TORONTO 2016 – Nightsky’s trip to the incredible Canadian metropolis - Page 6

destroycreate · #**101** Posted **Dec 1, 2016, 3:50 PM**

I really don't get how some people label Toronto as being sterile. From these photos, all of the streets look super frenetic with energy and the buildings are painted colorfully or covered in splashy ads/signage, it looks really cool and way less buttoned up than most NA cities. I really need to make a visit.

Nightsky · #**102** Posted **Dec 1, 2016, 4:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by destroycreate

I really don't get how some people label Toronto as being sterile. From these photos, all of the streets look super frenetic with energy and the buildings are painted colorfully or covered in splashy ads/signage, it looks really cool and way less buttoned up than most NA cities. I really need to make a visit.

Thanks!

Didn't even know that people considered Toronto as being sterile.

softee · #**103** Posted **Dec 1, 2016, 10:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by destroycreate

I really don't get how some people label Toronto as being sterile. From these photos, all of the streets look super frenetic with energy and the buildings are painted colorfully or covered in splashy ads/signage, it looks really cool and way less buttoned up than most NA cities. I really need to make a visit.

I don't get it either, Toronto is pretty much the opposite of sterile, IMO.

People who label it as sterile probably never venture too far away from their airbnb in newly built areas dominated by glass buildings around cityplace or Southcore.

Gresto · #**104** Posted **Dec 1, 2016, 10:52 PM**

Areas of Toronto, mostly in the suburbs, are sterile, but that can't be said of the downtown area. Doesn't the same apply to most cities?

Nightsky · #**105** Posted **Dec 2, 2016, 2:02 PM**

May be they consider the central business district with skyscrapers. But I don't think that's so sterile either. Parts of the outskirts are sterile in all cities, even Toronto.

Nightsky · #**106** Posted **Dec 2, 2016, 2:03 PM**

CHARLES ST W:

Walking towards our hotel. Our hotel, Comfort hotel, was on Charles St E, on the other side of Yonge St.

University Avenue 19 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

University Avenue 20 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

University Avenue 22 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

University Avenue 23 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

University Avenue 24 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

University Avenue 01 by worldtravelimages.net, on Flickr

http://www.worldtravelimages.net/Tor...niversity.html

Nouvellecosse · #**107** Posted **Dec 3, 2016, 7:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightsky

May be they consider the central business district with skyscrapers. But I don't think that's so sterile either. Parts of the outskirts are sterile in all cities, even Toronto.

I think a lot of the downtown is dominated by very reserved and conservative styles of architecture. The highrise buildings aren't avant-garde like in some cities. Some are handsome and high quality like Scotia Plaza and Royal Bank Plaza, others are modern and minimalist like Bay Adelaide Centre and One York, while others are forgettable and utilitarian like First Canadian Place. But few are daring or memorable.

I'm not sure I'd call it sterile, but it certainly isn't a mystery as to where that impression comes from.

• Video Link

Docere · #**108** Posted **Dec 3, 2016, 8:27 PM**

These are some great photos, Nightsky.

And yes people really should venture west of University Ave.

Gresto · #**109** Posted **Dec 3, 2016, 10:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

while others are forgettable and utilitarian like First Canadian Place.

I don't find FCP "forgettable and utilitarian" in the least, though I can see why someone would, especially if he/she has a fondness for ostentation. To me, FCP is a top-drawer example of a modernist skyscraper. Brawny, soaring, elegant, impressive.

Nouvellecosse · #**110** Posted **Dec 3, 2016, 11:40 PM**

I don't think it has much to do with what someone has a "fondness" for, it's a matter of what stands out as being out of the ordinary and attention grabbing. Whether or not you like something once it's caught your attention is a somewhat separate issue. For most people, a very basic square floor plate, rectangular elevation office building shape, and equally basic/inoffensive colour and materials just doesn't attract any attention other than perhaps for its size

Gresto · #**111** Posted **Dec 4, 2016, 4:31 AM**

Fair enough, but being "not out of the ordinary" or "not attention-grabbing" is not synonymous with "forgettable". Either way, I would suggest FCP is attention-grabbing because is it impressive and imposing and slender and tall.

