Showing posts sorted by date for query L.A.. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query L.A.. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, June 30, 2026

The 15-30 minute city concept

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15-minute_city 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198222000641

Ideally, if most things are within 15 minutes, that's great.

https://unfccc.int/news/the-15-minute-city 

https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/industries/government-public/perspectives/urban-future-with-a-purpose/15-minute-city.html

Even in the case of urban sprawl, a lot of things can be built within 15-30 minute town centers.

https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2024/10/15-minute-cities-canada

https://www.oecd.org/en/blogs/2025/04/from-the-15-minute-city-to-the-30-minute-region-rethinking-how-we-live-and-connect.html 

No matter how big a city or urban region is, 15-30 minute town centers can be built, but it can require a lot of work.

https://www.planetizen.com/news/2022/07/117975-could-la-be-15-minute-city

https://laist.com/brief/news/climate-environment/how-15-minute-cities-could-save-time-reduce-emissions-and-build-community 

However, sometimes people still have to get across town for various reasons. 

https://medium.com/sybarite/escape-to-a-15-minute-city-ce3707baf145 While its not impossible, to even establish 30 minute urban focal points in Greater L.A. can be challenging. If a person living in L.A. is within 15 minutes of walking or biking, or a bus or train trip from the stores and other services, that's great. However, a lot of people are still a 30-60 minute drive away from work & other places to get to. Thus, a 1 hour+ city is still unavoidable in some cases.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Urbanism/comments/1gtlylo/what_city_is_californias_best_option_for_a/

Friday, June 26, 2026

CN Tower celebrates 50 years of being a skyline icon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujWLEBhbdt8 

If it were possible today, the KEEP VANCOUVER SMALL AND BACKWARDS people would still not permit any building to be a 3rd of the height of the CN_Tower. (CNT) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN_Tower#Height_comparisons

The Harbour_Centre opened just over a year after the CNT, and is just under a 3rd of its height. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbour_Centre#Height

https://www.cntower.ca/

Unfortunately, The Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) was able to ensure that the Canada_Line Stations aren't even quite a 3rd of the length of the 152.5 m Montreal Metro stations. 


Even the North-Shore mountains aren't allowed to be as tall as the mountains north of L.A. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Shore_(Greater_Vancouver) 


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/LA_San_Gabriel_Mountains.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Gabriel_Mountains#Gallery 


Whether you are from Toronto or Chicago, LA or SF, Melbourne or Sydney, you might be shocked as to seeing how scaled down or watered down Vancouver is. Yet, the City of Paris, despite having a slightly smaller land area than Vancouver, can fit so much more inside. Boston and SF are only slightly larger in area than the City of Vancouver, yet they can also fit in so much more. 

Is LA's Airport Train Actually Useful?

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-9O8UYX3FQ 

Ideally, an airport line can run from the city to the airport station. Sometimes, the airport station is just a stop on a larger line.

Sunday, May 31, 2026

City's chief planner emphasizes creating a 'Vancouver approach' to taller towers

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-higher-buildings-review-taller-towers 

Seattle, Calgary and Edmonton all have taller and wider downtowns, where as most of downtown Vancouver is confined to a small peninsula. Yet, Seattle, Calgary and Edmonton already each have a taller residential tower than what restrictive Vancouver allows. 

So far, only three buildings have been permitted to be higher than the flag at the top of the 581 ft. Harbour_Centre

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

As of 2026, no residential tower within Vancouver has 65 stories and no office tower has been permitted to have a 40th floor.

Backwater BC is 75% mountainous, yet there has been such a cultivated fear that somehow provincial Vancouver could block out most of the mountains by allowing significantly taller towers. 

Whenever retuning from Los_Angeles to Vancouver, you quickly realize that even the mountains just north of Vancouver are shorter than the ones in L.A. Its as if even the Vancouver mountains are under height restrictions.

