HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #15041  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2022, 10:10 PM
CivicBlues CivicBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Why are you surprised? When BC sold off the Expo lands to a Hong Kong developer they imported Hong Kong’s method of housing.
Ah yes, Vancouver :

     
     
  #15042  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2022, 11:36 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 28,915
This is more of what I would love to see:

Quote:
Legalize this.

Six-story, 17-unit apartment building. All the apartments are corner units. Sits next to a SFH in a high demand area blocks away from light rail.

Capitol Hill, Seattle


https://twitter.com/JusticeQueen6/status/1529066511339606018?t=3pnNixNip3W7bstRg82gnA&s=19
     
     
  #15043  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 1:43 AM
whatnext whatnext is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Hope it’s rental. I wouldn’t want to be just one of 17 owners on the hook for a new elevator and envelope repair.
     
     
  #15044  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 1:55 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 28,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Hope it’s rental. I wouldn’t want to be just one of 17 owners on the hook for a new elevator and envelope repair.
In this case it is. What I was getting at, is that I like the style. Doesn't have to be built to 6 storeys and 17 units. Maybe just 4, no elevator and 8 units.
     
     
  #15045  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 1:57 AM
whatnext whatnext is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Ahhh the usual Canadian whine about size.

Alright, why doesn't Vancouver Island or the Lower Mainland or the Golden Horseshoe or even the Island of Montreal have that level of service and integration?
The population of Vancouver island is just 840k just 10% of Switzerland’s . Even Metro Vancouver is just about 1/4. Then take into account tax dollars that flow out to other areas of Canada and it’s pretty easy to see why it doesn’t make sense.
     
     
  #15046  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:02 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 28,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
The population of Vancouver island is just 840k just 10% of Switzerland’s . Even Metro Vancouver is just about 1/4. Then take into account tax dollars that flow out to other areas of Canada and it’s pretty easy to see why it doesn’t make sense.
Okay. And what about the Golden Horseshoe or Montreal? First it was size. Now it's population. But even our populated bits like the Golden Horseshoe and the Montreal metro area have nothing like this.

Also, what you just did is kinda typical. We, Canadians, are always full of excuses. Never any actual ambition.
     
     
  #15047  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:22 AM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
The population of Vancouver island is just 840k just 10% of Switzerland’s . Even Metro Vancouver is just about 1/4. Then take into account tax dollars that flow out to other areas of Canada and it’s pretty easy to see why it doesn’t make sense.
If Vancouver Island had 10% of the rail service of Switzerland that would be fantastic.

Vancouver Island needs commuter rail into Victoria that can be extended out towards Nanaimo over time.
     
     
  #15048  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:30 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonny24 View Post
Yeesh... absolutely no yard. Is it even a "house" at that point, or just a "house shaped apartment"?
You would be surprised how many houses in the denser parts of Toronto are apartments and that it just looks like a house.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
Eixample (in Barcelona) is hands-down the absolute best form of high density city living that I have seen in my travels near and far.

When I look for the most livable cities, Barcelona is not on the top 10 list. If that kind of housing was good, one would assume they would be near the top.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
The Europeans could do better on greenspace and tree cover. Is it worth the loss of personal space (and affordability) though?

Average apartment sizes (from some quick Googling)

Vancouver - 746 ft²
Barcelona - 969 ft²

Also, I find that we tend to mistake greenspace for quality public spaces. A square in front of the church or townhall in Europe is likely to be a lot more pleasant than some average neighbourhood park in Canada.

Lastly, density and good quality public transport means that you're not very far from actual nature, if you want to go and enjoy some.
It has been shown that trees clean the air and make it better to live in the area. So, greenspace is important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
Most of these dense blocks have communal courtyards in the centre of each block, heavily used by residents. They are really very nice.



most of the streets in Eixample are treed. Here is a random location, a few blocks from the hotel I was staying in: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3942244,...PuXqFMX_PPAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US
That shows much different than the satellite view. It looks pleasant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Not Just Bikes made a video a few days ago on the Swiss rail system. And it blew my mind. I can't even imagine that kind of coordination in a neighbourhood in Canada. Let alone a whole province. And one of the examples he gave in there was a train station that served a cafe, a hiking trail and a ski lift. It saw trains every half hour.

