By that logic places like Phoenix ought to be resembling Manhattan any day now!

I think LA is 20-22 unless I'm forgetting some stuff. But 20-22 sounds right. Not great, as LA is still developing those midrises mostly.

Yes, most of LA's are residential. Hollywood/Koreatown/Century City/Downtown/Wilshire mostly.

Koreatown is building a nice cluster of 25-35 story buildings around the Vermont/Wilshire metro station.

Those 50-70 story proposals in downtown are approved, so we'll see if they break ground in a couple of years. There seems to be a good amount of them.

SLC doesn't really deserve to be in the conversation of "building the most" in an absolute sense. In a relative sense my feeling is that it is building more compared to what might be considered its peer cities with similar MSAs: Grand Rapids, Buffalo, Richmond, Providence, Louisville, etc.

In an absolute sense, (for NA specifically) Toronto seems to be in a league of its own with regard to building highrises. For the US, my perception is that there is a lot happening in Austin, Nashville, NYC, Seattle, and maybe Charlotte, LA, San Diego, and Phoenix to a lesser extent.

I'm curious Atlas as to why you have perhaps categorized the much larger Wasatch Front into the same category as MSA/CSA's that are much smaller and are not only experiencing a much smaller growth rate but are even stagnant or losing people. I don't quite understand how your listed similar MSA/CSA's are anywhere similar in population, mid-rise multi-unit construction, etc., etc. I'm sure you have a formula for your train of thought, and I mean this only as a differing but friendly opinion. I'm sure you were referring to specific types of high-rise density above a certain height, such as 300'. Although, that marker has been rising dramatically in SLC these past couple of years. Other than an economic armageddon SLC doesn't seem to be letting up on its monthly announcement of new high-rises at or above 300 feet in the near future. Hopefully, Salt Lake will soon begin to announce multiple high-rises in the 500-600 foot category. Given its constant dramatic change over these past two decades, anything is probable.

Again, Salt Lake City's greater MSA/CSA area is currently much larger in population than those mentioned as peers such as Buffalo, and it still continues to grow at a much faster pace. Now, I'm only assuming by what the local Wasatch Front forum posts report. That is that SLC's greater MSA/CSA construction is adding all phases of residential and commercial development including dense mid-rise multi-unit residential at a stunning rate, and is still not able to even begin to keep pace with the demand. In fact, That urban area of Utah's Wasatch Front has a long waiting list of people just trying to get in. If current 2021 trends continue the Wasatch Front's upcoming decade will even significantly outpace the past decade, which placed Utah as the fastest growing State in the U.S.

The open tracts of land, hemmed in by large mountains and lakes topography of Salt Lake's Central Metro have all been claimed by conglomerate developers and are currently proceeding through the planning stages. Salt Lake's central metro has no other choice but to grow upward and denser, which it is doing as fast as the labor and supply chains can keep pace. Its Southern and Northern Metros are now outpacing Central Salt Lake's growth. The population of its Southern Metro will soon be larger than Salt Lake's Central Metro itself.

According to the latest 2020 report by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and the United States Census Bureau, of the 175 largest MSA/CSA listed in order of population are as follows: For the entire list go to...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_statistical_area

Just those greater MSA/CSA's that you mentioned as being in the same peer group.

Salt Lake City - Rank #22 at 2,672,368...decade growth +17.64%

Louisville, KY-IN - Rank #40 at 1,493,587...+5.28%

Grand Rapids - Rank #42 at 1,418,089... +7.43%

Richmond - Rank #47 at 1,263,617(According to its own internal data)

Buffalo - Rank - #48 at 1,201,500... minus -1.18%

* Also, IMHO give or take 100,000 in pop. Salt Lake City's Wasatch Front would be in the same peer group population as St. Louis, Charlotte, Sacramento, San Antonio and Pittsburgh: Two of these have been stagnant or have lost population over the past decade while #22 Salt Lake City, #21 Charlotte and #24 San Antonio are among the fastest-growing MSA/CSA's in the nation. I would be far more interested in comparing greater Salt Lake City's mid-rise density multi-unit construction growth to those cities of comparable size and growth rate.