Vancouver 450 ft and Fahrenheit 451

Was a 450 foot height restriction just a chance, or was it intentionally made to be very close to 451 Fahrenheit? Honolulu is still stuck around that maximum, while San Diego is at 500 feet.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 (1953) By the 1950s, so many things were already banned, watered down or scaled back in provincial Vancouver. Generations later, there was the No Fun Vancouver mind virus that further tried to cancel out things in such a small city with so much red tape and other ridiculous obstacles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(1966_film) By the mid and late1960s, the city made sure that its first office tower to have more than 29 floors wouldn't be until the 1970s. Its highly doubtful that Vancouver will have an office tower over 40 stories by 2030. However, Burnaby and Surrey could, because they aren't under the extreme restrictions of Vancouver. 

It wasn't until 1973 when Vancouver allowed its first building to be taller than the Los_Angeles_City_Hallhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall 

The Scotia_Tower (stump) is a good reference point to visualize the small scale of backwater Vancouver, as its about the same height as the Los_Angeles_City_Hall at 453'. 

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/scotia-tower/4396 453'

https://skyscraperpage.com/b65/vancouver/the-scotia-tower 452'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(2018_film) By 2018 it was quite apparent that Vancouver was in the process of allowing for more buildings over 450 feet. However, nothing has been permitted to reach 700 feet, so far. A tower over 1000 feet would help to water down its provincial mindset. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg

SF, Sydney & Auckland are just as scenic as Vancouver & warmer throughout the year. They all have taller building than what Vancouver currently permits. Seattle is just as scenic as Vancouver, but its allowed to function like a proper big city, because it doesn't have the imposed restrictions like Vancouver has. While its cold, damp & depressing like Vancouver during the fall & winter, Seattle usually gets noticeably hotter summers than Vancouver, BC. The tallest building in Seattle is the 76 story B of A office tower. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg/1280px-LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg While the L.A. City Hall looks like a stump there, in Vancouver it would still be one of the prominent buildings.

Everything is so small or scaled back in Vancouver. Even the Greater Vancouver mountains aren't allowed to be as tall as the ones in L.A. While the San_Francisco_Bay & Port_Phillip Bay by Melbourne are big next to their cities, English_Bay in_Vancouver is so much smaller. Its even smaller than Elliott_Bay by Seattle. 

Vancouver really needs to have bus and HOV bridges built next to its mostly narrow & congested bridges. Only a 5 car Skytrain is the max on the first 2 lines and ultimately, just a 2.5 car joke of a train on the YVR-Canada Line. 

Selective+Door+Operation can allow a short train to have an extra car at each end, despite a shorter platform. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg/3840px-Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg

Australia like the USA, has some big & tall cities on the Pacific Rim. However, Vancouver symbolically kept watering down its size, because that's how you demonstrate a reluctance towards proper urban planning & growth. 

Oddly enough, the small scale Vancouver mentality & agenda wasn't adopted by most cities around the world. Officially, there is no Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV), but somehow it keeps manifesting, just like the BCMV. 

Despite its size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population.

Tuesday, May 26, 2026

Senakw's first completed tower

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/senakw-rental-housing-rents-rates-first-tower-completion-photos 

These towers should have been taller, because they aren't supposed to be under Vancouver's very restrictive height limitations. 

So far, no residential tower in Vancouver has been permitted to be as tall as the 222.3 m (729 ft) Telus_Sky Tower in Calgary, or the 250.9 m (823 ft) Stantec_Tower in Edmonton. Then especially, the 850-foot (260 m) Rainier_Square_Tower in Seattle. The former Living_Shangri-La (Park Hyatt) is the tallest within Vancouver's city limits at 200.86 m (659 ft).

Vancouver has yet to ever permit an office tower to have a 40th floor.

Saturday, May 2, 2026

U.S. Bank Tower in L.A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Bank_Tower_(Los_Angeles)

 https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1t25cdo/us_bank_tower_la 

There was a time when no building in Vancouver was allowed to be as tall as the LA City Hall, or the old CIBC in Toronto, or the LC Smith Tower in Seattle. Today, those are all stumps now when compared to the much taller towers.

