https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0JAcGSwrMk
While Vancouver has allowed a couple residential towers to have at least 60 stories, no office tower has been permitted to have a 40th floor. While buildings over 200m have been allowed in Sydney and SF, slow provincial Vancouver has been very restrictive to allow big city symbolism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transamerica_Pyramid
Some San Francisco Neighborhoods you should avoid in 2026 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzWJA2v6EYk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnMLMp_gf1w
Unlike Toronto, SF and Melbourne, Vancouver was one of the first cities to get rid of streetcars and tram-trains or interurbans. Backwards Vancouver will likely be one of the last cities to ever bring them back.
No office tower in Vancouver was allowed to have a 30th floor before the 1970s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD_Tower_(Vancouver) The first 30 story office tower in backwater BC opened in 1972. As of 2026, no office tower in Vancouver, or anywhere in BC has been permitted to have a 40th floor.
As of 2026, no Skytrain stations are even close to the length of the Montreal Metro, TTC subway and underground Edmonton LRT stations.
Unfortunately, almost every city around the world is expensive. Its just that you get less of things in Vancouver. Short trains, short buildings, narrow bridges and mostly narrow streets.
Thus, its no surprise that there isn't a regional network of bus-bridges. Congestive transportation planning is what Vancouver does best.
Vancouver seems to be reluctant in constructing a network of bike-bridges. The city would rather remove a total of 5 lanes from 3 bridges for bike lanes.
Broadway will eventually be reduced from 6 lanes to 4 lanes so that even some small towns will have wider major streets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population
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+Shore, Richmond+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://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1r960mq/tbt_aerial_view_vancouver_downtown_coal_harbour_c This was still a time when Vancouver didn't allow any office tower to have a 30th floor. As of 2026, no office building in Vancouver has been permitted to have a 40th floor. However, Burnaby & Surrey are planning to have their first office building over 40 stories. That's because they aren't under the extreme height restrictions that Vancouver imposes.
Seattle had its first 50 story office tower in 1969. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeco_Plaza
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_Square The first 50 story office tower in Australia (1967) was possible because they don't have anything like the height restrictions in Vancouver.
Toronto had its first 50+ story office tower in 1967. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto-Dominion_Centre#Late_20th_century
SF had its first office buiding over 50 stories open in 1969. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/555_California_Street 52 stories, but the equivalent of 60 when counting all of the mechanical plant floors.
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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seyMIhry1M8
The SF and Boston land area can almost both fit into Seattle. However, the SF Bay Area and Greater Boston still have a lot more people than the Seattle-Tacoma Area.
Unfortunatly, growing poverty and substance abuse, combined with more job losses makes for a tougher situation, overall.
Seattle's Economic slide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxB8-RotFIU
Massive layoffs hit Seattle tech companies as city struggles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLvbQGr0Xmg
Seattle’s Downtown Isn’t Coming Back the Same https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLRMYCSm1Cs
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.
Singapore, Perth, Sydney, Seattle, SF and Miami are allowed to have tall buildings right near the water, because they are allowed to be big and tall cities.
Vancouver has several restrictions which prevent it from becoming a proper big city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izx7Y_qw_NQ
San Diego and SF have their downtowns right up to the water, but Downtown LA is a good ways inland.
The Transamerica_Pyramid was permitted to be about 400 feet taller than the LA+City+Hall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transamerica_Pyramid#Gallery
The very narrow pyramid in SF is almost twice the height of the tallest pyramid in Egypt. Will LA ever be allowed to have a pyramid tower as tall or taller than the one in SF?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2ljqamDgwg
Back in the day, the KEEP L.A. SHORT crowd really wanted to make sure that no building in SoCal was as tall as the tallest Egyptian_pyramid. Thus, the Giza_pyramid_complex was taller than anything in LA until the late 1960s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza "Initially standing at 146.6 meters (481 feet), the Great Pyramid was the world's tallest human-made structure for more than 3,800 years."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall#History "It has 32 floors and, at 454 feet (138 m) high..." https://calisphere.org/item/cf1903e53170db536690f3f8690925a0 Just a little pyramid on top of a building that is shorter than the tallest pyramid in Egypt.
