HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 1:17 AM
Hot Rod's Avatar
Hot Rod Hot Rod is offline
Big City Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle-Vancouver-Osaka-Chongqing-Chicago-OKC
Posts: 1,187
yes I have seen it, i just didnt know it was that large of an area (as in Mason County as well).

Using those counties in the census you do get 3.8M estimated for 2006.

My argument tho, was that if Canada were to use US style metro areas, Vancouver would be closer to Seattle, if not a little more.

The US includes foreign states as part of metro areas where they border (like Detroit, San Diego, Brownsville TX, El Paso TX, Tucson AZ). This throws off their populations but is probably more accurate as far as the CITY is concerned.

If Canada were to use this, surely Metro Vancouver would be well over 4M (Lower Mainland+SE/E Vancouver IS+Blaine+Bellingham). If the border crossing was more lax, Im sure there would be much larger numbers from Bellingham coming to the city. The US Television/Radio Industry already has Vancouver shown this way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 1:55 AM
seaskyfan seaskyfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rod View Post
yes I have seen it, i just didnt know it was that large of an area (as in Mason County as well).

Using those counties in the census you do get 3.8M estimated for 2006.

My argument tho, was that if Canada were to use US style metro areas, Vancouver would be closer to Seattle, if not a little more.

The US includes foreign states as part of metro areas where they border (like Detroit, San Diego, Brownsville TX, El Paso TX, Tucson AZ). This throws off their populations but is probably more accurate as far as the CITY is concerned.

If Canada were to use this, surely Metro Vancouver would be well over 4M (Lower Mainland+SE/E Vancouver IS+Blaine+Bellingham). If the border crossing was more lax, Im sure there would be much larger numbers from Bellingham coming to the city. The US Television/Radio Industry already has Vancouver shown this way.
The US Census does not include areas outside of the US in Census figures. If you look at the definitions on the Census site you'll see that they only look at areas on the US side of the border. Are you thinking of TV markets?

I think folks have looked at this before in a lot more detail (comparing land area, etc.) and I think consistently the greater Seattle area emerges as substantiallly larger than the greater Vancouver area in terms of population.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 4:38 AM
vanhattan's Avatar
vanhattan vanhattan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Posts: 287
Instead of getting so defensive it may serve Vancouverites well to look at some of the items the author points out. I too, believe that this city has long neglected business interests. This city needs to do alot more in attracting and keeping star corporations and their smaller neighborhood mom and pop businesses as well. If Vancouver would do this, the push for more business towers would present itself. The main reason no new business towers are going up in the city is that there is no need for them. Create businesses and the need for towers will increase. Very simple formula.

As far as Vancouver philanthropy is concerned, well I think the author has revealed the 800 pound gorilla that is NOT in the room. I mean, this city has zero premire facilities to show off or to house the arts....no decent performing arts centers , no good museums, no decent symphony halls, Opera halls, etc. I mean really, I have seen much better facilities in cities one third the size of Vancovuer . I mention philanthropy because typically, this is where these ventures get their seed money (and often times most of it) and where the major support and imputus originates. So where are all of the people with big money here in this city, where are the business leaders, society leaders?.....well they are not supporting Vancouver in any visible way that is for sure. There is obviously plenty of people with wads of cash in Vancouver, but few who are willing to step up to the plate to support and lead some very needed civic centered projects. Generally I feel that Canadians and Vancouverites think that the govenments should provide ALL of these ventures and services, well how is that working out for us??? Government does some things well, and other things not so well. We need to recongnize that government cannot and should not do it all.

Sure, Vancouverites can and should be very proud of their accomplishments. However, philanthropy that makes a big mark in meaningful and symbolic ways is not one of them and attracting and maintaining strong businesses in the core CBD has not been a strong point either.

My suggestion is to poke and prod city government into providing greater leadership in attracting businesses and lending stronger support to the ones that are already existing. Another suggestion is to nudge our wealthy and powerful society members to let go of some of their hard earned cash and time and energy and to give back to the city they love to live in. If they use their resources to lead their pet project and philanthropic efforts, I predict that average and upper wage earners will gladly follow suit, and assist them in their efforts for the benefit of all city dwellers and visitors alike. I have witnessed this scenario in many cities, and it could happen here. We just need a few civic minded people with the resources to get the ball rolling.

Just because Vancouver does a ton of stuff right does not mean that we can't do even more! I remain positive that we will take a close look at what we can do even better!
__________________
Vanhattan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 6:10 AM
Dorian G.'s Avatar
Dorian G. Dorian G. is offline
nogames2010
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 346
I think it's been pretty convincingly argued that it's not a lack of business interest in Vancouver, but a tax policy that makes condos much more lucrative to build than new office space. It would be interesting to note whether the owners of the existing downtown space make political donations; we already know that developers do. Because of that, I think that if there's a problem with development in the city, it's a fair bet it's not government that will save us…

Also, it's worth mentioning that Canadians are much stingier than Americans when it comes to donations; some of that is because of deductibility, lower taxes, &c.—but the fact remains (we're around tied with Britain).

