Suburban Skylines

[dleung]

Was playing around with google earth, and they've finally got a 3d scan of the Vancouver region... and all it's skylines Who needs photos anymore lol



Downtown Vancouver


Ambleside


Lonsdale, with downtown in the distance


Lonsdale again


Metrotown


New Westminster Downtown


New Westminster Uptown


Broadway, viewed from False Creek


Kerrisdale, with Vancouver in background


Richmond, with Vancouver International airport across the river to right


Brentwood, with Metrotown in the distance


Edmonds, with Metrotown and Brentwood in the distance


Lougheed Town Centre


Coquitlam Town Centre


Port Moody, with Coquitlam in distance

[dleung]

Seattle, and Bellevue:

[StethJeff]

Pretty much all of California is available in 3D on Apple Maps.

[mello]

So Vancouver is a young, expensive city laden with scenic views just like SD/LA/SF and they are progressive enough to have been going vertical in their suburbs for decades so what gives in California cities? Van is a clear example of how this works and people are fine with it, I just don't see why CA can't get its act together and go up outside of downtown areas.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by mello

So Vancouver is a young, expensive city laden with scenic views just like SD/LA/SF and they are progressive enough to have been going vertical in their suburbs for decades so what gives in California cities? Van is a clear example of how this works and people are fine with it, I just don't see why CA can't get its act together and go up outside of downtown areas.

Well, your statement is not really true for LA, but SD can use some highrises out side of Downtown and La Jolla

[dleung]

Originally Posted by mello

So Vancouver is a young, expensive city laden with scenic views just like SD/LA/SF and they are progressive enough to have been going vertical in their suburbs for decades so what gives in California cities? Van is a clear example of how this works and people are fine with it, I just don't see why CA can't get its act together and go up outside of downtown areas.

Ironically, it's the scenic views that are causing the market to favor high-rise over mid-rise development.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by dleung

Ironically, it's the scenic views that are causing the market to favor high-rise over mid-rise development.

I think its more to do with the lack of highways forcing people to live close to a skytrain station as its the only way to get around the city in a reasonable time frame. If SF was smart they would leverage BART a lot more, it is a similar kind of system even if it is on a larger scale.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I think its more to do with the lack of highways forcing people to live close to a skytrain station as its the only way to get around the city in a reasonable time frame.

That too, but I was referring the fact that the built form, given the same density, favors tall and skinny over squat-midrises more so in Vancouver than elsewhere, due to the premium people pay for the view. On the other hand, Vancouver is the only city where commute times are actually decreasing.

[coyotetrickster]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I think its more to do with the lack of highways forcing people to live close to a skytrain station as its the only way to get around the city in a reasonable time frame. If SF was smart they would leverage BART a lot more, it is a similar kind of system even if it is on a larger scale.

How do you suggest we leverage BART? SF does not control BART, it is a multi-county authority. Where there are BART stations in the city, there is already very dense commercial development (financial district), rapidly developing transit development (Civic Center), or vociferous opposition to density by the neigborhoods (Mission, Glen Park).

[IMBY]

Originally Posted by mello

So Vancouver is a young, expensive city laden with scenic views just like SD/LA/SF and they are progressive enough to have been going vertical in their suburbs for decades so what gives in California cities? Van is a clear example of how this works and people are fine with it, I just don't see why CA can't get its act together and go up outside of downtown areas.

I've been stumped myself as to why, for instance, San Bernardino isn't a suburban high rise jungle, with a commuter train to L.A., or Riverside or Hollywood or any other suburb of L.A.

I do recall that 72% of L.A. is still? archaically zoned for single family homes, and then there's the anti-density Nimby's to contend with.

Big question, with Vancouver, how did the developers win over their Nimby's?

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by IMBY

I've been stumped myself as to why, for instance, San Bernardino isn't a suburban high rise jungle, with a commuter train to L.A., or Riverside or Hollywood or any other suburb of L.A.

I do recall that 72% of L.A. is still? archaically zoned for single family homes, and then there's the anti-density Nimby's to contend with.

Big question, with Vancouver, how did the developers win over their Nimby's?

San bernardino is an hour away from LA... It's not really a suburb of LA like Pasadena or Glendale for example.. There are many suburbs (or areas outside of DTLA) that have high rise districts.... Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, Universal City, Brentwood, Westwood, Santa Monica, Hollywood, Koreatown, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Irvine and so on

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by IMBY

I've been stumped myself as to why, for instance, San Bernardino isn't a suburban high rise jungle, with a commuter train to L.A., or Riverside or Hollywood or any other suburb of L.A.

Beause it's the least desirable part of Southern CA, and pretty much all sprawl. Why would there be an urgent need for corporate HQ highrises or luxury condo and hotel towers?

Also, that commuter rail line has limited ridership and frequency, and probably has nothing to do with development patterns.

Originally Posted by IMBY

Big question, with Vancouver, how did the developers win over their Nimby's?

Canada and the U.S. are quiet different when it comes to living preferences and zoning norms. And Vancouver is basically unique in that it's a place for Chinese nationals to park their money in RE.

[Austinlee]

Wow, had no idea Vancouver had 13 satellite mini-skylines. That's pretty amazing. Considering downtown is already damn vertical.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Wow, had no idea Vancouver had 13 satellite mini-skylines. That's pretty amazing. Considering downtown is already damn vertical.

I get the feeling that the majority of people outside of Metro Vancouver have no idea how vertical our suburbs have become. I think Toronto is the only other city in North America with more suburban highrises.

A pic showing New West in the foreground and Burnaby in the background.

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Burnaby, BC

Source: My Photo, 2014-02-17

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by vanman

I get the feeling that the majority of people outside of Metro Vancouver have no idea how vertical our suburbs have become. I think Toronto is the only other city in North America with more suburban highrises.

A pic showing New West in the foreground and Burnaby in the background.

Pretty sure Miami could give it a run for its money if by "suburban" you mean non-central city (ie not Miami). Places like Miami Beach, Aventura, Sunny Isles, Coral Gables, Hallandale Beach, or even places like Fort Lauderdale or West Palm Beach.

[vanman]

I completely forgot about Miami. I counted about 834 towers for suburban Miami, and 547 for suburban Vancouver.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by vanman

I completely forgot about Miami. I counted about 834 towers for suburban Miami, and 547 for suburban Vancouver.

Never mind. Answered my own question.

[touraccuracy]

Looking at this map, it seems counter intuitive that Lougheed and Coquitlam are both in the same municipality, the City of Coquitlam (which looks massive), but Port Moody is not a part of it (it hugs the inlet).

[mSeattle]

Haha! I love the *1* (THUD) suburban highrise zone from the Seattle area after the parade of highrise zones up in the Vancouver area.
Did you mean to title this metro highrise zones? Isn't Broadway in Vancouver part of the city and not suburb?

[Innsertnamehere]

Toronto's highrises don't really cluster all that often though, they are just sort of everywhere.