about 140km.

Totally agreed; Vancouver should not be on any list of "subway track". Also, I don't know how they split hairs for statistics, but according to the Wiki sites, TTC has slightly longer track and one more station than Montreal's Metro system (70 km vs 69.2 km). As we know, Toronto is the only Canadian city with its original streetcar system intact, so maybe we could include all of those miles of track too. Perhaps many of those cities on isaidso's list also include conventional city streetcar/tram systems. It just might perk up people who have convinced themselves that we have the worst system in Canada... or, the world.

Toronto:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_subway_and_RT
Montreal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Metro

It was a nice photo. Btw, no city in Australia has a subway yet. They do beat us in intercity rail though. GO Train is puny compared to the equivalent in Sydney or Melbourne.

Again, the reason for this is that both Sydney and Melbourne are much more suburban cities than Toronto, with vast areas of single family dwellings. Toronto's subway system focused much development in clusters along its lines. If you have much more suburban development and no subway, then you develop more intercity rail. It would be very interesting to see an overlay map of TTC plus the Go rail system to compare to that of Montreal, or Vancouver. We never seem to compare intercity rail in Canadian cities... only subways.

I used to be obsessed with comparing our subway network to others, but then I realized it's a pretty pointless exercise unless you take several considerations into account. Population, population density, age, level of government funding, and the size of the city are all really important factors when looking at building subways. Sure, we can say we don't have as much subway as Oslo, Rotterdam, Madrid, Vienna or Munich, but then again we can say we have more subway than Rio de Janeiro, Frankfurt, Prague, Athens, Brussels, Buenos Aires and Rome. It's fun to compare the cities, but unless you do solid research to find out the limits of subway expansion in these cities, it's all a bit pointless.

Don't forget though that Valencia and Copehhagen both have commuter/metro hybrids.

Alright then. In regards to subways, if we want to rival the Madrids and Hong Kongs of this world our subway would have to triple in size. Zeroing in on an oversight doesn't change the the reality that our subway system is much too small for the needs of Toronto.

Again, the reason for this is that both Sydney and Melbourne are much more suburban cities than Toronto, with vast areas of single family dwellings. Toronto's subway system focused much development in clusters along its lines. If you have much more suburban development and no subway, then you develop more intercity rail. It would be very interesting to see an overlay map of TTC plus the Go rail system to compare to that of Montreal, or Vancouver. We never seem to compare intercity rail in Canadian cities... only subways.

Toronto's subway and GO Train are massively under built. It's probably more constructive to acknowledge that we have a deficit. Explaining away these deficiencies due to this or that doesn't help us move forward at all.

If we want to rival Madrid, perhaps we should adopt the European Union as a sugar daddy to pump kabillions into our system! :yes:

It's fun to compare the cities, but unless you do solid research to find out the limits of subway expansion in these cities, it's all a bit pointless.

How true. I suspect many of the statistics and charts we have seen so far compare apples to oranges.

If we want to rival Madrid, perhaps we should adopt the European Union as a sugar daddy to pump kabillions into our system! :yes:


How about we just start a proper dialogue between municipalities and the Federal government about a more workable division between taxation powers and services that each are responsible for. That's the problem, not a lack of funds. :|

Ah! So all we need to do is "start" a proper dialogue! Who knew that the reason we have been starved these past 15 years is just for lack of dialogue? Here I thought it was down to senior governments being completely, utterly unwilling to be seen giving tax dollars back to the Centre of the Universe, but I am happy to hear that it is all an easily remedied situation! No doubt the Rest of Canada outside of the GTA will be happy to chip in as long as we discuss it with them. :yes:

How about we just start a proper dialogue between municipalities and the Federal government about a more workable division between taxation powers and services that each are responsible for. That's the problem, not a lack of funds. :|

We're going to need consistent, ongoing operating funding for these subways you're asking for. Building a subway in low-density corridors like Finch and Sheppard would be a disaster for the TTC's finances unless they receive help from other levels of government. This is why I don't want subways on these roads. The density isn't there and the projections indicate it won't be for decades. It costs $8 per person to keep the Sheppard subway operating. If we repeat that again, be prepared to lose several bus routes.

I've said before that it's embarrassing that we don't have a National Transit Strategy. If we could expect stable funding from government sources, subway building would be much more realistic. But we can't make all these plans around subways hoping that they'll chip in sooner or later.

^^ That will never happen in this country, where funding gets handed out regionally and strategically to obtain maximum voting for the party in power. No one gives a rats ass what the GTA wants, because they politely vote for parties like the Conservatives even though they get sweet-tweet in return. Toronto was so focused on blaming Miller for all its problems that it never occurred to most people that our real enemies were our senior governments. The GTA and Ontario in general are the Sleeping Giant that hasn't quite figured out yet that if they voted in a bloc they could get anything they wanted handed to them on a silver platter.

Alright then. In regards to subways, if we want to rival the Madrids and Hong Kongs of this world our subway would have to triple in size. Zeroing in on an oversight doesn't change the the reality that our subway system is much too small for the needs of Toronto.

Fixating on extreme examples like Madrid doesn't change the facts either, and the fact is that Toronto is not as far behind average in terms of rapid transit relative to population as these extreme examples may suggest. It's like someone making $40,000/yr being hopelessly discouraged at how far behind they are compared to everyone else when they're only comparing themselves to the wealthy making 6 and 7 figures. The reality of course is that they are below average, they should do something about it, but they're not below average by a significant enough margin to inspire such hyperbole. Toronto could stand to double its system. At the very least needs to increase it by 50%. But having the system expanded by 4x-5x (unless we're talking about BART/S-Tog type hybrids) would just put us in the unfortunate situation of being massively over built and having huge amounts of taxpayer money wasted on providing transportation services that could be done much more cheaply.

Complacency isn't constructive, but hyperbole and extreme examples aren't constructive either.

I don't think "complacency" has been our problem, though; as you point out it is one of lack of funding. We want better, but like every other metro system in the world, we cannot build subways without help from senior governments. In the past, there was a simplistic finger pointing at Miller, when of course the true enemy is our senior governments using our tax money as a slush fund. My whole point is that it is useless to simply wallow in pity by imagining we have the worst transit system in Canada or North America when clearly we do not.

We're going to need consistent, ongoing operating funding for these subways you're asking for. Building a subway in low-density corridors like Finch and Sheppard would be a disaster for the TTC's finances unless they receive help from other levels of government.

Who said anything about building subways on Finch or Sheppard? I'm not suggesting that you're doing this, but there seems to be this common reaction that if you're for more subways that means you support Sheppard and Finch getting built first.

The DRL, Queen, and Eglinton must come first.

I've said before that it's embarrassing that we don't have a National Transit Strategy. If we could expect stable funding from government sources, subway building would be much more realistic. But we can't make all these plans around subways hoping that they'll chip in sooner or later.

Agree, that's why things have to change. We can't go on like this any more. We don't have a National Transit Strategy so we'll have to force Ottawa to re-negotiate taxation/service responsibilities in this country.

Who said anything about building subways on Finch or Sheppard? I'm not suggesting that you're doing this, but there seems to be this common reaction that if you're for more subways that means you support Sheppard and Finch getting built first.

The DRL, Queen, and Eglinton must come first.