Thursday, March 26, 2026

K Line (Los Angeles Metro)

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro) 

https://la.urbanize.city/post/metro-seeks-state-funds-extend-green-line-platforms 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro)#Rolling_stock 

Car length89 ft (27.13 m)
Width8 ft 8+34 in (2.66 m)
Height12 ft 6 in (3.81 m)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinki_Sharyo_P3010 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg/960px-LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg  

https://www.metro.net/projects/kline-northern-extension Just like in SD, Seattle, Calgary and Edmonton, their LRT trains are longer than the ones on the first 2 Skytrain lines. Especially, the embarrassing Canada Line. 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-03-24/this-rail-line-would-get-you-to-grove-beverly-center-cedars-sinai-is-it-l-a-s-missing-link In backwards BC its like it takes 2 or 3 people to turn a lightbulb than someone in Quebec. An 80m Skytrain on the first 2 lines would have to be about twice as frequent as a 152.5m Montreal Metro train to match capacity. The ridicules 50m maximum allowance for Canada Line trains would have to run 3 times as frequently as a Montreal Metro train. 

https://la.streetsblog.org/2026/03/18/metro-committee-again-sides-with-nimbys-postpones-key-north-k-line-rail-decision Unfortunatly, the Vancouver Mind Virus is all about holding back the scale of the city. Thus, anytime that a bridge or street can be narrower, a building kept shorter and especially a train kept short, is all part of the imposed symbolism of refusing to build on a BIG city scale. 

Sunny L.A. has been thinking, planning and building like a BIG city for over a century. In contrast, rainy Vancouver has been refusing to think on a big city scale throughout its history. For several decades, all White city counsels kept imposing various restrictions to keep Vancouver on a small scale. 

Thursday, March 5, 2026

Why the Widest Freeway on Earth still Made Traffic Worse in Houston

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMwKgT4ZUvQ It is utterly foolish to not have enough space for a commuter train to run above, or in the middle or underneath the widest highways. 

https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/houstons-15-year-growth-three-charts Simply building wide roads like in Houston, L.A. and Toronto is just as bad as having mostly narrow bridges in Greater Vancouver.  

Whether its 10 lanes or 20 lanes wide, there should always be 2 dedicated bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. While the highway will get clogged up during the day, at least the buses and trains can still get through quickly. 

The Pattullo+Bridge+replacement is only 2 lanes each way with narrow shoulders. It should have opened with enough space for 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes, but that would go against the congestive urban planning mentality of BC.

The Samuel-De+Champlain+Bridge in Montreal is just as good as similar wide highway and train bridges in Seattle+and+Perth. All were possible, simply because they aren't limited by anything like the Vancouver and BC Mind Virus.

The narrow-minded Vancouver and BC approach is to try to funnel everything into just 2 or 3 lanes each way. Then there just isn't enough space to have 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. Greater Vancouver has certainly gone in the extreme opposite direction of Houston, L.A. and Toronto...

A wide Greater Houston highway has lots of space, but without 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes, everything gets plugged up. In contrast, Greater Vancouver has most of its bridges and highways so damn narrow, there isn't enough space to accomodate a proper express bus and HOV network. 

This deliberate backwards BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning approach is totally absurd. 

There is no commuter train tunnel near the Lions+Gate+Bridge or even for the Massey+Tunnel+replacement. Thus, they are the best examples of BC choke-point urban planning. Despite having twice the lanes as the inept 3 lane LGB, the newer Iron+Bridge never had any emergency lanes. A bus and HOV bridge was never built next to it. Plus, no commuter train bridge. It's another fine example of BC choke-point, bottleneck planning. 

A north and south Boundary+Road bridge system would provide direct access between the North+ShoreRichmond+and+Delta, but that's what a proper big city would do. Backwards BC has quite a problem with thinking and building big. The 2 car Canada+Line is another example. Don't build it to at least have a 5 car train, just design it to only have 2.5 car trains, someday.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Houston#Transportation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_610_(Texas)#Lane_configurations There is a point when simply adding more lanes won't provide long-term improvement. However, when combined with dedicated bus and HOV lanes, other options become available. Especially, if there is rail rapid transit and commuter rail as well. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail While not as extentise as DART_rail, it still works like a tram-train. 