I would also be interested in how the Berkadia Reports for greater metros that are similar in size and growth percentage compare when talking about different aspects of construction such as all aspects of commercial, institutional, all aspects of surface/air & mass transportation infrastructure, single-detached residential construction, etc.

Obviously, population growth doesn't automatically track form (skyscrapers etc.)

But it certainly is a growth metric.

If one applies that to Toronto.

Based on the 2011 census, and forecast numbers for this year (this years census data will be published in Feb 2022)........

The GTHA (Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area)

Grew from 6,598,668 in 2011 to 7,180,434 this year.

Growth of roughly 600,000 people or about 9%

****

If one measured using the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Toronto's answer to Chicagoland)

Grew from 8,974,950 in 2011 to 9,860,745 this year.

Growth of roughly 900,000 people or about 9%

****

Source: https://neptis.org/publications/econ...en-horseshoe-5

****

Currently published projections show the GGH growing to 11.95M by 2031

That would be net growth of 2,100,000 over the next decade or about 21%.

Adding roughly 210,000 residents per year.

https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-place-...2020-08-28.pdf

Providence is part of the Boston CSA, which has over 8 million people.

^^^
Thanks, I edited that out. I guess Providence likes to consider itself independent from greater Boston. Now I'm wondering what Richmond is being thrown in with.

Salt Lake City's MSA is about what...1.2 million? That feels about right for SLC. Having been there many times, I can definitely say it does not feel like a 2.6 million person metro. It's certainly doesn't feel anywhere near as large or substantial as a place like Pittsburgh or St. Louis. If you include basically all of northern Utah you get up to 2.6 million, but that seems like quite a stretch to claim that all as SLC. I mean, hell, the entire state of Utah is only 3.2 million!

I just think MSA is more accurate in general than CSA. I think you can make a case that Ogden and Provo are part of SLC in some ways, and they are contiguous at this point, but they do feel like their own distinct cities to me.

SLC feels more like a city of 1.3 million. For a city that size, it has a pretty good skyline already and really good public transit (for a US city). It's definitely smaller than Denver and definitely bigger than Boise.

Here are the top 22 Canadian cities for under construction (12 floors +) as per Emporis and Martin Mtl

Toronto: 243
Montreal: 51
Mississauga: 31
Ottawa: 19
Calgary: 17
Brossard: 15
Vancouver: 15
Burnaby: 14
Vaughan: 13
Edmonton: 11
Waterloo: 8
Markham: 7
Windsor: 7
Richmond Hill: 6
Kitchener: 6
Kelowna: 6
Winnipeg: 5
Surrey: 5
Halifax: 5
Hamilton: 4
New Westminster: 4
Coquitlam: 4

There are 51 buildings under construction in Montreal of 12+storeys. This excludes anything build outside the city limits, like Laval or Brossard, which would add another 25 towers UC for a total of 76 UC buildings (there are about 15 in Brossard alone, just one bridge accros from Montreal)

WITHIN MONTREAL CITY LIMITS ONLY :

(floors - name)

