HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 1:02 PM
Razor Razor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,944
Why Do Canadian Skylines Overperform Relative To Their Metro Populations?

I know I'm probably stating the obvious here, but just for some discussion.

I was looking at some wonderful skyline shots of Vancouver, Edmonton, Halifax, and Calgary recently and I just thought how small their respective populations are in comparison to their skylines, which actually betray their numbers. Only Montreal and Toronto seem about right to me, with Ottawa maybe underperforming a little bit..Having said that, Ottawa does have some nice density.Halifax has a metro of just around 500,000, Vancouver (+/-) 2.5 million, and Calgary just under 1.5 (+/-), yet you would think that they were 3x their respective sizes in comparison to what other metros in other countries look like, and yes we are talking metropolitan figures..I guess you could say the same thing about both Australian and New Zealand metros which also seem to also overperform in the skyline department.

I think the easy answer is the scarce hinterlands and rural areas to draw into their CMA numbers..There is lot of barren nothingness once you leave Canadian cities, so basically what you see is what you get in a nutshell..

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 3:27 PM
dc_denizen's Avatar
dc_denizen dc_denizen is offline
Selfie-stick vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York Suburbs
Posts: 10,999
I find this a more interesting question outside of Toronto, which we've discussed ad nauseum here, and vancouver, where the answer is obvious (china)

eg, why is calgary building tons of new highrises, despite $5 oil and 25% office vacancies?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...tion-1.5393055

I kind of feel like if Calgary were in the US, and had the same current economic fundamentals, we would be seeing very little investment in real estate there..there may be some peculiarity with canadian financial markets that leads to the difference

with 1/4 of total office space vacant, Calgary basically has a 25% larger skyline that it should have, based on economic fundamentals.
__________________
Joined the bus on the 33rd seat
By the doo-doo room with the reek replete
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 3:37 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_denizen View Post

I kind of feel like if Calgary were in the US, and had the same current economic fundamentals, we would be seeing very little investment in real estate there..
It probably would..because Houston still attracts a lot of investment and it's been floundering from stagnant oil prices for the past few years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 3:38 PM
Maldive's Avatar
Maldive Maldive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor View Post
I know I'm probably stating the obvious here, but just for some discussion.

I think the easy answer is the scarce hinterlands and rural areas to draw into their CMA numbers..There is lot of barren nothingness once you leave Canadian cities, so basically what you see is what you get in a nutshell..

Thoughts?
Well the notion of barren nothingness when you leave a city is kinda absurd, particularly the big 3:

Toronto area:
hard to love Mississauga but 800,000 locals and hundreds of millions/billions of planned and u/c hi-rise growth. Thankfully the Absolut twins will temper future mistakes. Missie has 1.5 billion dollar project in the works.

Vaughn, Markham, Brampton - too much to count


Vancouver: Burnaby, Surrey etc. growing like weeds


Montreal: to lazy to document

I know this is a skyscraper thread but:

Calgary: heft and tall but a very small footprint of tall built form compared to Phillie, Boston etc.

Edmonton: glad you have a tall, call when u have another

Halifax: don't join the tall game, just keeping improving ur mid-rise aesthetic
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 3:50 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Canadians are much more apt to live in large multifamily buildings. This (mostly) accounts for the difference.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 5:47 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Mostly it comes down to the demand+economics of cities where sprawl is limited, driving isn't encouraged, and transit is easy. Also critical mass.

Vancouver was building residential highrises in large numbers 50 years ago, long before immigration kicked up. The Downtown Peninsula was considered desirable, and a lack of in-town freeways made commuting harder. Due to "housing first" land use policies, housing has always taken precedence over office growth. A critical mass of housing and a relative lack of urban ills (better transit, healthcare, safety net) have resulted in an urban wonderland that continues to attract more people.

Suburban Vancouver has always relied on transit more than most US equivalents. Since the Skytrain lines have been built, walkability to stations has always been important, and worth paying a premium for. That's made land expensive, encouraging density. Since highrises have been allowed and encouraged and the economics work, they've proliferated there too.