Of course longer streetcars or tram-trains are still slow on the actual surface street segments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#System_upgrades 

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muni_Metro SF

Tuesday, February 17, 2026

San Francisco just approved a 67-story, 820-foot residential tower at 10 South Van Ness

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-oBDIsEHSQ 

SF is finally allowing a building within a few blocks of City Hall to be much taller than the LA City Hall.

Saturday, January 31, 2026

Why Greater Toronto Has Several Skylines

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI9WJa9Q8dA 

Of course many large urban areas around the world have more than 1 or 2 skylines or tower clusters. 

For the longest time, no building in Vancouver or BC, was allowed to be as tall as the 1930s CIBC tower, which is now a stump.

https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/05/toronto-lost-observation-deck-commerce-court-north/

https://www.torontojourney416.com/canadian-bank-of-commerce-building/ 

https://www.25king.ca/the-history 

It wasn't until the early 1970s when stumpy, Vancouver allowed a building to be taller than the L.A. City Hall, or the Smith Tower in Seattle. 

The 1930s CIBC tower, the L.A. City Hall and the Smith Tower, would still be prominent towers in Vancouver, but stumps in their own cities. 

Despite Vancouver being divided by an inlet and a river, the city wasn't able to build a huge wall along Boundary Road. Thus, the KEEP THEM OUT agenda was a little thwarted. The various White city councils tried to do the next best thing. That was to symbolically impose various restrictions as a reluctance to think, plan and build on a BIG city scale. The time especially from 1960 to 2000 had predominantly White City Hall and its councils continually impose several overlapping restrictions. 

Since Vancouver can't control immigration or the movements of non-white people, keeping things small and backwards, means that less people will move there than to Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Edmonton. However, with a mild winter climate, more and more people want to move to backwards BC, especially small-minded Vancouver and provincial Victoria. 

In spite of immigration and Multiculturalism, Vancouver was to perpetually promote its small scale agenda. 

While the first Skytrain line can finally run 5 car trains, the stations weren't designed to become long enough to eventually accomodate 9 car trains like the big city Montreal Metro has. 

The 2nd and 3rd Skytrain lines are still only running 2 car joke trains. Running 8-10 car trains is what a proper big city would do, but not backwards Vancouver. 

Narrow bridges provides strong symbolism of the cities narrow-mindedness. When bridges are too narrow, its difficult to have a proper express or rapid bus system. The reluctance to build parallel bus and HOV bridges helps to maintain the congestive planning approach that is vancouver and the Greater Region. 

Vancouver's refusal to build parallel bike bridges has meant that 2 lanes were removed from the Burrard Bridge, 1 lane from the Cambie Bridge and 2 lanes from the Granville Bridge. 

Keeping buildings symbolically short when compared to what scenic Sydney, Auckland, SF and Seattle allow, also helps to maintain Vancouver's reluctance to enter the big and tall urban scale. In fact, the scenic setting that Vancouver is in has been used as the main excuse to continually scale the city down. Yet, several scenic cities around the world are either able to have wider bridges, wider roads, longer trains or taller buildings. 

The world is mostly composed of non-white people. Canada has less than 1% of the world's population and stubborn Vancouver symbolically remains as a small provincial backwater on the Pacific Rim. 

https://centralparktower.com.au Unlike Perth, Vancouver forbids 50 story office towers and Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne size residential towers. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108_St_Georges_Terrace In fact, no office building in Vancouver has been permitted to have a 40th floor. However, since Burnaby and Surrey aren't under the restrictive controls of Vancouver, they will eventually allow office towers over 40 stories. 

Despite Australia having less people than Canada, Perth is allowed to have taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains than Vancouver. Taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains are even less likely in Halifax than whats in Brisbane or Queensland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) To see buildings on a similar scale of what Brisbane allows, one has to get to Greater Toronto. Brisbane is allowed to have some buildings that would even be impressive in Melbourne and Sydney. 

While Montreal is allowed to have taller buildings than Vancouver, Montreal isn't allowed to have Sydney size towers. Especially not on the scale of what Melbourne and Toronto permit. 

Why LA Built the World's Longest Light Rail line

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnhA_GEqD7w