63 - 900 St-Jacques/Moxy Hotel
61 - 1 Square Phillips
61 - Maestria est tower
58 - Maestria west tower
56 - Victoria sur le Parc
45 - 1000 De La Montagne
45 - 455 René-Lévesque south tower
44 - Solstice
40 - National Bank tower
37 - Appartements Dorchester
36 - 455 René-Lévesque north tower
36 - Le QuinzeCent
35 - Art de vivre
35 - 628 St-Jacques
33 - MAA condos
32 - Symphonia Pop
27 - Est/West condos 1
27 - Est/West condos 2
27 - Alexander Apartments 1
26 - Laurent & Clarke phase 2
26 - 271 Robert-Bourassa
25 - Alexander Apartments 2
25 - Le Duke
23 - Enticy condos
22 - YOO phase 2
22 - Mary Robert est tower
22 - Mary Robert west tower
21 - Roccabella 3
21 - 180 René-Lévesque
20 - Bass condos phase 5
20 - 1500 De Maisonneuve
20 - Place Viger
20 - Voltige, tour Belvédère
19 - 230 Peel 1
18 - Links Apparatments
18 - Le Mildoré
15 - 1124, rue de Bleury
16 - 230 Peel 2
16 - Apero Teasdale
14 - Galerye sur le canal phase 3
14 - Coopérative de la Montagne Verte
14 - Le Gabriel
13 - 2190 Sainte-Catherine Ouest
13 - Hilton Hampton Inn & Homewood Viger
12 - Serenity Lasalle
12 - Symphonia Sol
12 - Westbury Montreal phase 4
12 - Westbury Montreal phase 3
12 - Le Cent Onze
12 - Cornelius
12 - Curtis condos

Thank you, montreal numbers did seems small, list now updated

Leftcoaster here at SSP has been tracking Vancouver cranes (not projects).

He's at 174.

That clearly does not work with the numbers above, which even what you throw in the Vancouver suburbs look exceedingly low.

The link to Leftcoaster's recent post on this is here:

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...&postcount=114

So are parts of rural New Hampshire 70 miles away from Copley Square. Providence is pretty much it's own animal hence the separate MSA.

Yes, I have spent a good part of my life in Salt Lake City, even more so than Southern Calif. Traveling from south to north it most definitely feels like an interconnected greater metro of around 2.7 million, especially these past five years. And yes, other than the St. George area the Wasatch Front is where almost the entire population of Utah resides. The rest is rural, smaller towns and either federal lands, State and National Parks, National Forests, or National Recreational Areas and Monuments. It sounds to me like you have been the occasional tourist traveling from the airport to the metro ski resorts on the metro's eastern fringe. Your comment that the entire State is only 3.2 million people so SLC can't be that big gives you away. If current growth rates continue the greater Salt Lake Wasatch Front Metro will be 3-plus million people by the end of this decade, and then it is on to 4 and 5 million. The only other greater metro area in Utah that will be of considerable size 20 years from now would be St. George. That area owes its hyper-growth to nearby Las Vegas, its milder climate, and spectacular outdoor lifestyle and scenery.



I agree with you on most matters regarding development Atlas but I think you're way overthinking it on this. Would you tell the very proud forum members in Boise that they can't include Meridian or members in Las Vegas can't include Henderson in their metro population because those areas wouldn't feel what you consider to be the same vibe as the more liberal downtown Boise. Henderson is in another Universe from the vibe of the Strip and should be left out of the greater Las Vegas metro? Please, if that were the case I would have to dismiss a majority of metro Los Angeles. Do you have any idea how many distinct districts there are in L.A.? Many are within a mile of each other and carry a much more distinct vibe than anything in the greater Salt Lake Wasatch Front. By what you seem to be describing as your definition of distinct vibes determining a greater metros size, the Wasatch Front is far more homogenous than many MSA/CSA's, especially L.A.

I am sure Leftcoasters numbers are more accurate than emporis, but with all crane counts how does it translate to builds under constructions since buildings can have various amount of cranes.

Would that be for LA proper only?

Let's see if they become a single MSA. Until then, it's unfair to use SLC's CSA numbers vs MSA numbers for other metros.

And I guess I could see SLC feeling like a 3 million person metro if you compare it to a place like the Riverside MSA. There's very little urbanity in SLC...a nice but small downtown. Some quasi urban/suburban neighborhoods around it, and then the rest is mostly straight up suburban. Provo hasn't been included in the SLC MSA because it's independent from SLC, has its own economy, and doesn't meet the commuting thresholds to be a unified MSA. I have no doubt this will occur in the future, but I think it will be quite a while before SLC feels anywhere remotely like a 3 million person metro.