Tight growth management has been a key to all this. Since there's very little sprawl, growth is concentrated inward more than in any US city. Even the SF area has the other side of the mountains, and Portland has Clark County WA's somewhat easier GM restrictions.

Then add much more acceptance of highrises. In the US, TODs might be limited to six stories that would be highrises in Canada.

PS, Calgary might be about to tank due to oil prices.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:07 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 10,793
I don't know whether 'over perform' is the right way of putting it. Canadian (and Australian) metros build taller and denser than US metros of the same size due to urban planning policies. They also tend to have higher population growth rates. They need to build a lot to satisfy the demand for new housing, offices, institutional, etc. Canada and Australia have some of the highest population growth rates in the developed world. It follows that their metros grow quickly too.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:12 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 10,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post

PS, Calgary might be about to tank due to oil prices.
Calgary started tanking a few years ago.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:34 PM
dc_denizen's Avatar
dc_denizen dc_denizen is offline
Selfie-stick vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York Suburbs
Posts: 10,999
And yet they have 37 cranes building (presumably) Highrises
__________________
Joined the bus on the 33rd seat
By the doo-doo room with the reek replete
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:39 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Canada didn't deliberately sabotage it's inner cities quite as much as the US did/does.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:42 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 13,867
Australia and New Zealand are arguably better still. It's transit, high-rise multifamily, and all that. Just Commonwealth middle-class stuff.

The "overperform" thing is really just an artifact of Canada always looking across its southern border (and only there) for comparisons. I mean, why do Canadian transit systems underperform German or Swedish ones so badly, metro-to-comparable-metro? I feel like you bring that up and Canadians are all shrugs and like, "well, you know, inescapable byproduct of history/can't even really be compared". But you get the US falling back on whatever metric, and we're all "hmm...obvious cultural and political failure, a shame really."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 6:59 PM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,701
More people using public transit, walking, and biking reduces the demand for parking in downtowns, freeing up space for development, allowing for a greater number of buildings to be built in a smaller area, and allowing for each building to have more non-parking levels above ground relative to the amount of parking levels below ground.

Halifax in 2011 had higher public transit usage than every US metropolitan area except New York, Washington, and San Francisco. So a dense core there is to be expected.