Video Link




This is an important point. Applies to more than just the trade off between public and private spaces.
This speaks to the desire to actually give services to the citizens. Imagine a daily train to Banff from Calgary, or Whistler from Vancouver, or Algonquin Park from Toronto. One could imagine how useful it would be. Sadly, most governments just want to cut revenue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Easier to do when a country like Switzerland is basically slightly larger than Vancouver Island 20-25%)
Interestingly, it appears that they have low personal income taxes. So, how does the government pay for it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Ahhh the usual Canadian whine about size.

Alright, why doesn't Vancouver Island or the Lower Mainland or the Golden Horseshoe or even the Island of Montreal have that level of service and integration?
The problem is that there must be a certain level of fare box return for a government to think of doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Okay. And what about the Golden Horseshoe or Montreal? First it was size. Now it's population. But even our populated bits like the Golden Horseshoe and the Montreal metro area have nothing like this.

Also, what you just did is kinda typical. We, Canadians, are always full of excuses. Never any actual ambition.
Kar is King!
No other real reason.
     
     
  #15049  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:30 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper View Post
Vancouver Island needs commuter rail into Victoria that can be extended out towards Nanaimo over time.
They need that service now.
     
     
  #15050  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 3:37 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
When I look for the most livable cities, Barcelona is not on the top 10 list. If that kind of housing was good, one would assume they would be near the top.
Just like one could say that if SFHs were that good then Phoenix would be near the top. Obviously there are a lot of important factors that influence livability with housing being just one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Interestingly, it appears that they have low personal income taxes. So, how does the government pay for it?
Keep in mind that government revenue is a combination of the effective rate of taxation (as opposed to the nominal rate) and the incomes that this rate applies to. Switzerland is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, often ranking higher than either Canada or the US, so even if the tax rate is lower that doesn't necessarily mean the resulting revenue is lower.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
     
     
  #15051  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 3:44 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Just like one could say that if SFHs were that good then Phoenix would be near the top. Obviously there are a lot of important factors that influence livability with housing being just one.
Top Ten Most Liveable Cities in 2022

1- Vienna, Austria.
3- Zurich, Switzerland & Calgary, Canada.
5- Vancouver, Canada.
6- Geneva, Switzerland.
7- Frankfurt, Germany.
8- Toronto, Canada.
9- Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
10- Osaka, Japan & Melbourne, Australia.

I have visited all 3 Canadian cities on the list. Sadly, I have not been to the other cities. I also have not been to Phoenix, of which is not on the list.

SFHs is not an indicator on its own one way or the other. Having said that, a good mix of housing is likely key to a livable city.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Keep in mind that government revenue is a combination of the effective rate of taxation (as opposed to the nominal rate) and the incomes that this rate applies to. Switzerland is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, often ranking higher than either Canada or the US, so even if the tax rate is lower that doesn't necessarily mean the resulting revenue is lower.
Oh, I know that it is not taxation, but it is a mix of factors. I imagine it also has to do with the terrain. Much easier to build a single track than a double lane.
     
     
  #15052  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 3:56 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Top Ten Most Liveable Cities in 2022

1- Vienna, Austria.
3- Zurich, Switzerland & Calgary, Canada.
5- Vancouver, Canada.
6- Geneva, Switzerland.
7- Frankfurt, Germany.
8- Toronto, Canada.
9- Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
10- Osaka, Japan & Melbourne, Australia.

I have visited all 3 Canadian cities on the list. Sadly, I have not been to the other cities. I also have not been to Phoenix, of which is not on the list.

SFHs is not an indicator on its own one way or the other. Having said that, a good mix of housing is likely key to a livable city.
Most major cities have a "good mix of housing" while cities dominated by a single type being are in the minority. So not surprisingly most of the cities on most lists will also have a good mix of housing including a "livable" cities list so the attempt at finding a correlation is a bit of a stretch.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
     
     
  #15053  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 3:58 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Most major cities have a "good mix of housing" while cities dominated by a single type being are in the minority. So not surprisingly most of the cities on most lists will also have a good mix of housing including a "livable" cities list so the attempt at finding a correlation is a bit of a stretch.
Maybe that is key to a livable city, the varied housing choices. That makes Phoenix and Barcelona both look bad.
     
     
  #15054  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 11:43 AM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,875
Strange conversation going on.

Yes, European cities have trees.

And yes, European cities have parks within walking distance.

In The Guardian link that started this whole conversation, you can clearly see parks and trees in even the densest square kilometers, and more just outside.