P.S.: 19 emoticons is too many.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 6:25 AM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,450
Good stuff Vanhattan. Although I agree with Dorian G that the current reason for little office construction has more to do with developer's being greedy since as we know the office vacancy rates are more than low enough to justify building at least one decent office project. But of course you're right Vanhattan that if we could attract more business (and in particular hq's) then we for sure would have even more of a reason to get some good towers going.

I don't know why there hasn't been any office proposals announced yet. We've been hearing and reading about rumours and speculation for at least the last year or so. What's the deal? Oh well, I'm confident that something decent will come up in 2007, especially with Brent Toderian now aboard. I think he'll manage to do some great things. How and when I'm not sure but considering he hasn't been here too long he has at least generated some excellent goals (particularly related to architectural quality and future office space). I'm sure the next decade will be quite a significant one in terms of Vancouver's maturation.

P.S.: I kind of liked all the emoticons for a change (though you probably wouldn't have wanted to add anymore than that).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 6:52 AM
JiminyCricket II JiminyCricket II is offline
good time not a long time
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rod View Post
nope, the puget sound basin, aka Seattle/Tacoma/Everett/Bellevue/Bremerton/Olympia Consolidated Metropolitan Area (uh, out of breath) IS 3.6M as of 2006; check the census estimate. And ALL of BC's population is in the lower mainland and opposing points of Vancouver Island, so shouldn't that be Metro Vancouver? Especially since there is HUGE commuter patterns in this area to vancouver for jobs, entertainment, shopping, etc?

Besides Jiminy, we dont need to debate the size of Seattle or Vancouver - my point was to mention that Vancouver is just as big (if not bigger) if Canada used the same concatchment as the US.

The ONLY thing Seattle currently has more of than Vancouver is the number of "world-reknown" hq and only ONE of them is in downtown Seattle (WAMU)!! Also, Seattle's numbers aint much when you compared to Chicago and NY.

Any foreign banks? Van has some. Dare I continue??

Get your chip off your shoulder dude you should "stick" to the sticks out in E-Washington!
you get the condescending tone outta here and "stick" to the facts then maybe someone will take you seriously, "dude"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 10:57 AM
Urban Zombie's Avatar
Urban Zombie Urban Zombie is offline
Crisp and Squishy
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Kailua-Kona
Posts: 7,731
Has this thread really evolved into a war over one or two decimal points...?!

You do realize that whether Seattle has 3.8 million, or an even 4 million, people are still getting slaughtered in Sudan, Iraqis are still getting bombed to kingdom come and global warming is coming to kill us all. Two decimal points most likely won't change the outcome.

Let's not personal insecurities expressed by some of the children in this thread deteriorate the brotherhood between two fantastic cities...or am I asking too mcuh?
__________________
As a staunch Marxist, I don't want to belong to any club that would accept me as a member. Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well I have others.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 7:19 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 40,016
you obviously don't understand canadians ^^^^
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2007, 10:55 PM
SEA-TOWN SEA-TOWN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rod View Post
Using those counties in the census you do get 3.8M estimated for 2006.

My argument tho, was that if Canada were to use US style metro areas, Vancouver would be closer to Seattle, if not a little more.
Not even close buddy...The Seattle CSA (Which means COMBINED Statistical Area...not CONSOLIDATED Statistical Area)... is about as large as all of British Columbia. So please...your fighting a losing battle. And by the way, your complaining about the size of the Seattle CSA??? Well, to start, the Phoenix CSA takes up THREE TIMES MORE LAND. Don't even get me started with the Los Angeles Area... Also, the 2006 estimate for the Seattle CSA is 3,919,624. It's plastered all over the internet, go look for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 12:17 AM
bgwah's Avatar
bgwah bgwah is offline
TEH KING
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 4,202
Counties in the Western United States are so enormous that, while they may gave an approximate population for a metropolitan area, they do not even come close to a metro's actual land area.

For example , look at this map of King County:
http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/images/seattle-sprawl/study%20area.jpg

Even including the sprawliest areas as part of Metro Seattle's land area, about half the county is undeveloped.

I always see different ways of calculating the population of the Seattle area. Sometimes it is restricted to King and Snohomish, and does not even include Pierce/Tacoma. Sometimes it goes all the way to Olympia. And now apparently it occasionally includes Mason, too...? Anyway, using 2006 numbers...

King County (Seattle)
1,835,300

King + Snohomish (Everett)
2,507,100

King + Snohomish + Pierce (Tacoma) + Kitsap (Bremerton/Bainbridge) - The most common definition of Metro Seattle from my observations
3,524,000

Go a step futher and add Thurston County (Olympia) and Island County to that (usually the largest I see Metro Seattle ever get)
3,832,300

Go crazy and add Mason & Skagit counties, which is a little far in my opinion
3,998,500


Anyway, I don't think that is what the topic is actually about. The 22,000 number for downtown Seattle probably does not include neighborhoods like Capitol Hill. Whether or not you consider that part of downtown is a matter of opinion I suppose. mhays usually knows more about the downtown population (if he ever sees this thread).

I'm not sure why Seattle is getting attacked so much, most people here, at least the SSP forumers & urbanists in general, look to Vancouver most often as an example of what we want Seattle to look like in the future. You guys should be flattered.