The only subway that would make sense from a density point of view is the DRL, running along Queen. You could make a case for Eglinton I suppose, but since you said 'subways' in the plural form, I figured you must have meant Finch and Sheppard as well.

I agree that the DRL needs to be built. The DRL should be built before anything goes in on Sheppard, so that the Yonge line isn't fed even more people.

^^ Ford does not represent the pro subway segment of the electorate. The original DRL proposal did not run along Queen, it looped south from Union Station both east and west, and then looped north on both sides till it hit Bloor. I still believe that's the best route due to the residential population growth along our lake front, the need for a stop at Skydome, and another one at Exhibition/BMO Field. To the east, similar arguments can be made for St. Lawrence, the Esplanade, and the Distillery.

In addition to the DRL, there should be a Queen subway that continues west along the Queensway and east to the Beaches. We need both not a compromise DRL on Queen Street. The Roncesvalles Avenue Alignment is optimal to give Roncesvalles proper service. Eglinton should come in conjunction with the DRL and Queen can come 3rd (running through Parkdale and making the Galt-Weston option unnecessary). These 3 will likely not be the end of it either. It would be 15-20 years till we could build all 3 and Toronto would likely need other lines by then. Toronto needs all 3 lines.


Original Planned Route for the Downtown Relief Line

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/TtcV233.png


Fixating on extreme examples like Madrid doesn't change the facts either, and the fact is that Toronto is not as far behind average in terms of rapid transit relative to population as these extreme examples may suggest.

I picked Madrid on purpose and quite predictably you zeroed in on the detail rather than the message. What I'm getting from all of this is you're in the camp that believes we have sufficient rail infrastructure then? If that's the case, I'll leave you to it.

What I'm getting from all of this is you're in the camp that believes we have sufficient rail infrastructure then? If that's the case, I'll leave you to it.

NO ONE is in the camp that we have sufficient rail infrastructure. That camp does not exist, outside of Stephen Harper's caucus. Failing to jump on the "We're Number Last" bandwagon by pointing out that statistics are not comparing apples to apples, or pointing out the impossibility of funding does not mean anyone is content not to get more infrastructure. It just means that a bit of reality is being injected into the fantasy, that's all.

I picked Madrid on purpose and quite predictably you zeroed in on the detail rather than the message. What I'm getting from all of this is you're in the camp that believes we have sufficient rail infrastructure then? If that's the case, I'll leave you to it.I believe in a happy medium. I don't think transit should be starved like what's happening in Toronto now, nor do I think money should be squandered like what's happening in Madrid now. Ideally, the system should have a route length from 110km to 140km, compared to the current 70km. I just balked at the suggestion the system needs to be quadrupled which would equate to over 270km of metro routes, unless of course most of that was in the form of S-Tog/S-Bahn/BART type surface rapid transit which would be a fraction of the cost of expanding the system based on the current paradigm.

I don't think "complacency" has been our problem, though; as you point out it is one of lack of funding. We want better, but like every other metro system in the world, we cannot build subways without help from senior governments. In the past, there was a simplistic finger pointing at Miller, when of course the true enemy is our senior governments using our tax money as a slush fund. My whole point is that it is useless to simply wallow in pity by imagining we have the worst transit system in Canada or North America when clearly we do not.I'd say complacency may be a big part of the funding problems you describe in that federal and provincial governments have become very comfortable with their funding games and have not come to realise how important cities and their infrastructure are. This is an issues in almost every province to one degree or another, but in Ontario it seems to be acute with neither the federal nor provincial governments seeming to recognise the importance of a center like the GTA/Golden Horseshoe. The area has a good quarter of the entire country's population, a similar percentage as what Paris, London, and Tokyo have of their respective national populations, yet Ottawa and Queen's part seem fairly unconcerned.

Sorry to change the subject somewhat, but what is the density and total population of Toronto's inner city? By inner I mean the (rough) 10km ring that surrounds the downtown area.

Sorry to change the subject somewhat, but what is the density and total population of Toronto's inner city? By inner I mean the (rough) 10km ring that surrounds the downtown area.


In Toronto "inner city" typically refers to the 97 sqkm former city boundaries (so a little under a 10 km radius), which would now have about 750,000 people (so ~7,700 people/sqkm).

If we were to expand to a roughly 10 km radius that would also include York and East York which would bring the population up to about a million in 140 sqkm (~7,100 people/sqkm).

oh oh.... I do hope this is not leading to one of the old Aussie-Canuck dogfights about density/suburbiana. Those subjects got pummelled to death and back again about 230 times during the old City vs City days. :shifty:

^^
Nope, not my intention :)

I know that Toronto is considerably more dense than Sydney, but the point of me asking is that I think Toronto is potentially a good example of the route Sydney should be taking. Rather than an increasingly sprawling city that engulfs greenfield sites with limited focus on urban infill, we should be concentrating on developing major corridors with medium and high density residential that eases our chronic housing shortage and subsequent affordability issues. It would also be cheaper to provide new and improved infrastructure for the existing urban footprint than to build roads and rail from new housing estates in greenfield sites and then trying to funnel them all into the inner city for work and leisure.

One of the best things Toronto ever did was building the first subway in Canada. This channelled denser development along nodes of the subway. It was an extremely effective way of maintaining a denser city, and preventing a lot of suburban flight. We've lost momentum in subway expansion during the past generation due to lack of funding, but we are striving to do the best with what funds we have available to us.

^^
The previous State Government here planned on building a fairly extensive (and extremely expensive) underground metro that had a number of flaws. It didn't get up and the new State Government has committed to a light rail network to some parts of the inner city. I don't think this will solve many/any of Sydney's long term transport problems and will not provide a framework for medium to long term urban infill.

Hopefully future governments recognise the benefits of urban infill and pursue this with more vigour in the future. For instance, population projections for Sydney through to 2036 show just 17.7% of new residents will be housed within the 10km ring of the inner city by then. Over the past half decade, ~30% of new residents have been housed in the 10km ring. A planning report from 2004 recommended ~50% of new residents be housed in the same area.

Hence why I think the 'Toronto Model' would be an effective one for Sydney. Toronto clearly shows that to be a progressive, outward-looking city, you can build effective underground rapid transit that supports new and future residents and subsequent increases in residential densities.

Original Planned Route for the Downtown Relief Line

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/TtcV233.png




I'm not entirely sure the DRL should run through Union station. I don't think Union could handle the capacity.

I'd prefer Queen as the alignment myself.

It depends. I wouldn't mind a DRL on front if some sort of higher level transit is proposed on queen as well.

something like this would work well;

light blue: above ground LRT
dark blue: below ground LRT
red: below ground heavy rail
orange: above ground heavy rail

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/queen.jpg

^^ Yes, the original DRL was designed with the expectation that there would also be a Queen subway.

I'm not entirely sure the DRL should run through Union station. I don't think Union could handle the capacity.

Isn't Union undergoing an expansion?

Isn't Union undergoing an expansion?

Yes, but from what I've read, it still won't be enough to support a DRL. Metrolinx wants to avoid future congestion at Union as much as possible.

I believe this is one of the options being considered:

http://www.blogto.com/upload/2011/11/20111122-metrolinx-4b.jpg

In addition to the DRL, there should be a Queen subway that continues west along the Queensway and east to the Beaches. We need both not a compromise DRL on Queen Street.

I'm generally aligned with your thoughts here.

I'm not sure that we need a subway straight across Queen the the beach, and maybe I fear it a bit.

