Smith Tower in Seattle, WA (1914)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Tower "Completed in 1914, the 38-story, 462 ft (141 m) tower was among the tallest skyscrapers outside New York City at the time of its completion." 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/L_C_Smith_Building%2C_Seattle%2C_1914

It would take almost 6 decades until stubborn Vancouver finally permitted a building to be of a similar height.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Centre_(Vancouver) "The skyscraper stands at just under 145m tall and 37 storeys. Royal Centre was the tallest building in Vancouver upon completion in 1973..." 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/06/Royal_Centre_Vancouver.jpg/500px-Royal_Centre_Vancouver.jp 

Fortunately, Seattle+and+Perth never adopted anything like the VMV approach to things. Thus, they are able to have longer airport trains, wider bridges and significantly taller buildings.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=LC+Smith+Tower+in+Seattle

How the Seattle to Vancouver area could become a megaregion

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POcg0oFvVf8 

The larger Portland, Seattle and the Vancouver, BC (V-BC) region has a lot of growth potential. However, Seattle size buildings haven't been allowed in Portland and in Vancouver, BC. Nothing like a 12 lane Ship Canal Bridge has been allowed in Portland and Vancouver. While Oregon and backwater BC haven't been able to thwart the largest city in Washington State, Seattle might eventually become more of a magnet in pulling more people into the area between Portland and V-BC. 

Right now, Vancouver, WA (V-WA) still has a wider bridge than V-BC. Most of the V-BC bridges are so damn narrow that its not possible to have an efficient regional express bus network. As long as there is a refusal to build proper BRT bridges as part of a regional system, it remains a sad joke. 

The Skytrain (LRT) was built with shorter stations than what the underground stations in Seattle and Edmonton are at. Whenever possible, the Skytrain stations are shorter than the C Train stations in Calgary, DART stations in Dallas and even the Max in Portland. 

The biggest mistake of the Skytrain was to not build all of the stations with a future level clearance to eventually have Montreal Metro size stations of 500 feet or 152.5 m. Instead, the first 2 lines only have 80 m stations and the line to YVR (The Canada embarrassment Line) is only 50 m. Backwater BC logic is that a 5 car Skytrain could run twice as frequent as a 9 car Montreal Metro train. Someday, a 2.5 car YVR-Canada Line train could also run much more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train. 

There is just one key problem with that type of BC logic. While initially constructing short stations and having short trains can save money, its not proper BIG city size infrastructure. In the long run, it costs more to try to lengthen stations for longer BIG city type trains. 

Concord Metrotown Is Nearly Topped Out in Burnaby, BC, Canada

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcQqiPa-Qa0 Unlike most of the buildings in Vancouver, this one in Burnaby would actually be one of the taller buildings in Calgary and Seattle.

https://skyscraperpage.com/b114729/burnaby/grand-tower-at-sky-park 230 m or 755 feet. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_Park_(Burnaby) 

All possible, because its not under the extreme controls and restrictions that Vancouver imposes. 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=31 BC https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?stateID=1

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=31&status=15 BC https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?stateID=1&status=15 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?countryID=1 Can https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?countryID=1&status=15

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.

Honolulu and San Diego...

Honolulu is very reluctant to allow buildings to go much higher than 450 feet. SD can't go higher than 500 feet, because of the airport being so close. However, that's not the case in Boston.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honolulu#Economy

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=421 

Will Honolulu ever have some Miami or Singapore size buildings? That remains to be seen. For now, Honolulu like San_Diego will remain free of 50 story hotels and condos and 40 story office towers. 

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

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=120 

If SD can ever relocate its airport, then it can have much taller buildings. Once Edmonton closed an airport that was too close to its downtown, the city eventually had the tallest building in Western Canada. 

Honolulu got a nice airport train station long before SD.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/09/05/will-san-diegos-airport-ever-get-a-light-rail-connection/

Vancouver 450 ft and Fahrenheit 451

Was a 450 foot height restriction just by chance, or was it intentionally made to be very close to 451 Fahrenheit? Despite being around the same size as Paris, Boston & SF, Vancouver remains as a very restrictive city. 