.jpg/960px-Los_Angeles_City_Hall_(from_the_West).jpg)
.tif/lossy-page1-800px-Pyramids_from_afar_(2).tif.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza
https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/vintage-photos-los-angeles-1940s-1960s
Of course LA would eventually allow some buildings to be twice as tall as the tallest Egyptian pyramid.
https://www.commercialcafe.com/blog/evolution-downtown-la-visual-timeline/
https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=26&status=15
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=LA+City+Hall
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Transamerica+Pyramid+in+SF
Why San Francisco Runs America's Slowest...Metro? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzi1oNaRIUE Unless a streetcar, tram or any LRV has its own right of way, it always has the potential of running slow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#First_electric_trams
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#/media/File:C2.5123_bourke,_2014.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#/media/File:E2.6057_bourke,_2023_(01).jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#/media/File:Melbourne_Tram_E-Class_6007.jpg
SF and Melbourne
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-olympic-line-streetcar-demonstration-revival-proposal
The city and greater urban region should have never gotten rid of the streetcars and interurban tram-trains. Now, its extremely difficult to bring them back. Fortunately, backwards Vancouver was unable to get Toronto, Melbourne and SF to get rid of their street railways. Those cities and many others just never had anything like a Vancouver Mind Virus or BCMV to thwart them.
Of course Seattle & Portland would bring back some of their streetcar lines long before slow-moving Vancouver can.
https://globalnews.ca/news/11528001/burnaby-apology-discrimination-against-chinese-community
Asia is the most populated part of the world and until recently, China had the biggest population. Thus, people from China or people who are of Chinese descent, live all over the world. There was a strong, KEEP CANADA WHITE agenda, right into the mid 20th century. Of course this mentality wasn't just directed towards Asians, but towards anyone who was nonwhite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_head_tax
It took until the 1970s for Multiculturalism to challenge the, KEEP CANADA AS A WHITE MAN'S PARADISE.
https://pier21.ca/research/immigration-history/canadian-multiculturalism-policy-1971
https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/multiculturalism
While Canada hardly has that much of a Pacific Coast, when compared to the US and Australia, the BC part of Canada should have had at least one major city on the scale of Montreal or Seattle, Brisbane or SF. Unfortunatly, Vancouver has retained several of its overlapping restrictions, which prevent it from being on a scale similar to that of Montreal, Seattle, Calgary, Brisbane & SF...
Despite Burnaby & Grater Vancouver being multicultural for several decades, so much of the restrictive BC mentality remains like an old disruptive computer program that hasn't been deleted. Unfortunatly, after the WW2 era, Greater Vancouver and BC continued with a backwater mentality. Just look at how much bigger things are allowed to be in Australia's 4 largest cities. Look at the scale of Seattle & Calgary & see how much of Greater Vancouver is still held back. Look at how big Edmonton as a capital is, while Victoria remains as a small provincial backwater.
Unlike Melbourne, SF and Toronto, backwards Vancouver made sure that it was one of the first cities to get rid if its streetcar and tram-train (interurban) network before the 1960s. To make matters worse, the Greater Vancouver Region had and still does, have a system of mostly narrow bridges.
There was such a push to have a tracks to tires agenda, no one seemed to realize that all the bridges should be wide enough to accomodate 2 bus lanes, or at least build a bus bridge or tunnel next to an existing bridge.
Just because Multiculturalism in Canada started to officially get going in the 1970s, the city & municipal councils and planning departments were still predominantly managed by people of European descent. For most of the Colonial and postcolonial history of BC, the main municipalities were Vancouver, Burnaby, NW & Victoria. It was that way right into the 1970s.
Since the predominantly White civic structure was firmly in place well into the 1980s, there was plenty of time to implement and maintain a social engineering agenda. An unofficial (White) Urban Livability Plan was cleverly devised by scaling almost everything down. Since BC can't control non-white immigration, "Livability" had to be symbolically quite visible. Livability was an ingenious way to impose various overlapping restrictions throughout the decades. How does the Livability agenda work? Suppose that there was a mostly subconscious mentality to refuse building up proper big city infrastructure for non-white people. Thus, by symbolically constructing inadequate transportation infrastructure, it becomes a way demonstrating that you are not properly building for the future, despite most of the world being non-white. Now, Burnaby & the Greater Vancouver region are so far behind now, its difficult to catch up to other proper metropolitan areas around the world.
Despite Canada being the 2nd largest country in overall size, it has such a small area on the Pacific_Rim and Asia is the most populated part of the world. By keeping most of the bridges narrow and the trains short compared to most cities, that fits right in with the symbolism of antigrowth towards a predominantly non-white world. Canada is nowhere near close to having 1% of the worlds population, but most of the world is non-white. Its been that way since the beginning.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Burnaby+apologizes
_in_Elizabeth_St_on_route_19_to_North_Coburg_in_PTV_livery,_December_2013.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