Maybe just to Woodbine, but best might be to terminate at the DRL, and then streetcar from there.

The Beach is a bit of a transit dead end - there are no good connections to the east/north. So if you brought a subway to the end of queen, it would not make much sense since there are no good thorougfares to bring traffic to the last stop, and not the density that is needed at the end of the line, and not obvious place to extend towards (you would be at the bluffs). Might make more sense to turn and go up Kingston Rd. Lots of connections there, but also gets close to the Danforth line.

Honestly, I think a ROW LRT would be awesome on Kinston Rd.

It depends. I wouldn't mind a DRL on front if some sort of higher level transit is proposed on queen as well.

something like this would work well;

light blue: above ground LRT
dark blue: below ground LRT
red: below ground heavy rail
orange: above ground heavy rail

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/queen.jpg

That's it! Come along Queen, and then go up Kinston. Maybe above ground could start a little closer to Vic Park.

LRT right across Queen - unless there is more intensity, this makes sense (especially with the DRL route you have shown).

Honestly, I think a ROW LRT would be awesome on Kinston Rd.

That's it! Come along Queen, and then go up Kinston.

Having difficulty with the spelling of "Kingston Rd." today? Not once, but twice?! You may have to hand in your Beaches membership card. :lol:

That aside, I too live in the Beaches (between Woodbine and Victoria Park), and I agree with pretty much everything you said regarding a subway in this area. It definitely doesn't make sense to go east of Kingston Rd., and even having it run that far is probably pushing it. LRT, however, is another story.

I'm generally aligned with your thoughts here.

I'm not sure that we need a subway straight across Queen the the beach, and maybe I fear it a bit.

Maybe just to Woodbine, but best might be to terminate at the DRL, and then streetcar from there.

The Beach is a bit of a transit dead end - there are no good connections to the east/north. So if you brought a subway to the end of queen, it would not make much sense since there are no good thorougfares to bring traffic to the last stop, and not the density that is needed at the end of the line, and not obvious place to extend towards (you would be at the bluffs). Might make more sense to turn and go up Kingston Rd. Lots of connections there, but also gets close to the Danforth line.

Honestly, I think a ROW LRT would be awesome on Kinston Rd.

I understand your fears about increased traffic that a subway would bring, but it might significantly decrease car volumes... especially in the summer. The volume of people would increase which is good for businesses, area residents would gain better transit, real estate values would increase, car traffic would be curtailed, but you would have more people arriving on your doorstep.

I don't live in the area, but would certainly go there far more if I could get there by subway. I tend not to go anywhere that has no subway connection.

Yes, but from what I've read, it still won't be enough to support a DRL. Metrolinx wants to avoid future congestion at Union as much as possible.

I believe this is one of the options being considered:

http://www.blogto.com/upload/2011/11/20111122-metrolinx-4b.jpg

That route west of University Avenue doesn't make much sense to me. It looks like they're trying to service 2 different areas with just 1 line and will end up not servicing either very well.

That route west of University Avenue doesn't make much sense to me. It looks like they're trying to service 2 different areas with just 1 line and will end up not servicing either very well.


The point is to have it meet the (proposed) new train terminal at Bathurst. Otherwise, people coming from the Georgetown and Barrie GO lines would have no subway connections.

Original Planned Route for the Downtown Relief Line

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/TtcV233.png




I would say keep this route, except put it along Queen Street and have one extension to the CNE and Ontario Place. I don't think it should go through Union. Queen Street is so crowded, it needs a subway. A subway stop at River Street can serve the West Don Lands/Don River Park and they will also have the Cherry Street/Queen's Quay LRT to serve that lower waterfront area. A lot of the downtown population is within close walking distance to Queen Street, so it's much more accessible to more people.

I would say keep this route, except put it along Queen Street and have one extension to the CNE and Ontario Place. I don't think it should go through Union. Queen Street is so crowded, it needs a subway. A subway stop at River Street can serve the West Don Lands/Don River Park and they will also have the Cherry Street/Queen's Quay LRT to serve that lower waterfront area. A lot of the downtown population is within close walking distance to Queen Street, so it's much more accessible to more people.

What about the waterfront? It´s growing very rapidly with more people and more jobs added every year... And there are few transportation options except the Waterfront LRT. This is why the Front St option makes more sense to me.

The only change I would make is instead of making an entirely new DRL, it would be smarter to break down the Yong-University-Spadina line at Union and make extensions from there - the Yonge line would then go west to Dundas West and the University line would go east to Eglinton East.

The stations at University are very close to the corresponding stations at Yonge (about 5 min walk). Why then should they be a part of the same line? A majority of people make a stop at Union. I think with the alignment which I proposed less people would need to transfer to other modes of transportation in this area and for many, the route would be more direct to their destination.

I would say keep this route, except put it along Queen Street and have one extension to the CNE and Ontario Place. I don't think it should go through Union. Queen Street is so crowded, it needs a subway.

It's already been mentioned that there would be 2 subway lines: the DRL and a Queen Line. It makes far more sense to have the Queen Line go straight the whole way rather than loop up to Bloor and have the original DRL serve the waterfront and be the line that loops north on each side.

my only concern is that half the reason the DRL needs to be built is to relieve union station when it reaches capacity in a maximum of 20 years. (probably sooner) a DRL running right into union station would not do this.

Having difficulty with the spelling of "Kingston Rd." today? Not once, but twice?! You may have to hand in your Beaches membership card. :lol:

That aside, I too live in the Beaches (between Woodbine and Victoria Park), and I agree with pretty much everything you said regarding a subway in this area. It definitely doesn't make sense to go east of Kingston Rd., and even having it run that far is probably pushing it. LRT, however, is another story.

Howdy neighbour!

Honestly, I am a fast typer, and have grown to be reliant on spellchecking, but don't have ieSpell.

Kingston, Kinston, Kingston.

See, I didn't mean to miss the g in the middle one!

I understand your fears about increased traffic that a subway would bring, but it might significantly decrease car volumes... especially in the summer. The volume of people would increase which is good for businesses, area residents would gain better transit, real estate values would increase, car traffic would be curtailed, but you would have more people arriving on your doorstep.

I don't live in the area, but would certainly go there far more if I could get there by subway. I tend not to go anywhere that has no subway connection.

What I fear is the increased development pressure a subway would bring to the hood (not that it has done the same to Bloor/Danforth). People here are already upset with development (most of which is appropriate scale for the area).

Beachers are used to heavy influx of people from outside of the area, especially in the summer.

Drunks stumble up and down my street all summer long. Mostly harmless.

I just don't think a subway would make sense here because of the dead end nature of the area. Once you go past Woodbine, there are no North/South streets that are suitable for transit connections. They are all residential, hilly, and already congested. And you would have piles of cars pouring into the area to get to the subway.

LRT makes the most sense for the density here too.

Strange how you can hear a perspective so completely different to your own that it takes you aback somewhat. Met a very well spoken elderly man visiting from Britain, and I suppose he had for some reason to come downtown from the North along the DVP. He was very critical of Toronto as a city, based on it only having one big freeway coming downtown like that. I explained to him how they tried to build the Spadina Expressway, but citizens fought against it, but he simply couldn't grasp that we would not have wanted it just to save a few "quaint" neighbourhoods or that we don't necessarily gauge the worth of our city by how fast we can drive in or out. My guess is that the traffic ground to a halt, and whoever was driving him got frustrated. The old guy was about 80 and I suppose I was a bit surprised that he would place such value in freeways to the suburbs. How much of a hurry can you be at that age!? :dunno:

He must be 10x more critical of most British cities considering they often have fewer large "motorways" leading to city centers than Toronto does. London certainly doesn't have anything as central as the Gardiner.