Any tall building in SL City is under 450 feet. Honolulu is still stuck around the 450 foot maximum, while San Diego is stuck at 500 feet. Even Rio DeGennaro still has shorter buildings than Vancouver, BC. Washington, DC has strict height limitations like Paris. However, W,DC could eventually set up their own equivalent of La_Defense. Its a fine example of allowing tall buildings just beyond the city limits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 (1953) By the 1950s, so many things were already banned, watered down or scaled back in provincial backwater Vancouver. Generations later, there was the No Fun City 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 at, or over 40 stories by 2030. However, Burnaby and Surrey could, because they aren't under the extreme restrictions of the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV). 

It wasn't until 1973 when Vancouver allowed its first building to be taller than the Los_Angeles_City_Hall. https://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/One_Wall_Centre It opened in 2001 at 157.8 m (518 ft). Its 49 feet shorter than the Philadelphia_City_Hall.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_City_Hall Opened in 1901 at 548 ft (167 m).

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

Despite its size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. Its been difficult enough just for Canada to even have half of 1% of the worlds population. 

One expects Melbourne and Sydney to be proper big cities. However, Australia has big stuff at both ends of the country. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Design Its a 12 lane crossing in Brisbane. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrows_Bridge_(Perth) 10 lanes with 2 commuter train tracks in the middle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Skytower It has 90 floors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) Almost has 80 floors.

Perth Central_Park_(skyscraper) at 51 floors and 108_St_Georges_Terrace at 50. Very restrictive Vancouver still won't permit any office tower to have a 40th floor. Calgary and Seattle each have a few over 50 stories.

So far, provincial Halifax hasn't been allowed to be on a similar scale as Boston and Montreal. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_L._Macdonald_Bridge 3 lanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Murray_MacKay_Bridge 4 lanes. 

The scale of Vancouver is kept below that of Calgary & Seattle or even Auckland, in some ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge A classic 3 lane BC bottleneck-chokepoint. No parallel bus and truck tunnels and especially, no LRT tunnel. 

Provincial backwater Victoria isn't allowed to be on a similar scale of Wellington, NZ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_Street_Bridge Another BC 3 lane wonder.

The Houston Galleria and Galleria Dallas

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

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

Texas is a place where thinking BIG has been going strong for almost a century. 

By the year 1900, NYC had to start thinking and building on a big-city scale, simply out of necessity.

https://www.nypl.org/blog/2015/03/11/nyc-big-apple 

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

In contrast, backwater BC has a tough time keeping up with Alberta and Washington State. Especially with Ontario and Quebec. BC is 75% mountainous and has a seawater barrier on its west side. Still, its almost as if some people would like to have a wall around BC, or even a forcefield like out of Star Trek. 

Keeping things small and backwards in BC whenever possible seems to be part of a multigenerational symbolic agenda. 

Its as if there is something like a BC Mind Virus (BCMV).

Texas has more people than Australia and California has more people than Canada. Despite its overall size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. 

Singapore is on an island that's smaller than all of NYC or Chicago, even. Yet, it has proper big-city trains, bridges, roads and buildings.

A weekend washout for the GTA

 https://www.cp24.com/video/2026/05/23/a-weekend-washout-for-the-gta-its-going-to-be-an-all-day-affair-climatologist-on-weather-update/ 

No matter how much rain in TO, there is always more of it in Vancouver. It shouldn't be fall in May. However, when Toronto finally gets summer, its summer for more than just a few months. Unfortunately, summer in Vancouver always seems so short, just like its short trains and short buildings. Even shorter-swimming-pools. One hopes that from June 1st to September 1st, Vancouver will have constant 25-30C days. Unfortunately, the dam rain sometimes kicks in to reduce the number of sunny summer days. Then by 2nd week of September, summer is fading & you're lucky to have spring like days. 