Population growth is certainly a good clue! But it's not definitive, and volumes can vary tremendously within that metric.

Some of that is filling in past overbuilding. There might be very little construction until things tighten a bit.

Then you get a lag effect. If offices are 20% vacant, construction volumes might not really gain steam until it's 15% or 10%.

Cities also invest at very different levels. Some electorates enthusiastically support big infrastructure programs and others are more reticent.

Another factor is that a large percentage of all work is renovations and buildouts, not new construction. For example in richer areas, housing tends to be renovated more often, partially because the housing value will tend to rise more than the renovation cost.

Right, but the person I was replying to used Salt Lake CSA numbers while using MSA numbers for other areas.

Actually, SLC was previously single metro with Provo and Orem. Revisions in the 90s to the method (when CSAs were first created) broke this MSA apart as well as Greensboro’s and Raleigh’s and a few others. This is a case where it isn’t as clear cut as it first looks and if someone wants to bring in the additional data points, I think as long as they do so in a way that admits they’re comparing apples to oranges somewhat it’s fair.

My own opinion:

I don’t think SLC qualifies for this discussion currently. However, I do think SLC is putting the right policies with zoning and the region and state are putting together the right policies with transportation for eventual re-consolidation of the metro area into a single entity. The county commuter data and underlying core urban area may be only a few years off from the region qualifying again as a single MSA. Furthermore, those positive transportation network policies are poised to allow SLC to benefit from a larger region drawing progressively more commuting workers. 10-15 years from now, SLC downtown may be littered with 500-800 foot construction sites.

Per the atlanta projects construction compilation thread, which smArTaLlone does a great job of maintaining, it looks like the count (above 12 stories) in city proper is 36. 18 midtown, 12 downtown and beltline east, 6 buckhead. downtown has three buildings near or over 30 floors now under construction (40, 32, 29) and a handful of others over 20 - the first time in who knows how long where there is more activity downtown than in buckhead. hmm, maybe i'll go take the drone for a spin tonight

Speak for yourself. And your comment was 100% meant to insult despite your attempt to back pedal.

The list emphasizes that 'city proper' isn't the best catchment area to use. A ton of construction happens beyond city limits in places like Vaughan, Mississauga, Surrey, Coquitlam, Markham, Brossard, Burnaby, New Westminster, Richmond Hill, etc. Metropolitan area makes more sense in many cases. I'm surprised to see Montreal CMA ahead of Vancouver CMA. Calgary CMA and Edmonton CMA are in a slump due to the steep decline of the Alberta oil industry.

Toronto CMA: 300
Montreal CMA: 66
Vancouver CMA: 42
Ottawa CMA: 19
Calgary CMA: 17
Kitchener-Waterloo CMA: 14
Edmonton CMA: 11
Windsor CMA: 7
Kelowna CMA: 6
Winnipeg CMA: 5
Halifax CMA: 5
Hamilton CMA: 4

edale, Did you even look at the government list? I did not use MSA numbers for other areas with the exception of Providence, which was hidden in a long list of Boston MSA's, and I corrected that. Indeed, Providence is officially considered part of the Boston CSA, which I did not previously realize. Apparently, by official standards, Richmond Va. is its own MSA island without adjoining MSA's and is not listed as a CSA. All 175 CSA areas and their ranking by population as of 2020 are officially designated as such by the U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Office of Budget and Management.

Again, here is the official list if you missed it the first time. If you think the official list is somehow unfair then take it up with the government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_statistical_area

The Vancouver CMA has at least triple the number of what is shown here. Probably closer to quadruple the amount. The crane amount is down from 200 a couple of years ago, but the 42 number is totally inaccurate.