The Spadina expressway! What a great idea. It's one thing listening to citizens who live near to a proposed route, but it's another taking into account the long term viability of one freeway servicing a city with an ever expanding population. Traffic may not be an issue if you live in the downtown as you can walk or take the subway, but for people doing business Toronto is a disaster...in fact a joke when it comes to transport and this threatens it's future. Comparing it to London is like comparing apples and bananas...no one drives in London because you only have to step out of your front door and there is a bus stop or subway.

Toronto either needs to stop expanding or grow a set and make some unpopular decisions like raising taxes significantly to pay for new subways and bulldozing an 8 lane highway directly from the 400 to the Downtown.

Howdy neighbour!

Honestly, I am a fast typer, and have grown to be reliant on spellchecking, but don't have ieSpell.

Kingston, Kinston, Kingston.

See, I didn't mean to miss the g in the middle one!

I remember ieSpell! I used to use that browser plugin. I haven't used ieSpell in years, ever since I discovered the Google Toolbar, which has its own spellcheck if I need it.

I type fast as well, but I'm a bit of a perfectionist, so I tend to proofread my posts before submitting them.

He must be 10x more critical of most British cities considering they often have fewer large "motorways" leading to city centers than Toronto does. London certainly doesn't have anything as central as the Gardiner.

That is what sort of surprised me. Traffic in England is no picnic. Maybe he has been living in LA for awhile! :dunno:

Comparing it to London is like comparing apples and bananas...no one drives in London because you only have to step out of your front door and there is a bus stop or subway.


Yet London is packed full of vehicles. Mostly taxis and buses and the narrow streets make traffic a nightmare. And the smallish Underground trains are packed to the rafters with riders. Hot ones, at that! What we call "crowded" here on the subway is nothing in comparison. :yes:

I can't remember about the past, but this last time I was in London I don't remember seeing anyone on a bicycle. You can't swing a cat in Amsterdam without hitting four crazed Kamikaze cyclists, but I don't remember even one in London.

That is what sort of surprised me. Traffic in England is no picnic. Maybe he has been living in LA for awhile! :dunno:



Yet London is packed full of vehicles. Mostly taxis and buses and the narrow streets make traffic a nightmare. And the smallish Underground trains are packed to the rafters with riders. Hot ones, at that! What we call "crowded" here on the subway is nothing in comparison. :yes:

I can't remember about the past, but this last time I was in London I don't remember seeing anyone on a bicycle. You can't swing a cat in Amsterdam without hitting four crazed Kamikaze cyclists, but I don't remember even one in London.

My wife used to cycle round central London, she got knocked off 3 times. You have to have a death wish! There is lots of traffic in London, but it would be ten times worse if public transport was like in Toronto. Canada is at a unique place in history, making trillions out of oil and other natural resources...it needs to invest in massive infrastructure and education projects, and stop squandering money on government workers who add little value for the amount they earn.

In order to invest in education and infrastructure, you often need to invest in government employees who will carry out those projects.

In order to invest in education and infrastructure, you often need to invest in government employees who will carry out those projects.

You also need a government who values education and infrastructure over things like F-35s...

at least we aren't as bad as our friends down south when it comes to military over-spending.

You also need a government who values education and infrastructure over things like F-35s...

We will in 2015. :banana:

Canada is at a unique place in history, making trillions out of oil and other natural resources...it needs to invest in massive infrastructure and education projects, and stop squandering money on government workers who add little value for the amount they earn.

Couldn't agree more. If you have any pull with the cardboard cutout Prime Minister in Ottawa, I'd love it if you could make him understand this! I'd love some of the money he proposes be spent on new prisons to go toward our subway sysem :yes:

Couldn't agree more. If you have any pull with the cardboard cutout Prime Minister in Ottawa, I'd love it if you could make him understand this! I'd love some of the money he proposes be spent on new prisons to go toward our subway sysem :yes:

Most politicians are cardboard cutouts, even Obama. Until financing of parties and lobbying is changed, we will continue to live in faux democracies.

Harper is a complete twonk, a patsy for big Oil and other corporate interests...as will any conservative be. It beggars belief he's still in power after the F35 business. Whereas the others are held by the nuts by government workers and state dependents. The whole system is very flawed. With modern technology you could have votes on every issue rather than voting for a party on one or two issues and then getting all the other rubbish they hide at election time.

Marcandian...I take your point, but Canada has too many people who stand in the way of productivity by simply existing to tick boxes. Also, we have an insane amount of duplication with the federal and provincial system. Believe me, Canada is one of the most bureaucratic countries in the world. Saying that, it also one of the most awesome countries in the world! Wouldn't live anywhere else at the moment.

Marcandian...I take your point, but Canada has too many people who stand in the way of productivity by simply existing to tick boxes. Also, we have an insane amount of duplication with the federal and provincial system. Believe me, Canada is one of the most bureaucratic countries in the world. Saying that, it also one of the most awesome countries in the world! Wouldn't live anywhere else at the moment.

That is true. The government should always be striving for efficiency and that usually involves cutting the fat. Some political parties don't take this far enough, while others (Conservatives) take it too far to the point that the quality of service drastically declines. I wish there was a common ground, but we still need to accept the fact that government workers are necessary in order to provide good services. I just hope that many of the layoffs we're experiencing now won't have severe effects on service quality.

That is true. The government should always be striving for efficiency and that usually involves cutting the fat. Some political parties don't take this far enough, while others (Conservatives) take it too far to the point that the quality of service drastically declines. I wish there was a common ground, but we still need to accept the fact that government workers are necessary in order to provide good services. I just hope that many of the layoffs we're experiencing now won't have severe effects on service quality.

Couldn't agree more...but I don't think the dumb Tories are on the same page.

On Good Friday The government announced it was cutting the agency that focuses on Aboriginal healthcare issues. This is not only typical Tory insensitivity, it will have budget implications in the future as there is currently an HIV epidemic occurring in this community, with rates in some areas approaching those seen in Africa...whole families infected through needle sharing. One HIV patient will cost the state $200,000 or more. False economy as well as stupid and plane nasty.:bash:

so.. I decided to go through and colour code my buildings according to their current state in the application-completion stages of construction! if you see a building with the wrong colour, or if you see a missing proposal, PLEASE TELL ME! provide a link to its forum thread if possible for the missing project too!. I'll try to add it! (think of the borders as bathurst to the don valley, and the waterfront to davenportish) if someone is willing to give me a good linked list of liberty village or any projects south of queen and east of bathurst i would be happy to do those as well!

WHITE = the project has had preliminary renders, but no application has been submitted.
RED = the project has submitted an application to the city
GREEN = the project has been approved, but has yet to start construction
YELLOW = the project is currently in sales
BLUE = the project is currently under construction

classic skyline shot;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/future_2.jpg

zoom in on the entertainment district to give a better idea of what's happening there;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/future_3.jpg

a shot to show how dominant 50 Bloor west will be;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/future_4.jpg

and just a nice aerial of the entire city;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/future_1.jpg

Looks good!