United States:
Code:
Metro Area    Population %Transit %Active
New York      19,015,900    32.38    7.04
Los Angeles   12,944,801     6.55    3.79
Chicago        9,504,753    12.20    3.91
Dallas         6,526,548     1.51    1.32
Houston        6,086,536     2.42    1.68
Philadelphia   5,992,414     9.66    4.45
Washington     5,703,948    15.51    3.96
Miami          5,670,125     3.99    2.29
Atlanta        5,268,860     3.26    1.85
Boston         4,552,402    12.19    6.41
San Francisco  4,391,037    15.58    6.55
Riverside      4,304,994     1.67    1.87
Detroit        4,285,832     1.69    1.59
Phoenix        4,263,236     2.30    2.83
Seattle        3,500,026     8.57    4.86
Minneapolis    3,318,486     4.91    3.00
San Diego      3,140,069     3.23    3.70
Tampa          2,824,724     1.31    2.37
St. Louis      2,817,355     2.48    2.08
Baltimore      2,729,110     6.38    2.97
Pittsburgh     2,359,746     5.76    3.77
Portland       2,262,605     6.77    6.01
San Antonio    2,194,927     2.24    2.26
Sacramento     2,176,235     2.90    4.24
Orlando        2,171,360     2.62    1.86
Cincinnati     2,138,038     2.13    2.28
Cleveland      2,068,283     3.32    2.52
Kansas City    2,052,676     1.26    1.46
Las Vegas      1,969,975     4.02    2.12
San Jose       1,865,450     3.54    4.26
Columbus       1,858,464     1.83    2.65
Charlotte      1,795,472     2.46    1.73
Austin         1,783,519     2.66    3.21
Indianapolis   1,778,568     1.22    2.07
Virginia Beach 1,677,984     1.91    3.08
Nashville      1,617,142     1.47    1.69
Providence     1,600,224     2.89    3.32
Milwaukee      1,562,216     4.15    3.44
Jacksonville   1,358,593     1.62    1.65
Memphis        1,325,605     1.61    1.35
Louisville     1,294,849     1.97    2.04
Oklahoma City  1,278,053     0.51    2.15
Richmond       1,270,541     1.72    1.85
Hartford       1,213,255     3.89    3.24
New Orleans    1,191,089     2.81    4.00
Raleigh        1,163,515     1.17    1.69
Salt Lake City 1,145,905     3.76    2.75
Buffalo        1,134,039     3.77    3.35
Birmingham     1,132,264     0.70    1.29
Rochester      1,055,278     1.92    3.80
Honolulu         964,607     7.87    6.51
Tulsa            946,962     0.49    1.52
Fresno           942,904     1.12    2.91
Bridgeport       925,899     9.17    2.49
Albuquerque      899,149     1.72    3.47
Omaha            877,110     0.95    2.11
Albany           871,478     3.28    3.83
New Haven        861,113     4.06    4.45
Bakersfield      851,710     1.28    2.28
Grand Rapids     779,604     1.67    1.90
Columbia         777,116     0.69    4.08
Greensboro       730,966     1.17    1.84
Little Rock      709,901     0.57    1.37
Knoxville        704,500     0.45    1.18
Akron            701,456     1.39    2.01
Stockton         696,214     1.60    2.25
Springfield      693,204     2.89    3.96
Syracuse         662,553     2.33    4.36
Boise            627,281     0.41    2.81
Des Moines       580,255     1.00    1.67
Scranton         563,223     1.41    3.71
Ogden            555,437     2.50    1.98
Provo            541,710     1.39    5.58
Lancaster        523,594     1.51    4.23
Durham           512,979     4.18    3.77
Santa Rosa       488,116     1.92    5.11
Winston-Salem    482,025     1.12    1.56
Spokane          473,761     3.06    3.54
Lansing          465,138     2.77    6.81
Asheville        429,017     0.47    2.53
Fort Wayne       418,148     0.60    1.27
Canton           405,693     0.89    1.77
Manchester       401,696     0.73    1.80
Salem            394,865     1.00    5.47
Anchorage        387,516     2.01    3.89
Peoria           380,961     1.13    2.30
Trenton          367,063     8.49    5.16
Savannah         355,576     2.09    2.39
Rockford         348,360     0.50    1.37
Ann Arbor        347,962     6.85    8.62
