Vancouver's skyline vs American cities'.

[tony speller]

I just found this picture in the Canada forum, and it blew me away. I never knew Vancouver was so beautiful!

The picture is large, but i love it. Right now I am holding it over most skylines in the US.

[bigbigyo2000]

That's a great picture, it's just too bad there isn't more variation with the buildings.

But I agree, that beats out a lot of US skylines, but not all.

[Lone Ranger]

it's just too bad there isn't more variation with the buildings.

I love Vancouver's skyline, and I agree that it's better than nearly all US cities I've seen. Then again, I wonder how much of that is a result of a geography, as opposed to the skyline itself, which has density going for it, but not much else. Maybe it's just me, but IMO there's way too much residential in that picture. And residential towers tend to look cluttered -- that is, not clean.

Vancouver needs some more prominent corporate buildings. A couple of really good ones would do it, I think.

[andrew.w]

That's a great picture, it's just too bad there isn't more variation with the buildings.

That was the first thing that I thought too. It seems that there are about twenty buildings in that picture that are very similar.

Although I'd have to say that I like the overall massing and now I want to head over to emporis to get a closer look at the buildings individually.

[damus]

From the pictures I've seen in the past it ranks up there with the best of America's. Those being San Fransisco, New York, Chicago.

[Inkdaub]

Vancouver is probably the most beautiful city I've ever been in. It's like Seattle and San Fran put together and cleaned up. It's a dreamlike place.

[tony speller]

Vancouver's skyline actually reminds me of some of the larger Asian cities'.

[satalac]

great density, ugly buildings, beautiful geography.

[Inkdaub]

They aren't ugly when you're there. Then again, I don't think they're ugly in the pic either.

[damus]

They aren't ugly when you're there. Then again, I don't think they're ugly in the pic either.

Never been, but have seen pictures like the one above numerous times over the years and have been very impressed. Not sure if it was mentioned in this thread, but isn't Vancouver one of the rare dense North American cities? I might see what the person who thinks the ugly might be thinking. A lot of the buildings in that pic look very similar, creating a perceivable aura of blandness.

[dtown]

i think the mountains are the main thing that makes it have to be dense, like Hong kong.

[Inkdaub]

Never been, but have seen pictures like the one above numerous times over the years and have been very impressed. Not sure if it was mentioned in this thread, but isn't Vancouver one of the rare dense North American cities? I might see what the person who thinks the ugly might be thinking. A lot of the buildings in that pic look very similar, creating a perceivable aura of blandness.

Van is very dense and cosmopolitan. Many of the buildings are alike, specifically the high rise apartment and condo towers. Yet they look good and there is actually enough of the other sort of buildings to provide a beautiful and contrasting skyline. It isn't spiky like many Amercian skylines, though. Different a bit but still very nice. And obviously the geographic setting is spectacular.

[Lone Ranger]

No question, the density is enviable.

[paul514]

I actually lived in Vancouver for four years and it is indeed an incredibly dense city, such a contrast from where I grew up (Hartford). The downtown is made up of probably at least 100 newer highrise condos and most have around 30 stories since there is a height cap (recently removed). Most of the towers have around 8 apartments per floor, and 2 or 3 elevators. Many apartments are small by American standards with one bedrooms in the 500-600 sq ft range (priced around $250,000 CAD), and 2 bedrooms with 750 to 1,000 sq ft ($350,000 CAD and up). Even with more of these constantly being built, the demand seems to keep on increasing. I lived in the downtown in 3 different buildings and they're great despite the small size since they're very efficiently designed and most have indoor pools, gyms, etc. I found living there though that the downtown core is so full of life, including restaurants, bars, clubs, and even a beach that I rarely left except when I commuted to campus.

There is a business core in the central part of the city, the building with a red S logo is Scotia Bank and near it is TD Bank and there are several corporate offices there, they just tend to blend in with the residential. Vancouver truly is a mixed use city that has it all, it is quite expensive though. The cheapest houses in Vancouver are $500,000 and they are 1,000 sq ft shacks on 33x100 lots. The closer you get to downtown the higher the price, and the suburbs are considered not to be as desirable. it certainly was a culture shock having grown up in the Hartford area where the opposite is true. Even in these smaller homes, people tend to rent out their basements to university students, so it makes for a dense city.

[Evergrey]

How does this giant mass of skyscrapers affect the street level environment of Vancouver?

[paul514]

How does this giant mass of skyscrapers affect the street level environment of Vancouver?