I'm curious; what's the wide "under-construction" one furthest to the left on the third graphic? It seems to be way over on Jarvis and I wasn't aware of anything that big under-construction so far east.

Brilliant!! Thanks for this breakdown!

Excellent renderings. Love the colour coding.

The entertainment district is gonna be DENSE.

Looks good!

I'm curious; what's the wide "under-construction" one furthest to the left on the third graphic? It seems to be way over on Jarvis and I wasn't aware of anything that big under-construction so far east.

pace condos.

Thanks, I had completely forgotten that one existed!

Awesome!

Though at the very least you're missing 297 College (http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=36219) & the UofT Residence (http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=92077) at 245 College.

I suppose you might just want to consult the SSP Map (http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/maps/?cityID=12) of Toronto developments to see what else may be missing.

Thanks, i went through the UT database last night and found about 20 missing projects. I'll look at the maps on ssp tonight!

That view is missing 20 projects??!!

Just the blue alone is astounding.

POP!

I went through the maps, and it turns out I'm missing 65 projects from my model!!!! :llama:

they are mostly under 30 floors, but still, thats a ton!

heres my list of missing buildings/ to do list; (these are just the ones currently MISSING form my drawings lol, there are probably just as many in my model currently)
old four seasons tower 2

ryerson residence

ryerson student center

local at fort york

the king east

update 5ive

650 king west

the st thomas

one park place

context king west

kingsclub condominuims

reve

pan am village

west harbour city

ivory on the adeliade

qrc west

river city

womens college hospital

king + condos

fashion house

lumiere condos

paintbox

thompson residences

bridgepoint hospital

22 condominuims

no-210-residences-simcoe

8 Gloucester Street

york harbour club

garrison at the yards

the yards at fort york

o2 mansionettes

toy factory lofts

dna3

onepark west

Axiom Condos

Posthouse Condominiums

The George Richmond

258 Victoria

219 Queen West 76m

building between m5v and tux

langston hall

langston hall 2

324 Richmond Street West

fabrik

32 Camden

111 bathurst

525 adeliade

Minto 775 King Street West

king west condos

liberty place

Liberty on the Park Condominiums

liberty central by the lake

30 ordinance east & west

365 church

355 church

sutton hotel

70 saint mary

77 charles

one sultan street

45 avenue

94 cumberland

403 bloor east

565 Sherbourne

297 college

U of T college residence

bridgeport health

Good god. I'm on here every day, and I haven't heard of some of those. Ce n'est pas possible!

I know!! You will see signs all over the place of projects we haven't even heard of before :eek:

I went through the maps, and it turns out I'm missing 65 projects from my model!!!! :llama:

they are mostly under 30 floors, but still, thats a ton!

heres my list of missing buildings/ to do list; (these are just the ones currently MISSING form my drawings lol, there are probably just as many in my model currently)
old four seasons tower 2

ryerson residence

ryerson student center

local at fort york

the king east

update 5ive

650 king west

the st thomas

one park place

context king west

kingsclub condominuims

reve

pan am village

west harbour city

ivory on the adeliade

qrc west

river city

womens college hospital

king + condos

fashion house

lumiere condos

paintbox

thompson residences

bridgepoint hospital

22 condominuims

no-210-residences-simcoe

8 Gloucester Street

york harbour club

garrison at the yards

the yards at fort york

o2 mansionettes

toy factory lofts

dna3

onepark west

Axiom Condos

Posthouse Condominiums

The George Richmond

258 Victoria

219 Queen West 76m

building between m5v and tux

langston hall

langston hall 2

324 Richmond Street West

fabrik

32 Camden

111 bathurst

525 adeliade

Minto 775 King Street West

king west condos

liberty place

Liberty on the Park Condominiums

liberty central by the lake

30 ordinance east & west

365 church

355 church

sutton hotel

70 saint mary

77 charles

one sultan street

45 avenue

94 cumberland

403 bloor east

565 Sherbourne

297 college

U of T college residence

bridgeport health


Yeah, I haven't heard of plenty of these. And the ones I have heard of I know out of pure chance (seeing the application or whatnot).

Driving Down Gardner Expressway in 2025

dYR_AA0ZbEg



PS....This video shows driving down Shanghai Downtown, but at Toronto's current pace, it will catch up :D

^^ I love those driving down the freeway to downtown videos! Wow, Shanghai is really sprawled out. Some eye-candy and a lot of fugliness on that drive...

Shanghai is unbelievably huge. 20+ million people packed in an area the size of Toronto. It's not that it's spread out as much as it's as dense as you can get with the amount of time/money that they've had so far and will probably just get denser.

I remember when I went there 5 years ago on a tour. Our bus was full of Americans. We'd already been to Beijing and Xi'an, and most people on the bus had been to NYC. When we were coming from the airport (all relatively low density area) and finally crossed the river on the bridge and saw the skyline for the first time there was an audible 'ohmygod' gasp in the entire bus. I don't think anyone had ever seen anything like that before, it was that impressive.

And that was 5 years ago...

A lot of really crummy buildings though in Shanghai. Stuff that is clearly not made to last more than 20 years.

Got any pictures from your trip? I'd be interested in getting the link if so.

^^ I love those driving down the freeway to downtown videos! Wow, Shanghai is really sprawled out. Some eye-candy and a lot of fugliness on that drive...

Not to mention some bad driving :D

:lol: You'd never catch me trying to drive there! Or even on the Gardiner, for that matter. Just watched it again and enjoyed it again.. MASSIVE city. Great choice of music, too.
I know few agree with me, but I'd really hate it if we lost the Gardiner. I just love driving into cities like that.

added around 25 of the buildings on my list. take note that I added a new colour, black, for completed buildings that are missing from google earth.

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/future_5.jpg

^^ what software do you use to do this?

Maple Leaf Square is missing ... but otherwise super awesome!

dYR_AA0ZbEg



PS....This video shows driving down Shanghai Downtown, but at Toronto's current pace, it will catch up :D

:eek2::eek2::eek2::applause::applause::applause:

OH WOW! in fact that blue/green-ish sea of glass is not totally true with Shanghai! It seems as if THAT is something so Vancouveri/Torontonian!

I sat here, perplexed, hypnotized and amazed as least to say! WHAT a city.

OH WOW! in fact that blue/green-ish sea of glass is not totally true with Shanghai!.

But, the flip side of the coin is a lot of concrete; I kind of hate to say it but of the two I think I would prefer glazing than dull brown concrete. At least glass is reflective and can catch the sun's rays. Many of those residential towers on the Shanghai drive look pretty suburban and dated to me.

I'd rather have a built form that's predominantly non-glass with only glass buildings here and there. I've never seen an all glass neighbourhood that I've liked.

^^ what software do you use to do this?

I use google sketchup. free to download, and takes about 15 mins. (no joke) to learn how to do what I am currently doing.

a neat pano from RCMI, showing what the penthouse view will be in 5 years;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/pano.jpg

It's really bulking up down there. Today was the first time I've driven in along the Gardiner and felt the vastness of it. Before it always felt incomplete, but it's really coming together with this latest round of buildings. The 'holes' are being plugged and the core is starting to feel built out.