Boulder          299,378     6.68    9.69
Duluth           279,761     2.08    4.97
Atlantic City    274,338     9.16    4.09
Olympia          256,591     1.59    2.11
Topeka           234,380     0.37    2.50
Sioux Falls      232,433     0.96    3.11
Champaign        232,050     7.74   10.59
Fargo            212,171     0.59    5.86
Charlottesville  202,406     3.13    8.14
Saginaw          199,088     0.44    2.46
Racine           195,388     2.27    2.48
Athens           193,317     3.12    6.25
St. Cloud        190,014     1.14    3.66
Eau Claire       161,151     0.79    4.60
Pueblo           160,545     0.74    2.80
Billings         160,097     1.53    4.30
Iowa City        154,893     6.18    9.71
Bangor           153,786     0.64    5.48
Jefferson City   152,370     0.48    1.75
Santa Fe         145,648     1.21    4.51
Jackson          116,995     0.31    1.10
Ithaca           101,723     5.40   17.49
United Kingdom:
Code:
Metro Area   Population %Transit %Active
London       14,717,231    36.29   12.83
Birmingham    3,720,360    14.26   11.30
Manchester    2,734,806    14.70   13.38
Leeds         2,467,376    14.49   13.09
Liverpool     2,467,305    13.23   12.35
Glasgow       1,966,943    20.23    9.77
Newcastle     1,934,095    15.20   12.65
Portsmouth    1,670,399     8.42   16.62
Nottingham    1,632,238    11.38   14.19
Sheffield     1,546,412    13.32   12.36
Cardiff       1,390,247     9.60   12.49
Bristol       1,069,583     9.45   20.45
Leicester       929,952     8.77   15.21
Edinburgh       834,648    24.46   16.61
Brighton        785,000    17.51   19.65
Middlesbrough   662,791     8.76   13.54
Hull            590,585     8.61   17.61
Bournemouth     511,027     7.75   16.07
Stoke           469,985     6.89   11.45
Blackburn       404,734     7.71   14.13
Norwich         381,170     7.75   18.93
Swansea         378,835     6.36   11.50
Preston         356,414     8.88   13.04
Blackpool       325,571     7.57   15.88
Cambridge       272,622    10.41   30.03
Dundee          263,246    12.19   14.98
Ipswich         257,682     8.16   19.08
York            198,051    10.45   31.53
Peterborough    183,631    10.51   15.64
Hastings        180,842    11.17   16.05
Colchester      173,074    14.50   17.44
Bedford         157,479     9.66   15.27
Kettering       154,730     5.85   13.06
Canterbury      151,145    11.14   19.80
Lancaster       139,375     8.66   20.30
Thanet          134,186    11.04   15.85
Canada:
Code:
Metro Area   Population %Transit %Active
Toronto       5,584,064    23.28    5.72
Montreal      3,934,078    22.24    7.09
Vancouver     2,313,328    19.71    8.08
Ottawa        1,236,324    20.10    8.55
Calgary       1,214,839    15.87    6.04
Edmonton      1,159,869    11.32    5.16
Quebec          767,310    11.34    7.46
Winnipeg        730,018    13.41    7.14
Hamilton        721,053     9.27    5.28
Kitchener       496,383     5.43    5.46
London          474,786     6.89    5.39
St. Catharines  392,184     2.94    6.00
Halifax         390,328    12.47    8.52
Oshawa          356,177     8.45    3.63
Victoria        344,177    11.08   15.89
Windsor         315,460     3.02    4.80
Saskatoon       262,215     4.45    7.09
Regina          211,519     4.77    5.90
Sherbrooke      202,261     4.19    7.38
St. John's      196,954     2.98    5.66
Barrie          184,325     4.59    4.42
Kelowna         176,435     3.43    7.52
Abbotsford      166,685     2.54    3.41
Kingston        159,561     5.06   10.69
Sudbury         158,260     4.52    6.03
Trois-Rivières  146,930     2.27    6.10
Guelph          141,097     6.24    6.63
Moncton         139,287     3.25    6.73
Saint John      129,057     4.72    5.30
Thunder Bay     121,596     3.58    6.27
Peterborough    118,975     3.48    8.63
Lethbridge      102,785     2.78    5.30