Since so many people do live downtown the streets are rarely empty. I would often go grocery shopping at late hours (there is one 24 hour grocery store), and there were always people out. I never had a car while I lived there so I didn't notice the traffic too much, though I never saw bad traffic jams. One thing I did notice was the amount of people with no car at all, simply because it wasn't needed and most apartments only come with one underground parking space only. Granville St. is the main road downtown where most of the nightlife was so it was rarely ever deserted. Robson St. is a shopping area full of high-end stores and it's sidewalks were often as crowded as any in Manhattan. Most of the newer skyscrapers have commercial space on the ground level so there aren't many areas of the city that are not mixed use. During the summer Stanley Park and English Bay are also crowded. The most crowded times are during the festival of light, an annual fireworks competition that runs for a few weeks every summer on English Bay, thousands of people crowd onto the waterfront and Davie St. is usually cut off from traffic.

[BHCav]

Makes me want to visit.

[citiboi27610]

The atmosphere is definitely good, but there need to be some more variation as said before. It still is a strong contender for the best skyline though as it has the water, mountains, an arena, and some several cool buildings.

[nashvol85]

From the pictures I've seen in the past it ranks up there with the best of America's. Those being San Fransisco, New York, Chicago.

Ranks with New York and Chicago? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It is very dense and impressive with the number of buildings...but has little height. There is only 1 building over 500 ft tall, and one U/C that is over 500 ft. They have a lot of 3-400 ft buildings clustered together, but nothing STICKS OUT.

I would say that it is a very impressive skyline, especially for a city its size, but I would stick it behind cities like New York, Chicago, Houston, Los Angelas, Seattle, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, Dallas, and a couple of others. It has a FLAT skyline.

[krazeeboi]

Very impressive, but I wish there was a better office tower to residential tower ratio.

[monsoon]

Vancouver's population exploded during the 1990s in the lead up to Hong Kong being returned to the Communist China by the United Kingdom. Tens of thousands migrated from Hong Kong to Canada to escape commie rule and Vancouver was one of the cities that benefited from these migrations. This is why you see a number of highrise towers arranged in dense development. It reflected the type of development where most of the immigrants were coming from. Vancouver is probably one of the best looking cities in North America. IMO

[urbanbna]

Ranks with New York and Chicago? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It is very dense and impressive with the number of buildings...but has little height. There is only 1 building over 500 ft tall, and one U/C that is over 500 ft. They have a lot of 3-400 ft buildings clustered together, but nothing STICKS OUT.

I would say that it is a very impressive skyline, especially for a city its size, but I would stick it behind cities like New York, Chicago, Houston, Los Angelas, Seattle, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, Dallas, and a couple of others. It has a FLAT skyline.

i completly agree. vancouver is impressive, but i have never noticed a true "skyline" its just a group of dense buildings, like you said, nothing sticks out really

[Jasoncw]

The skyline as a whole is beautiful, but the buildings individually aren't that great looking.

[tracer1138]

Ranks with New York and Chicago? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It is very dense and impressive with the number of buildings...but has little height. There is only 1 building over 500 ft tall, and one U/C that is over 500 ft. They have a lot of 3-400 ft buildings clustered together, but nothing STICKS OUT.

I would say that it is a very impressive skyline, especially for a city its size, but I would stick it behind cities like New York, Chicago, Houston, Los Angelas, Seattle, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, Dallas, and a couple of others. It has a FLAT skyline.

The lack of tall buildings defining a core to the downtown has to do with heigh restrictions imposed by the city. The restrictions are meant to preserve the views of Vancouver's incredible natural scenery from as many points within the city as possible.

It's true that only some of the height restrictions have been removed. City planners agreed that allowing for a few taller buildings in the financial district would help to define the core. Unfortunately, much of downtown Vancouver has already been built up, so finding the right mix of lots for which to remove the height restrictions has proved challenging.

Also, in regards to the condo boom...

While the number of people choosing to reside downtown is awesome, the boom in condo construction has not been accompanied by a proportional boom in office or commercial service construction. In short, downtown Vancouver is becomming like a giant bedroom community with a reverse flow of traffic out of downtown to jobs in the suburbs. The interesting and unique new development, the ramifications of which have not yet been fully realized. More jobs in the suburbs might push sprawl ever futher out as jobs follow people out into the countryside. It's an interesting problem to consider.

btw... i Love Vancouver's skyline... the majority of new condo construction that has taken place of late is located in the area just north of False Creek... type that into google to get more awesome shots in the daytime. The area used to be industrial until it was used for the world's fair, after which it was rezoned to residential.

[SeaJ]

Vancouver has density on its side and a beautiful natural setting, but the towers themselves are too short and unimaginative. There are almost no older historical buildings within the core and I don't think the skyline is aging well ( I have heard many complaints of poor construction and leaking condos) Again, the setting is stunning but the actual quality of architecture in Vancouver is pretty bad.