Just needs a super tall or two and we have one of the best clusters in the world IMO. Of course NYC and HK have the best overall skylines, but as far as dense and varied clusters go, Toronto is kicking arse. I'm sure there will be more accidents eastbound on the West Gardiner as time goes by because of all gawping!

Speaking of "supertalls", I read an article the other day about the new World Trade Centre tower in NYC, and how they might enclose the antennae in a little case that points at the top so that they can call that a spire and it will automatically qualify as the tallest building. Perhaps in the future we will see that the tallest buildings in the world have in fact won the race for the tallest antennae.

finally got around to entering all the buildings on the list, plus some more. if I am still missing any, which I am sure I am, feel free to tell me!

lets start off with a nice aerial,

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_1.jpg

then we see what it will be like to drive into the city on the DVP in 10 years;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_2.jpg

lets zoom into the st.lawrence / distillery / moss park area...

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_3.jpg

flipping over to the other side of the city, we learn that the Entertainment District is in fact "Manhattenizing"

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_4.jpg

continuing west, we check out liberty village (I am sure I am still missing projects for this)

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_6.jpg

switching back and heading east, we hit the Fort York neighborhood; (probably missing a couple buildings here as well)

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_5.jpg

then a look at the hoity-toity Yorkville neighborhood;

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_7.jpg

and lets finish it off with a classic skyline view from the Islands...

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_8.jpg

Excellent rendering. Just wondering, if there is another recession will most of these buildings not be built?

the blue ones will, as of today. The other ones, not so sure.

Great job. Could you do a close up of the core with the latest additions too?

You forgot the East Bayfront and West Donlands redevelopments. ;)

Looks like 45 Bay is missing too (though, who knows if that's ever going to materialize anyway).

Nothing detailed enough has materialized about the east bayfront (other than the goerge brown college building, which i have to add) and the satellite imagry for the west donlands is not good enough (too old) for me to accuratly place the buildings.

Was looking at the skyline today and was wondering what it would look like with the Burj Khalifa instead of the CN Tower. Here's the results...

http://i.imgur.com/zY9Fs.jpg

That thing is massive. But in all honesty I expected it would appear even taller from that vantage point.

Care to try a Kingdom tower render from the waterfront?

Give me 10 minutes!

Edit: Here we go! Had to increase the height of the photo to fit this one in. Crazy to think it's nearly double the height of the CN Tower...

http://i.imgur.com/bmVfm.jpg

wow good work :righton:

WOW! People complain so much now about the CN Tower overshadowing the rest of the skyline that this would send people into apoplectic fits!! :eek:

We'd only need one of those if we felt we had something to prove. We don't. Canada is cool...Toronto is cool...Dubai is kitsch. However, to keep our cool status we do need a few well designed supertalls :)

I think most of North America went through the architectural version of penis-envy back in the '70's when many of the tall towers went up. Then everyone seemed to cool down and realize that supertalls were super-expensive so the fad died down a bit. It has come back in waves now that other parts of the world (eg Europe, Asia and the Middle East) are going through the same contest to be tallest. I doubt many, if any people in Toronto cared about losing the title of the World's Tallest Free-standing Structure as they had had it for a good generation and the need for such titles had disappeared. I'd love to see some beautiful supertalls sprout up here soon, but if they don't materialize right away we have other yardsticks to measure our progress! :)

Burj Khalifa is such an eyesore. It's hideous! I don't think it'd look good in any skyline in the whole world. Hell, it doesn't even look good in Dubai! But don't get me started on that "city."

I dislike most of Dubai's work but SOM's Burj Khalifa is gorgeous in my opinion.

For me, whether they're gorgeous or hideous depends on how I look at them. If I look at them less as buildings and more habitable monuments, they're way more attractive to me. Thinking of them as normal buildings makes me view them as ridiculous.

I can just imagine a large, mainly low/mid rise capital city having a building like that with a large reflecting pool, ceremonial mall, etc. filling a role similar to the Washington Monument and housing a major museum, government offices and other things of national or global significance. That would be spectacular. You could see the building all over town and the city would be like a giant sun dial as the shadow passed over the layout of the streets. Major boulevards many KMs from the building could line up with it and have small reflecting pools in their medians. Would really be a grand vision.

Sometimes I imagine what it would be like to have the TransAm Pyramid in SF at a scale like this. That would be pretty cool as well.

The Burj is growing on me; you do have to admire the pile just for its sheer breathtaking scale. I believe that the highest observation deck you can access is still lower than the skypod of the CN Tower. I always find that a bit thrilling to walk around.

The highest observation deck on the Burj is higher, but the outdoor observation deck is lower. Me thinks.

I think it's a rather elegant tower with the setbacks.

Actually, I think it has the "Highest outdoor observation deck in the world", but here are the ones that have higher observation decks than the CN Tower. As you can see, the
Canton Tower observation deck is around the equivalent of 13 storeys taller than the Skypod.

Canton Tower 2011 Steel Tower ChinaGuangzhou 488 600 The outdoor rooftop observation deck opened in December 2011. The highest indoor deck is at 448.8 m or 1472 ft.
2 Shanghai World Financial Center 2008 Skyscraper ChinaShanghai 474[1] 492.3 100th floor, decks also on levels 94 & 97
3 Burj Khalifa 2010 Skyscraper United Arab EmiratesDubai 452.1[2] 828 124th floor, outdoor
4 Tokyo Skytree 2012 Steel Tower JapanTokyo 451.2 634 Three additional observation decks at 340 m, 345 m, and 350 m
5 CN Tower 1976 Concrete tower CanadaToronto 446.6 553.3 Two additional observation decks at 342 m (outdoor) & 346 m (indoor).

They've really been sprouting in the last half decade or so. I had never even heard of the Canton one.

^^ Me either! :dunno:

I'm not at all up on the subject; I just googled the results.

Canton Tower is quite lovely actually. It constantly looks like it's lit up for pride though...

^^ You are right! I just googled it, and it is very beautiful! :okay:
The Pearl of the Orient one in Shanghi looks to me rather like a menacing pink battery-operated personal-device,
and I don't mean hand food blender.

WOW! People complain so much now about the CN Tower overshadowing the rest of the skyline that this would send people into apoplectic fits!! :eek:

Agree. I'd rather have 3-4 buildings in the 400-500 m range than something like Burj or Kingdom Tower.

Not sure if its already been posted...

http://www.upside-down.ca/sdphotos/10york.jpg

Amazing. Does that include all the recent proposals?

No. It came out about a year ago, so anything new that's come along since then isn't included.

It looks like it's been updated. Ten York is included.

Ten york is the only thing he added.

The guy who did that rendering used to be a regular member here, and I really miss him! :(

Can he bribed to come back?

You can try! His nick is elliot and he is greatly missed.

I have a spare Tim Hortons voucher going...personally I'd rather lick an elephants butt than drink that shite, but I hear Canadians are rather partial to it.

I have a spare Tim Hortons voucher going...personally I'd rather lick an elephants butt than drink that shite, but I hear Canadians are rather partial to it.

Second Cup, Starbucks, Tim Hortons, Timothy's, etc. are all terrible compared to proper coffee. At least the Tim Hortons coffee has a strong coffee taste which is more than I can say for the weak garbage over at Starbucks and Second Cup. At Starbucks and Second Cup you're paying 50% more for an inferior product to support a marketing campaign that convinces people its premium. You pay for the leather chair, decor, and manufactured cache.