FWIW, I think Emporis's database is out-of-date for Waterloo Region. In Kitchener alone I count 18 towers under construction according to waterlooregionconnected.com.

^ Where's London, Ontario in that Canadian list?

Where is Laval?

Where are Laval and Repentigny?

Take it as an insult if you want idgaf. And thats not back pedalling thats just me softening the "blow" for you snowflakes out there.

Yeah, it’s almost comically inaccurate.

It is actually funny how much metro Van now seems to fly under the radar on this and other construction forums. Metro Van forum members are pretty awful at civic boasting compared to those in Toronto that’s for sure.

For example I don’t think Metro-Van has a single member that adds drawings or even updates the official lists.

New York the king as always. Greatest city in this solar system

Hmm... very interesting exchange. First, someone makes a speculative claim about the desires of a large group of other people, then when a member of that group states that the claim isn't true, the person assures them that it's ok for the claim to be true, which assumes that the objection was based on displeasure with the claim rather than a genuine belief in its inaccuracy. Then when a third person also objects, pointing out that no one can know what others are thinking, the first person continues the speculation by assuming that all the objections were due to the displeasure of being found out (it came as a "blow") rather than genuine disagreement.

So basically, assume to know what others are thinking, then counter any objections by assuming them to be based on the displeasure with being found out. Seems like the perfect, non-falsifiable way of constructing an identity for an opposing group.

And this is what we end up with when parents never say 'NO' to their children. They become nightmare adults who NEVER admit when they're out of line because it's NEVER their fault. The default is always to double down on the insults and become even more toxic because 'sorry' is not in their wheel house.

Chronologically, you're an adult.

It did seem awfully low. Emporis is sometimes way off the actual numbers so stopped using it about 10 years ago. Using 12 floors as a cut off always struck me as odd too.

Most of those look so low, 12 floors really isn't very much so having large cities with millions of people have only twenty or thirty such buildings under construction seems like nothing.
I suppose this makes sense because of the American style of having a skyscraper area in the centre and almost everything else be low rise, but it is still jarring.

For comparison I tried doing this in Tel Aviv from my country where 12 floors is an average apartment building that could go up all over the metro:
Tel Aviv municipal borders (466K population): 92
Tel Aviv metro (4.1M population): 493

That's because Tel Aviv is most multi-family housing. The U.S. puts most of its housing into low density, single family housing suburbs, even in fast growing areas.

As for this debate over whether MSA or CSA numbers more accurately describe SLC, SLC is in a unique situation. I can’t think of another metro with a larger disparity between its CSA and MSA figures. The fact of the matter is, every American metropolis is different, and there are no perfectly defined borders that can be used to determine where exactly the edge of suburbia lies and which populations should or shouldn’t count as part of the metro.

For example, neither the MSA nor the CSA definitions work well for my current city (Denver). One excludes Boulder, which is obviously part of the metropolis; the other includes Boulder but also includes a bunch of far-off towns which are obviously not part of the metropolis. The true population of this metro is somewhere in between.

As is the case with SLC.

I’ve spent much time in that town, having been a truck driver with a dedicated route based out of SLC (Costco distribution center), which meant I spent every other night there and had countless back-hauls that led to seemingly innumerable points within the metropolis - and having visited at least once a year all throughout my life since childhood, because my family is from Sandy and most of my family still lives there. Even in my current job as a flatbed driver I’ve picked up countless loads from Interstate Brick in West Jordan, delivered countless loads to the IFA DC on West 1700 South, etc, etc, etc. I know the town well. I know many towns well.

I think all of you on either side of the “how big is SLC” debate are kidding yourselves. I think it’s obvious SLC isn’t nearly as large or prominent as its CSA peers such as St Louis or Pittsburgh. It doesn’t feel that way, on the ground, within those towns, at all; nor does it feel that way in terms of the cultural, historical and economic gravitational pull those towns exert within the American collective consciousness. It’s equally obvious SLC is far larger and more prominent than its MSA peers such as Louisville or Buffalo. Those cities don’t belong in the same conversation with SLC.