A lot of this conversation seems to be centred on Barcelona, for some reason. I'd guess because it has the densest square kilometer. First, 53k in a square kilometer is crazy dense. The Gothic Quarter is an insane labyrinth of tight lanes but, like Leo pointed out, you don't need shade. When it does open up into squares, the squares have trees, like so. If you want a green break, Ciutadella Park is directly to the west. The Mediterranean and white sandy beaches are less than a kilometer from the southern edge. And at the northern edge there are multiple metro lines that will take you to the mountains 5km to the north.


The history of Barcelona's Gothic Quarter is really interesting. Barcelona backed the losers in the War of Spanish Succession, in 1714. Spain, therefore, forbid the city from growing beyond its walls. For the next 140 years, Barcelona became increasingly dense. By the 1850s it was something like the 19th century Kowloon Walled City. The Gothic Quarter, as roughly half of the old city, had an incredible population density of about 85k per square kilometer.

In 1854, Spain lifted the restrictions on Barcelona's growth. Barcelonans ripped down the city walls, converted the citadel to the west--built to oppress them--into a beautiful park, and expanded the city into Cerdá's Eixample--the expanse of iconic square street grid with chamfered corners.

So, that's why the Gothic Quarter is extremely dense and lacks space for a lot of street trees or large parks.



And I now hear that their (fake) lack of trees means European cities are dealing with the heat poorly. Are European cities dealing with the heat poorly? I don't know. There's less air conditioning than in NA. More of life goes on outdoors, in public spaces. I shouldn't need to explain why hiding from heat in air conditioned cars doesn't mean Canadian cities are handling global warming.

European cities are tuned to their traditional climates. This means that southern European cities--which tend to be built closer together, to create more shade, and that therefore tend to have fewer street trees--are already equipped to deal with the heat. Climate change is more of a problem in Northern Europe, where cities were built to maximize light during dingy winters.

Northern European spaciousness, though, leaves more room for trees, which already exist, and more of which cities are planting.

Seville, handling the heat like the always have.

Amsterdam, planting trees to deal with the unbearable sun and heat characteristic of North Sea cities.
__________________
no
     
     
  #15055  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 11:57 AM
biguc's Avatar
biguc biguc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: pinkoland
Posts: 11,875
Incoming PSA about livability rankings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Top Ten Most Liveable Cities in 2022

1- Vienna, Austria.
3- Zurich, Switzerland & Calgary, Canada.
5- Vancouver, Canada.
6- Geneva, Switzerland.
7- Frankfurt, Germany.
8- Toronto, Canada.
9- Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
10- Osaka, Japan & Melbourne, Australia.
This looks like a mix of Mercer's and EIU's city "livability" rankings.

If anyone ever wondered what qualifies an asset management firm and a spinoff of a weekly dedicated to the dismal science to rank cities on livability, there's an easy answer: nothing.

These rankings are for bougie corporate types to negotiate raises when they relocate. Relocate to Nairobi and you'll want to live in a fortified compound and send your kids to boarding school abroad; you'll need to get compensated for that. Relocate to Calgary and those aren't problems. Calgary is, therefore, "liveable" city. The top 80ish cities in EIU's rankings are basically the same--don't expect a raise to relocate there.

The EIU even put a piece out ten years ago on how we shouldn't take these seriously as city rankings because they don't account for much of what makes cities good. They don't account for culture, diverse recreational opportunities, or pleasant surroundings, for example.
__________________
no
     
     
  #15056  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 12:30 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 28,915
@biguc

Thank you.

Will add that the reason, Vancouver, Toronto and Calgary make the list of livable cities is less because of their own merits and more because of the country they are in. Canada is a wealthy, politically and economically stable country, with decent public services in some categories. If you look at the actual EIU categories, very little of the three cities high ratings on the list is because of anything they do as municipalities. Incidentally, these factors can drag down European cities in the PIGS countries, like Barcelona. Likewise, cities like Singapore take a hit because of governance despite having great public services and universal public housing.

Livability rankings do nothing to further the discussion here on urban design and housing affordability. Indeed, does a great job of justifying complacency. "We're ranked highly. So everything we do is right." I bet a city design or planning journal would have very different rankings.
     
     
  #15057  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:21 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,256
Yeah there are so many problems with drawing conclusions on housing type based on livability rankings that it's hard to know where to start. But obviously I wasn't going to waste any more time on it as I would have been here all night.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
     
     
  #15058  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:21 PM
goodgrowth goodgrowth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,226
Photo of Hong Kong 1964 vs 2016

Why has Vancouver been slacking?