Nouvellecosse · #**112** Posted **Dec 4, 2016, 4:58 AM**

I happen to believe that being attention-grabbing and out of the ordinary are very much synonymous with memorable. Most people need to notice things in order to remember them, and while FCP's size may be noticeable if it were sticking out among low or midrise buildings, surrounded by other very tall buildings I don't find that it is. But of course its ok if your perception is different. I would just be cautious not to conflate your perception as a skyscraper or architecture enthusiast with that of the average person.

Gresto · #**113** Posted **Dec 4, 2016, 10:10 PM**

I don't want to beat this horse to death and ruin Nightsky's thread, but something flashy that grabs one's attention is not necessarily something that stays in the memory, and the converse is also true.

Nightsky · #**114** Posted **Dec 4, 2016, 10:15 PM**

I think Toronto has much exciting architecture, like the art musuems, the City Hall and Sharp Centre. And Casa Loma of course if you count older buildings. But not many of the skyscrapers (except for Aura, One Bloor and some others), I think it looks good anyway, in the same way Tokyo looks good despite it has mosly boxy buildings. And the mix with old townhouses and other buildings make it really attractive. And don't forget CN Tower, that really stands out!

stm · #**115** Posted **Dec 5, 2016, 8:17 PM**

Part of the reason Toronto was considered sterile was because of the age old rivalry with Montreal. Montreal was always considered Canada's party city while Toronto was often considered the serious business town. As a Montrealer who has been to T.O dozens of times I never considered Toronto anywhere near Montreal when it came to fun, sexiness, or coolness. I must admit that has changed a lot in the last decade and Toronto has done a great job to shed that sterile label.

softee · #**116** Posted **Dec 5, 2016, 10:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by stm

Part of the reason Toronto was considered sterile was because of the age old rivalry with Montreal. Montreal was always considered Canada's party city while Toronto was often considered the serious business town. As a Montrealer who has been to T.O dozens of times I never considered Toronto anywhere near Montreal when it came to fun, sexiness, or coolness. I must admit that has changed a lot in the last decade and Toronto has done a great job to shed that sterile label.

Toronto had loosened up and become fun, sexy and cool by the late 1960s, but it wasn't until the last 10 years or so that Montrealers and others unfamiliar with the city took notice of that fact.

Acajack · #**117** Posted **Dec 6, 2016, 2:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by softee

Toronto had loosened up and become fun, sexy and cool by the late 1960s, but it wasn't until the last 10 years or so that Montrealers and others unfamiliar with the city took notice of that fact.

Well, this was in 1990:

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/05/28...rested-madonna

While Toronto isn't boring or stodgy, it is probably wound up a little tighter than some other places.

Its liquor laws for example are still fairly restrictive for a metropolis of 6 million people in a western, secular country. (And please don't say that's the fault of the Government of Ontario. Toronto runs the show and gets what it wants from Ontario.)

Overall, while I wouldn't call it "party central", Toronto has good nightlife that is at the level that one would generally expect from a city of its size.

isaidso · #**118** Posted **Dec 6, 2016, 3:18 PM**

Toronto has changed massively in the last 15 years. Back in the 90s it was as interesting as burnt toast. I tried moving here twice but was bored out of my skull. In 2001, I gave it one last shot and noticed a sea change happening. I haven't been disappointed.

I didn't think a city could completely change from one extreme to the other in such a short time, but it did.

Acajack · #**119** Posted **Dec 6, 2016, 3:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Toronto has changed massively in the last 15 years. Back in the 90s it was as interesting as burnt toast. I tried moving here twice but was bored out of my skull. In 2001, I gave it one last shot and noticed a sea change happening. I haven't been disappointed.

I didn't think a city could completely change from one extreme to the other in such a short time, but it did.

Every place changes over time but I disagree that Toronto was boring in the 1990s. I went there quite a bit during that decade and always had a good time.

isaidso · #**120** Posted **Dec 6, 2016, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acajack

Every place changes over time but I disagree that Toronto was boring in the 1990s. I went there quite a bit during that decade and always had a good time.

My company made my time there amusing but the only aspect of the city that impressed me was the CN Tower and bank towers. Toronto has done a complete 180 since then. It checks off more boxes for me than any other city.

Perhaps we shouldn't hijack Nightsky's nice thread? You can pm me if you'd like.