And Boeing and Microsoft aren't Seattle's largest employers. Perhaps they are for the entire metropolitan area, I don't know, but for the city?

Oh well, I'm sure you guys are just angry because every time you watch a movie that takes place in Seattle, you'll see the Vancouver skyline.
__________________
Favorite Music: Everything except country
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 1:09 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,067
Will you people give it a rest?

It's commonly accepted knowledge that Metro Seattle is bigger than Metro Vancouver.

Who cares either way anyways?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 1:27 AM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,450
I'm not really sure why there is so much debate about the two metros relative sizes. I would say it is a well accepted fact that the Seattle metro is bigger (like nutterbug said). If you included the whole Lower Mainland and the south/southeast of the Island you could certainly push it up a good chunk but I don't see that population reaching much more than 3 mil, even if you were to add in Blaine and Bellingham. Anybody interested in showing a breakdown of the numbers for that? This is the best I can do, but I really have no idea just how accurate they are. All I can say is, the numbers can't be far off enough to push them up to 4 mil.

GVRD = ~2.2 mil
rest of the Fraser Valley = ~.3 mil?
Sunshine Coast/Squamish-Lillooet = ~.05 mil?
South/Southeast Van. Island = ~.6 mil?
Blaine/Bellingham etc = ~.2 mil?

= ~3.35 mil

Anyways, population seems largely irrelavant when discussing this article.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 2:34 AM
SEA-TOWN SEA-TOWN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 307
Yea, I guess its really not. I just got aggrevated because this is definately not the first thread where Hot Rod has claimed that the Vancouver metro area is larger than that of the Seattle metro area. It really doesn't matter. I think it just set me off after all the Seattle bashing that I saw in this thread...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 5:02 AM
vanhattan's Avatar
vanhattan vanhattan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Posts: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian G. View Post
I think it's been pretty convincingly argued that it's not a lack of business interest in Vancouver, but a tax policy that makes condos much more lucrative to build than new office space. It would be interesting to note whether the owners of the existing downtown space make political donations; we already know that developers do. Because of that, I think that if there's a problem with development in the city, it's a fair bet it's not government that will save us…

Also, it's worth mentioning that Canadians are much stingier than Americans when it comes to donations; some of that is because of deductibility, lower taxes, &c.—but the fact remains (we're around tied with Britain).

P.S.: 19 emoticons is too many.
Hi Dorian G. Was it 19? LOL, yes I did get a bit carried away didn't I. I will try to restrain myself next time...
__________________
Vanhattan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 6:19 AM
renthefinn's Avatar
renthefinn renthefinn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,646
You can't include SE Vancouver Island in Vancouver's Metro, there's not nearly enough commuters.
__________________
'I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them.'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 1:31 AM
204 204 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Terminal City
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rod View Post
nope, the puget sound basin, aka Seattle/Tacoma/Everett/Bellevue/Bremerton/Olympia Consolidated Metropolitan Area (uh, out of breath) IS 3.6M as of 2006; check the census estimate. And ALL of BC's population is in the lower mainland and opposing points of Vancouver Island, so shouldn't that be Metro Vancouver? Especially since there is HUGE commuter patterns in this area to vancouver for jobs, entertainment, shopping, etc?

Besides Jiminy, we dont need to debate the size of Seattle or Vancouver - my point was to mention that Vancouver is just as big (if not bigger) if Canada used the same concatchment as the US.

The ONLY thing Seattle currently has more of than Vancouver is the number of "world-reknown" hq and only ONE of them is in downtown Seattle (WAMU)!! Also, Seattle's numbers aint much when you compared to Chicago and NY.

Any foreign banks? Van has some. Dare I continue??

Get your chip off your shoulder dude you should "stick" to the sticks out in E-Washington!
It's interesting that most of the Seattlites I've spoken to think that Vancouver has a larger population. They mentioned all the overseas flights at YVR and the large, busy downtown core.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 3:04 AM
smasher000's Avatar
smasher000 smasher000 is offline
Im smasher000 xD
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver-Burnaby
Posts: 308
Really that's fascinating!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 5:12 AM
SEA-TOWN SEA-TOWN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by 204 View Post
It's interesting that most of the Seattlites I've spoken to think that Vancouver has a larger population. They mentioned all the overseas flights at YVR and the large, busy downtown core.
Here we go...

And are you talking about the CBD or entire downtown. Because if you are talking about the CBD then I would say otherwise.

Last edited by SEA-TOWN; Apr 4, 2007 at 5:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 5:58 AM
Black Box's Avatar
Black Box Black Box is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 895
Yikes! I'll just keep it at yikes.

Last edited by Black Box; Apr 4, 2007 at 6:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2007, 6:15 AM
renthefinn's Avatar
renthefinn renthefinn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,646
Vancouver has a metro feel, that I've never seen in Seattle, but if I wanna fly to my home country, I've only ever been able to get there through Seattle, though that was a couple of years ago.
__________________
'I have opinions of my own -- strong opinions -- but I don't always agree with them.'
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:35 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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