These marketing campaigns prey on the same people who get suckered into believing that bottled water is better than tap.

Second Cup, Starbucks, Tim Hortons, Timothy's, etc. are all terrible compared to proper coffee. At least the Tim Hortons coffee has a strong coffee taste which is more than I can say for the weak garbage over at Starbucks and Second Cup. At Starbucks and Second Cup you're paying 50% more for an inferior product to support a marketing campaign that convinces people its premium. You pay for the leather chair, decor, and manufactured cache.

I miss being at Second Cup with you.

Now with this job, I can't get a day off until Halloween time. I didn't care and told them immediately upon hiring that I have planned my vacation then so they did take notice and will let me have my vacation.

Miss being there, go to "that" second cup, sit with you, look at people, critisize them, laugh at them :) and drink our coffee's...

I'd take Second Cup over Tim Horton's coffee any day of the week. Tim Horton's makes a nice freshly brewed tea, though.

Agreed TB. Second cup is ok. Tim Hortons is actually vile, and Starbucks is barely coffee flavored milk. The best coffe shop I have encountered so far in Toronto is Bulldog. They Actually do a flat white.

I miss being at Second Cup with you.


It's on my list of things for us to do when you get here.

The best coffe shop I have encountered so far in Toronto is Bulldog. They Actually do a flat white.

Agree. I go to Bulldog when I want a proper cup of coffee. You need one of these to make a decent cup:

http://www.bulldogtoronto.com/images/gal/4.jpg

Tim Hortons is actually vile

It tastes really cheap to me. I like Timothy's coffee the best, but I am not big on the darker roast of espresso type coffee; I only like medium body brewed. I never drink lattes or cappuccinos, and if I did it would only be with breakfast.

I drink lattes mostly, but the antipodean flat white is the best form of coffee. Not so runny or milky as a latte, but not as foamy as a capachino...it's strong and has a good texture when made well.

a proper cappuccino is half espresso, half milk. Is that similar to a flat white?

I made the switch from breakfast coffee to tea back in January, and am sleeping much better now.

a proper cappuccino is half espresso, half milk. Is that similar to a flat white?

I made the switch from breakfast coffee to tea back in January, and am sleeping much better now.

I think there is a difference, but I couldn't tell you what. I've been sleeping much better since I left England :)

I think there is a difference, but I couldn't tell you what. I've been sleeping much better since I left England :)

Ah, its that good fresh Canadian air! ;)

I weaned myself off the coffee by drinking strongish tea (Yorkshire Gold). Still less caffeine than my old strong coffee.

I never had an issue as long as I didn't drink coffee less than 8 hours before bed time. That seemed to be enough time for the caffeine to work its way out of my bloodstream.

Perhaps my coffee wasn't as strong as yours. I just use instant, usually either Nescafe or Maxwell House. Whatever's on sale. I don't like the dark roast since it has less caffeine. The heat of the roasting process breaks down the caffeine molecule, so light roast is better to wake you up in the morning.

I'm addicted to Kicking Horse coffee beans. I'm finding it really hard to part with $2 for a cup at the chains since I discovered it.

^^ Sometimes it is a bit surprising if you figure out how many cups of coffee you get from fairly expensive ground coffee. Sometimes not as huge a saving as we think if we are paying something like 15 bucks a pound or more. I used to drink a Kona blend from Timothy's; expensive but good.

Glad to be off the stuff and onto tea. Coffee is an insidious addiction and EXTREMELY hard to break. A $3.99 box of teabags lasts me 20 days, which is about ten cents for a big mug of steaming hot tea!

Coffee can get out of hand quickly. Kicking Horse is very expensive: it probably works out to about $1.50/cup. I bought some for my mum and sister and now they're all about it too. On a positive note, it's a BC company so at least my money is supporting Canadian business.

finally got around to entering all the buildings on the list, plus some more. if I am still missing any, which I am sure I am, feel free to tell me!

lets start off with a nice aerial,

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/update1_1.jpg
...


Chicago (taken from Chicago sub forum on this site):
http://static.flickr.com/14/93825947_d03f7b23fc_o.jpg


Toronto might just catch up to Chicago, if it all gets built. Population wise we are close (on a city basis).

Got inspired by the recent mock up of Ten York so I whipped something up myself. Added in a very rough 90 Harbour St. This is going to be one hell of a canyon...

http://i.imgur.com/HTmWR.png

http://i.imgur.com/do2RK.png

http://i.imgur.com/s78cr.png

http://i.imgur.com/ynwVj.png

PS. I may have increased the height a little. Maybe...

Ugh I hate the new google earth model of FCP.. It looks like it 280m tall.. And makes the building look green! It's the same thing with the RBC dexia building.. It looks 210m tall, when it is really 185. Not to mention the fact that maple leaf square was mysteriously removed about a month ago.. With no replacement so far.. (you have to manually upload your own, as Matt did with his renders)

Yeah I was a little confused about that. Pinnacle (Success I and II) weren't their either. Nor Ice, which really should be included considering Trump was at this stage in it's construction.

Regardless the area is going to look sweet!

Agree. I go to Bulldog when I want a proper cup of coffee. You need one of these to make a decent cup:

http://www.bulldogtoronto.com/images/gal/4.jpg

For me it's gotta be Dark Horse.

http://www.torontocitylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/dark-horse-1024.jpg

And they use these bad boys at all there locations.
http://coffeestork.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/DSC_0160.jpg

Yeah I was a little confused about that. Pinnacle (Success I and II) weren't their either. Nor Ice, which really should be included considering Trump was at this stage in it's construction.

Regardless the area is going to look sweet!

There are actually a ton of buildings missing. The shorter four seasons tower, lumiere, almost all of liberty village, a couple of buildings between city place and th Ex, pinnacle developments, and maple leaf square. Plus there are buildings that have been demolished in the east bayfront area for years that are still there.

^^ 90 Harbour is a good example. I wonder who would need to be contacted to get that all fixed? There are solid models of all of those buildings thanks to wylipoon.

wyliepoon would have designate his models as "real buildings", and then google would review them. if they deemed them good enough, they add them. you can right click on models and report them though, if they are floating or aren't real buildings. but that is only if they were done in sketchup instead of buildingmaker. (one of the two programs you can make google earth models in) 90 harbour is made with buildingmaker, thus the unreportability, and the fact that it is still there. as for maple leaf square, someone reported it for some reason, (probably because it had no photo textures, a stupid rule in my opinion) and google took the model down.

I don't like Coffee ... but LOVE tea :)

Chicago (taken from Chicago sub forum on this site):
http://static.flickr.com/14/93825947_d03f7b23fc_o.jpg


Toronto might just catch up to Chicago, if it all gets built. Population wise we are close (on a city basis).

Toronto could catch up to Chicago maybe by 2030 at the current level of construction provided Chicago doesnt go into a Building boom of its own.

But Toronto needs supertalls, buildings over 300 meters and till that happens, Chicago will have a better skyline than Toronto.

http://i.imgur.com/ynwVj.png


Which one is the tallest one? Does it have a name? or under construction already? And the "white" ones?

Guys, please don't drag this into a Toronto vs Chicago thing. We know from experience that it only leads to the threads getting flooded with angry Chicagoans. Thanks.

Which one is the tallest one? Does it have a name? or under construction already? And the "white" ones?