It’s somewhere in between. And unfortunately a number in between those vastly disparate CSA and MSA figures - a number that could be used to accurately rank SLC among its peers - doesn’t exist. More than any other metropolis I can think of, SLC doesn’t have a definitive size that will work within the realm of this forum and its home-town-boosting, city-vs-city culture. There just isn’t a good, useful number for poor SLC.

Edit: I propose we just use SLC’s CSA figure when we’re making comparisons, and call it good. I mean, close enough. Otherwise we’re just going to keep getting hung up on this.

Ya, I can think of 10 currently under construction in London.

In some cities, highrises are only allowed in a few places. In my area, the vast majority of new multifamily housing is woodframes, which can get to 85' and are more often around 65'.

I undercounted Seattle previously...now I'm counting 27...23 in greater Downtown, 4 in the U District.

Convention center (ballroom ceiling is over 200' as rooms are in a tall stack)
1200 Stewart x2
Holland x2
Fairview & Denny SE corner
Onni Fairview & Denny x2
800 John
Dexter Station x2
Guitar Center block
Firestone site
600 Wall
2000 Third
303 Battery
707 Terry x2
Ovation x2
800 Columbia
Olympic Tower
Minor & Madison
The Standard x2
4126 12th
4515 Brooklyn

Five others shored and dug holes but stopped, including four that are related. All are working on permits to restart.

Two others are underway below-ground as part of the convention center project, but the towers will be built on pads by someone else.

A few others are fenced and in prep at some level.

Jeez im getting proper roasted arent I :haha:

At least im not the dumbass who put Toronto on a list of American cities. And im not sure what I should be apologizing for.

Again with the insults. Stop projecting.

American could be taken to mean many things depending upon your cultural context and understanding of the meaning of the word, from least to most expansive:

1. United States of America (common to most people in the United States)
2. Anglophone North America (common to a subsection of those in Canada, both Anglophone and Francophone)
3. Anglophone and Francophone North America (common to Canadians generally)
4. Geographic North America (inclusive of Hispanophone areas, sometimes including sometimes excluding Central America - not common that I’ve seen but perhaps in Mexico you might see this more than other places?)
5. All of North, Central, and South America, including all language areas above as well as Lusophone and others (Quechua, etc.). e.g. “The Americas” (common in all Hispanophone and Lusophone language areas).

I for one assumed OP meant one of the first 4 categories, probably #3.

True...if you understand English, "America" can mean a lot of things. Our nickname doesn't mean other countries can't use it too.

In the past, some people have been confused by the "of America" thing. If we'd said "United States of Earth" they'd think we claimed that too.

Nice try dumbass but he said "US cities" not American.

This thread specifically says "North America."

OP:

And the actual, still unedited post, specifies North America.

Nice try, Donny Darko.

Wrong again. Heres the post I was talking about:

Nice try, dumbass.

After I read this, I’m left with the nagging question about where exactly you disagreed with my previous lengthy post on this in this thread? To me, your post reads as an addendum to mine with contextual on the ground details and seems to largely agree with what my basic point was:

The region isn’t a single region yet, but is working toward becoming that. It’s fine using the MSA number and it is fine using the CSA number, just make sure you throw in some caution and explanation about the numbers you’re comparing.

Edit:

Don’t get me wrong. I thoroughly enjoyed your post and am glad to have read the perspective. It adds to my understanding, definitely. I just think the bolded part at first blush implies you disagreed with me as well (or didn’t see my comment, or thought I wasn’t taking the same middle approach... idk) but the context suggests you at least partially agreed with me and I’m hoping you can draw out your disagreements with me specifically (to the extent there are some) more explicitly so I can readjust my own thinking a bit more than I already have (in part due to you).

Further edit:

Yes, I know I’m overthinking it.