HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2014, 6:13 AM
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,099
Your city's suburban skylines in 3D

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

Last edited by dleung; Feb 8, 2014 at 9:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2014, 3:38 AM
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,099
Seattle, and Bellevue:



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2014, 3:49 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
Pretty much all of California is available in 3D on Apple Maps.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2014, 4:08 AM
mello's Avatar
mello mello is offline
Babylon falling
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,471
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'm loving this economic "recovery" >>>>>

Last edited by mello; Feb 24, 2014 at 5:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2014, 7:20 AM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by mello View Post
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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2014, 9:17 PM
Austinlee's Avatar
Austinlee Austinlee is offline
Chillin' in The Burgh
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Spring Hill, Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,888
Wow, had no idea Vancouver had 13 satellite mini-skylines. That's pretty amazing. Considering downtown is already damn vertical.
__________________
The new Pittsburgh development thread is up.
Pittsburgh Rundown III

"Even Old New York was once New Amsterdam"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2014, 8:28 AM
touraccuracy's Avatar
touraccuracy touraccuracy is offline
Registered Loser
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,853
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).

__________________
"The modern metropolis is a teeming hive of strung-out dope heads, rapists, home invaders and fine regional cuisine." -Cracked.com
Don't quote me on that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 1:20 AM
mSeattle's Avatar
mSeattle mSeattle is offline
Socialism 4 Extreme Rich?
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: here
Posts: 10,073
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?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 6:21 PM
vanman's Avatar
vanman vanman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 5,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austinlee View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cypherus View Post
Burnaby, BC

Source: My Photo, 2014-02-17
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 9:48 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 3,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanman View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 10:33 PM
vanman's Avatar
vanman vanman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 5,417
I completely forgot about Miami. I counted about 834 towers for suburban Miami, and 547 for suburban Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2014, 11:19 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,653
Toronto's highrises don't really cluster all that often though, they are just sort of everywhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2014, 3:12 AM
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by mello View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2014, 3:19 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanman View Post
I completely forgot about Miami. I counted about 834 towers for suburban Miami, and 547 for suburban Vancouver.
Never mind. Answered my own question.

Last edited by chris08876; Mar 27, 2014 at 8:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2014, 4:03 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleung View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2014, 8:32 PM
Tuckerman Tuckerman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 839
From a US perspective the development of the Vancouver area is quite amazing, both in terms of center development as well as the suburbs. It is an extreme example of the general Canadian example of thigh rise residential development taking precedence over suburban housing and lower density residential developments. It also illustrates how difference the US is; with few exceptions there is really nothing equivalent to this vertical growth that is characteristic particularly of most South American countries as well as Canada ad Asia. I used to think of America as the land of skyscrapers, but that has changed drastically - our skyscraper and high rise development is quite paltry in comparison to most other countries, and this is particularly true in the suburban areas that continue to be sprawled and build out rather than up. In particular this rapid high rise development is characteristic of fast growing cities throughout the world, with the exception of the US. It is of course true that fast growing cities in the US such as Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, miami etc. are adding a lot of high rises, but the number and density is not very great in comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2014, 8:48 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuckerman View Post
I used to think of America as the land of skyscrapers, but that has changed drastically - our skyscraper and high rise development is quite paltry in comparison to most other countries, and this is particularly true in the suburban areas that continue to be sprawled and build out rather than up. In particular this rapid high rise development is characteristic of fast growing cities throughout the world, with the exception of the US. It is of course true that fast growing cities in the US such as Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, miami etc. are adding a lot of high rises, but the number and density is not very great in comparison.
Were getting there. I would still take quality over quantity. I've seen hundreds of aerials of S.American and cities in Asia, and quite frankly, most of those towers look horrible. Commie blocks really. Not to say that we don't have those as well, but in terms of developments, what is happening in Miami, NYC, Seattle, Chicago, and S.F. just to name a few are of very high quality. In terms of suburban development, we are a suburban nation. We pioneered the suburb and that lifestyle will not be dropping anytime soon. Our infrastructure is built for the suburbs.

Density also has to be considered carefully. Sometimes it works, sometimes it can be a economic burden. Some cities can support it, and the ones that can't, have issues. Our infrastructure need to catch up before we could truly support massive, dense cities. otherwise, they will look like this (Ok 1st pic is exaggeration but you get my point ) :




Overpopulation is not fun.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2014, 12:22 AM
pdxtex's Avatar
pdxtex pdxtex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,529
i think all those point towers in vancouver are built around 1 elevator shaft and single stair case that wraps around the core of the building. as far as i know, alot of american zoning calls for at least two stairs cases on either end of the building so the foot print has to be larger, hence stumpier size of glassy high rise condos around here.....
__________________
Portland!! Where young people go to retire.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2014, 2:41 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,494
Yes, apparently there are aspects like that that make the US more expensive. I forget the specifics, but we certainly need multiple stairs for fire egress.

The US is all about saving small numbers of people from accidents...despite outcomes like this that do a lot more damage as a result. Our car culture kills what, 40,000 people per year, sprawl contributes to sedentary lifestyles, etc...
__________________
"Alot" isn't a word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2014, 4:28 AM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Were getting there. I would still take quality over quantity. I've seen hundreds of aerials of S.American and cities in Asia, and quite frankly, most of those towers look horrible. Commie blocks really. Not to say that we don't have those as well, but in terms of developments, what is happening in Miami, NYC, Seattle, Chicago, and S.F. just to name a few are of very high quality. In terms of suburban development, we are a suburban nation. We pioneered the suburb and that lifestyle will not be dropping anytime soon. Our infrastructure is built for the suburbs.

Density also has to be considered carefully. Sometimes it works, sometimes it can be a economic burden. Some cities can support it, and the ones that can't, have issues. Our infrastructure need to catch up before we could truly support massive, dense cities. otherwise, they will look like this (Ok 1st pic is exaggeration but you get my point ) :




Overpopulation is not fun.

Thats not overpopulation, that is underbuilt infrastructure.
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 1:17 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.