Well technically the blue one I made is tallest but it's not the actual design. Nor are the white blocks I made arbitrarily for 90 Harbour.

Updated renderings for the new hotel at Exhibition Place - posted by AlbertC at UrbanToronto

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7275/7567576968_4bcf9d4d7b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567576968/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8426/7567577758_99a4d10f07_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567577758/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8430/7567578652_efcb96ff06_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567578652/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8024/7567579350_4b5076032a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567579350/)

:puke:



Please don't tell me that POS is replacing this proposal:

http://i.imgur.com/jsrhw.jpg

Yes, unfortunately it is. It's being ripped to shreds on UT. It honestly looks like a 1960's brutalist apartment building.

It's being ripped to shreds on UT. It honestly looks like a 1960's brutalist apartment building.


And not without good reason - this is probably the ugliest tower I've seen proposed for us in my lifetime.

A 1960s brutalist apartment would be a step up - I was thinking it sort of looked like the Simpson Tower and the old Four Seasons were mashed together in a vortex in the 1980s.

Hideous.

Updated renderings for the new hotel at Exhibition Place - posted by AlbertC at UrbanToronto
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8430/7567578652_efcb96ff06_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567578652/)


LOL...The CN Tower looks so weird in this pic :lol:

Kind of like they put it in the tumble dryer and it shrank! :yes:

GOOD GOD, NO! The original was first rate gorgeous and they have the nerve to replace it with that shit.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

not a problem - it is not going to be built.

I will eat my hat if it does.

Ughhhh! My eyes feel sore.

Oh dear God, please make it be no Westin!

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8024/7567579350_4b5076032a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567579350/)

my reaction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ

lgI2ZQVyrBo&feature=related

^^ really funny! Especially the opening bit.

I'd rather they leave Exhibition Place as is instead of building this monstrosity.

This thing is truly a step down from a parking lot.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m57p4gART41qi6921.gif

That woman's mouth reminds me of an Asian carp with lipstick.

http://www.boattest.com/images-gallery/News/carp_mouth.jpg
Courtesy of boattest

That's one pencil sharpener you don't want to get too close to!

http://i.imgur.com/h2Y5l.jpg

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/71-95_king.htm

The City has received a Rezoning Application for a 47-storey mixed-use building including a 4-storey base building at 71-95 King Street East. The proposed development is 148.5 metres tall including the mechanical penthouse. The proposal includes 355 dwelling units and 8,135 square metres of non-residential uses. The applicant is also proposing 257 parking spaces in five levels of underground parking.

Hey I love this one! No curvy bendy chunky edgy flashy Thingy thing but a real skyscraper

Updated renderings for the new hotel at Exhibition Place - posted by AlbertC at UrbanToronto

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7275/7567576968_4bcf9d4d7b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567576968/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8426/7567577758_99a4d10f07_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567577758/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8430/7567578652_efcb96ff06_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567578652/)


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8024/7567579350_4b5076032a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7567579350/)


this one looks cute, is it going to be located on regent park or somewhere around?..

^^ That's Exhibition Place, across the street from the Direct Energy Centre. It is currently a parking lot.

^^ That's Exhibition Place, across the street from the Direct Energy Centre. It is currently a parking lot.


yes u re right!....i was paying attention to the first render only...

but, is it possible to build something there?..i mean, it looks weird...jejeje

Chicago (taken from Chicago sub forum on this site):
Toronto might just catch up to Chicago, if it all gets built. Population wise we are close (on a city basis).

I've never been to Chicago, but when I went to Toronto I felt as if this was Chicago was supposed to be like.

whipped this up in paint

http://i.imgur.com/rhYxB.jpg?1

Nice!

Looks like my models have received some recognition:

http://http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/data/99689--what-toronto-s-skyline-will-look-like-in-2020 (http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/data/99689--what-toronto-s-skyline-will-look-like-in-2020)

Nice!

Looks like my models have received some recognition:

http://http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/data/99689--what-toronto-s-skyline-will-look-like-in-2020 (http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blog/data/99689--what-toronto-s-skyline-will-look-like-in-2020)

How cool! And they were very good about properly crediting you for the work. The first comment is: "hat's off to Cale
Wow, that is really impressive work Cale. Congratulations to you!"

Is that referring to you?

Yep that's me. mind you I had to email them my name, but it is hard to get my actual name from my forum profile.

It is rewarding to get this kind of feedback!! Well done!

Insertnamehere, any chance we could get a look at the north end of the CBD for all of the new proposals? Perhaps a shot which shows Massey Tower, 88 Scott and the others around there (Bay-Adelaide bunch, 100 Adelaide, 95 King East, etc)? Sorry to bother you but that would be pretty cool.

Quick block-up of Gehry's beauties. They are going to be stunning from the CN Tower. Also Aura, Holt Renfrew and One Bloor.

http://i.imgur.com/X5Tef.jpg

Looks great/good job! Btw, I know it was a quickie but One Bloor should be south of the Bay building, not north of it. :)

Looks great/good job! Btw, I know it was a quickie but One Bloor should be south of the Bay building, not north of it. :)

I wasn't paying attention to layers clearly! I just whipped this up in a couple minutes, nothing extravagant in the least...

Excited to see some more renders of these guys.

I'm continually amazed how a new tall building can suddenly make the city look like its got a lot of skyscraper building to do.

I'm continually amazed how a new tall building can suddenly make the city look like its got a lot of skyscraper building to do.

+1

Toronto it's going to look so amazing with 50 Bloor and Gehrys' towers, and not only on the skyline but also at the pedestrian level they're going to make a real improve to the city.

Toronto probably has the 3rd or 4th largest Skyline in North America after New York, Chicago and maybe tied with San Francisco.

Toronto needs to continue on this pace for another 20 years to tie Chicago, provided that Chicago doesn't build any more Skyscrapers in the foreseable future.

Hopefully by 2035, Toronto will have the 2nd largest Skyline in North America. :D

San Francisco? In NA, Panama City, Houston and Miami have larger skylines than SF.

San Francisco? In NA, Panama City, Houston and Miami have larger skylines than SF.

Yes, Toronto and Panama City are 3rd and 4th in size and its actually quite close. If our current building boom manages to last till 2020, we'll be very close to Chicago. We won't have to wait till 2035 although its in the 300-450m range where Chicago trumps us. We have none, they have 6.

Guys I took this picture from Robarts library but I don't do renders... but you can use it for your own renderings ;)

here ya go:

http://i46.tinypic.com/2w38byo.jpg

Give me 15 minutes!

Not much to show here other than Mirvish, Aura and a bit of Ice. I suppose there's the Yonge Developments but I don't really know what to expect from those.

http://i.imgur.com/E1DxN.jpg

my attempt:

http://i899.photobucket.com/albums/ac197/innsertnamehere/pano-3.jpg

(small, I know)

^^^ You win!

Give me 15 minutes!

Not much to show here other than Mirvish, Aura and a bit of Ice. I suppose there's the Yonge Developments but I don't really know what to expect from those.


Nice!! I like how Aura looks from this spot!

Posted by AlbertC at UT


http://www.toronto.ca/planning/yorkville/89_avenue.htm

Designed by architectsAlliance.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8043/8113763997_5a2c98cf10_o.png (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/8113763997/)

The accordion style panels looks quite interesting.

Diagrams like this make me very excited for our future skyline...

http://i.imgur.com/XMhOu.png