The differences in the built form of US cities is just the result of coordinated planning policies to encourage alternatives to driving and the lack of investment in public transit there compared to other countries.

The Calgary metropolitan area is basically just Calgary. The development can be more easily directed a certain way. Compare that to a typical US metropolitan area which can have dozens or even hundreds of different municipalities. That political fragmentation and lack of unity makes development there much harder to control.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 7:18 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 13,867
And Halifax transit sucks. I realize now that I have no idea what transit in, like, Toledo or Wichita is like. Last time I used Halifax transit, I thought "this is really Middle America-style stuff", but I guess no.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 8:35 PM
dc_denizen's Avatar
dc_denizen dc_denizen is offline
Selfie-stick vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York Suburbs
Posts: 10,999
Are these two cityscapes all that different? I think people exaggerate the commonwealth vs US divide.

How does the first one "outperform"?

262-flkr by ScootaCoota, on Flickr

NKC_1466 by Nick Chong, on Flickr
__________________
Joined the bus on the 33rd seat
By the doo-doo room with the reek replete
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 10:24 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool maudit View Post
And Halifax transit sucks. I realize now that I have no idea what transit in, like, Toledo or Wichita is like. Last time I used Halifax transit, I thought "this is really Middle America-style stuff", but I guess no.
Halifax transit is bad but it's quite different from the US. In Halifax there are lots of fairly busy milk run type bus routes. In the US those routes either wouldn't exist or maybe one or two of them would be a streetcar that would be nice but wouldn't connect to much else.

I think the cause-effect relationship is that lots of people live in the urban core and in multifamily housing, and vehicles are relatively unaffordable. This drives demand for transit, and causes people to take transit in Canadian cities even when it's not that great.

Halifax has been growing a lot lately but the transit isn't improving much. There are so many plans, like commuter rail or fast ferries, but nothing is ever built except more incremental bus infrastructure. Canadian cities are unfortunately pretty unambitious and risk-averse when it comes to infrastructure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 11:04 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Wow, the UK actually has pretty terrible transit share for Western European standards. Really only London and Scotland perform as expected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2020, 11:27 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
Canada (and other countries) did not destroy their cites with urban freeways to the same extent
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2020, 12:12 AM
giallo's Avatar
giallo giallo is offline
be nice to the crackheads
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 11,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_denizen View Post
I find this a more interesting question outside of Toronto, which we've discussed ad nauseum here, and vancouver, where the answer is obvious (china)

Wrong.

Vancouver had an impressive skyline for its size long before the money started pouring in from China in 2012. The West End went up when China was still in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. The Vancouver model (downtown high rise living in "point towers") preceded that capital flight out of China by decades.

Has Chinese money greatly influenced high-end to luxury high-rise developments within the region over the last decade? Of course it has, but Vancouver was already out of land, had implemented the TOD-style of development, and had an impressive skyline long before Xi's policies started to drive the tidal wave of Chinese money out west.

Also, as SIGSEGV and mhays mentioned, Vancouver residents blocked the development of a large freeway that would have changed the course and culture of the city and its downtown forever. Because of this, Vancouver's downtown remained walkable and a desirable place to live.

Vancouver has had a history of high-rise living since the 60s, and whether Chinese money came or went, we'd still be building high rises in and around downtown.

Last edited by giallo; Apr 12, 2020 at 12:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2020, 12:25 AM
JoeMusashi JoeMusashi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 161
Americans generally don't want to live in residential towers unless they are luxury buildings or in prime locations. Suburban towers, like what you'd see in Toronto, is not appealing to an average American.

I thought I'd like this lifestyle but eventually grew tired of bringing up groceries and taking garbage/recyclables to the dumpster. And it wasn't even a tall building. I can't imagine dealing with this and a kid. Going up and down elevators is a nuisance, like living in a hotel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2020, 1:13 AM
montréaliste montréaliste is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chambly, Quebec
Posts: 1,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by giallo View Post
Wrong.

Vancouver had an impressive skyline for its size long before the money started pouring in from China in 2012. The West End went up when China was still in the midst of the Cultural Revolution. The Vancouver model (downtown high rise living in "point towers") preceded that capital flight out of China by decades.

Has Chinese money greatly influenced high-end to luxury high-rise developments within the region over the last decade? Of course it has, but Vancouver was already out of land, had implemented the TOD-style of development, and had an impressive skyline long before Xi's policies started to drive the tidal wave of Chinese money out west.

Also, as SIGSEGV and mhays mentioned, Vancouver residents blocked the development of a large freeway that would have changed the course and culture of the city and its downtown forever. Because of this, Vancouver's downtown remained walkable and a desirable place to live.

Vancouver has had a history of high-rise living since the 60s, and whether Chinese money came or went, we'd still be building high rises in and around downtown.

Yes, but you are answering someone who has made a point of hammering ad nauseam his view that Vancouver's skyline is the product of Chinese money, exclusively.

You could also tell him that there were a couple of Chinese Canadians in BC before the nineties.
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 > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:31 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.