     
     
  #15059  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 2:47 PM
thebasketballgeek's Avatar
thebasketballgeek thebasketballgeek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Rimouski, Québec
Posts: 1,672
There are 2 big differences between North American design and European design and as a result housing affordability. The first is transportation infrastructure. As long as nonsense like the Gardiner Expressway and 4 lane 1-way roads like 4th Ave in Calgary exist Canadian cities will never match Europe because we are far too car-centric. As a result general affordability craters because what good is having a nice and affordable townhouse when you’ll have to spend $600 a month to own a automobile to function within the city. Europeans for the most part pay a fraction of that in terms of transport costs because it’s much easier to walk, cycle, or use public transportation for the majority of your trips. Most Canadians can only dream of attaining that freedom of transportation but instead are stuck as slaves to the automobile. Not to mention would you want to live in an inner city where you could potentially suffer from hearing loss and deal with pollution due to all of the ICE vehicles occupying our inner city roads?

The second difference is how end of city development is designed. City centres and inner-city neighborhoods for the most part in North America and Europe are somewhat competitive in terms of walkability, access to transit, and having services nearby. However, once you get past the inner city those stupid yellow belts start popping up and now the population density required for a lot of services is simply not there. Mind you these are the established pre war neighborhoods that won’t add new housing because NIMBYIsm. Unfortunately, the further you move along the worse it gets because that’s when you reach the cookie cutter urban sprawl which once again is terrible for general affordability. The worst thing about cookie cutter sprawl is that it’s generally next to a highway or high speed thoroughfare because the grid system that Canadian cities established abruptly ended once we let developers buy massive tracts of land and create winding streets forming a wall between each neighborhood rather then a seamless connection with many access points. It also makes it very difficult and dangerous for children to go outside their neighborhoods and can’t develop a sense of independence.

European end of city development on the other hand keeps the narrow streets (for the most part), sufficient density with rowhouses and small apartment blocks, and maintain that access to good public transit because they don’t expand beyond their means. In the Netherlands for example their bike lanes are actually better in the suburbs compared to the inner cities because they’ve developed a set of standards (CROW) that builds from their years of experience of constructing said lanes and constantly looking for innovation and improvement.

I think Canadian suburbs can be just as good as European suburbs, but we need to rework all the existing suburbs before expanding outward. Since Canadian suburbs have wider streets we need significant road diets, utilize land use around AT paths more effectively because far too many of them are just recreational trails (looking at you Calgary and Winnipeg), and of course push for gentle density that is middle housing. The one pro for Canadian cities is that they still have A LOT of space to build infill within their cities. So until all of these needs are met for existing suburban residents there should realistically be no greenfield development going forward if we want to promote functioning and vibrant cities.

Those were just the 2 big ones but there are a lot of minor triggers as well like slip lanes, traffic signalling, lack of political will, urban illiteracy because most people grew up in suburbs that can be discussed for a while but I’ll leave it here for now. This discussion is so broad one could easily write a case study or even a thesis on it honestly.
     
     
  #15060  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 3:18 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Quebec
Posts: 44,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by biguc View Post
Incoming PSA about livability rankings.



This looks like a mix of Mercer's and EIU's city "livability" rankings.

If anyone ever wondered what qualifies an asset management firm and a spinoff of a weekly dedicated to the dismal science to rank cities on livability, there's an easy answer: nothing.

These rankings are for bougie corporate types to negotiate raises when they relocate. Relocate to Nairobi and you'll want to live in a fortified compound and send your kids to boarding school abroad; you'll need to get compensated for that. Relocate to Calgary and those aren't problems. Calgary is, therefore, "liveable" city. The top 80ish cities in EIU's rankings are basically the same--don't expect a raise to relocate there.

The EIU even put a piece out ten years ago on how we shouldn't take these seriously as city rankings because they don't account for much of what makes cities good. They don't account for culture, diverse recreational opportunities, or pleasant surroundings, for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Yeah there are so many problems with drawing conclusions on housing type based on livability rankings that it's hard to know where to start. But obviously I wasn't going to waste any more time on it as I would have been here all night.
These lists are total jokes. Toronto and Vancouver are among the least livable cities on the continent: low incomes + unattainable housing.

(Montreal is unarguably more livable, yet doesn’t make the list.)

The makers of that list should be forced to tour the DTES while announcing in a megaphone “I am bearing fantastic news: you guys are enjoying one of the most livable cities on the planet!”

If they get beat up, that would be a bonus
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:30 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.