The Broadway Subway-Mount Pleasant to Broadway City Hall

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z64SisMwIuY 

Another illogical lane reduction project. Broadway was for the most part, always 6 lanes, 7, if you count the turning lane at major intersections. The train isn't a 24 hour service, so its important to always have 1 bus lane each way, especially if the train is shut down for an occasional emergency. Then there still should be 2 general lanes each way, because this isn't supposed to be a small town street or avenue. 

This, combined with so many 4 lane bridges, ensures that BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning remains firmly entrenched. 

A 5 car Vancouver train is expected to do the job of a 9 car Montreal Metro train. That's because a short Vancouver train can run a little more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train, during even the most busy times of the day. Of course many proper cities have long big-city trains, because they aren't under anything like small thinking Vancouver, or a backwater BC mentality.

The standard short trains, narrow bridges & narrow streets and short buildings, are all part of holding the scale of Vancouver back. Apparently, if you can't build a wall around Vancouver, the next best thing is to continually plan and build symbolically for a provincial backwater of a city. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Selective+Door+Operation

Concord | Metrotown in Burnaby

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbFE98Esk9k 

Burnaby isn't under the strict restrictions of Vancouver, so its able to have taller buildings and even a freeway.

Sydney's SEVERED Skyline vs. the stumps of Vancouver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpEoJia-4ns  Fortunately, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth don't have similar restrictions as Sydney. However, NSW still has less imposed restrictions and impediments as backwater BC.

Backwards+Vancouver B$ logic should never make it to Sydney, or any other properly functioning city. Fortunately overall, NSW never was overtaken by anything like the BC Mind Virus (BCMV). Otherwise, Sydney would also have narrow bridges, short trains and mostly short buildings. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/25_Martin_Place Over 60 levels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotia_Tower Not even 40 levels.

Vancouver still won't allow any office tower to have 40 floors, let alone 50 or 60.

The urban trifecta of backwards Vancouver

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trifecta 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trifecta#History 

Ideally, for some small thinking cities, the plan is to symbolically have mostly short buildings and short trains and mostly narrow bridges.

That seems to have been the goal of Vancouver over the past several decades. In contrast, Brisbane after its Expo 88, was able to really go into big city planning mode, because it doesn't have anything like the excessive Vancouver restrictions holding it back. 

1 The+Typical+Vancouver+Size+Stump+Building No office tower has been permitted to have a 40th floor. https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Stumpy+Post+building+in+Vancouver Never-mind 40 or 50 stories, it wasn't even allowed to have 25 floors.

2 YVR-Canada+Line A 2 car joke of a train. 

3 Lions+Gate+Bridge A 3 lane joke of a bridge.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=backwards+Vancouver

Free entry to Vancouver Lookout observation deck for City of Vancouver exhibit on considering higher buildings

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-lookout-city-higher-buildings-policy-review-exhibit 

The Perfect Mass Transit Model is in Montreal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsoZVzd9djQ

Just mostly more stumps or some real Towers in Vancouver?

 https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2026/05/02/opinion-the-yiyby-critique-bilsker 

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/the-stack/35667 Only 38 floors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Centre_(Vancouver) Just 37 stories. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_Center Seattle's tallest has 76 stories. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge 12 lanes consisting of three 4 lane sections.

Mostly short buildings, short trains and narrow bridges are all part of the imposed symbolism to keep Vancouver small and backwards. 

While Seattle had its first 50 story office tower in 1969 and Calgary in 1984, stubborn Vancouver still won't permit any office tower to have a 40th floor. 

A 30-35 story office tower would be impressive if it was in Victoria, Kelowna, Kamloops and Prince George. However, what's impressive in backwards Vancouver & backwater BC isn't impressive in Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Washington State, Victoria State, NSW, Queensland & WA... 

Stumpy buildings, short trains and narrow bridges makes for the Vancouver trifecta of B$ city planning.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fort+McMurray,+AB 10 lanes. Only the TCH bridge between Surrey and Coquitlam in BC has been allowed to have as many lanes as this. Some people still wish that everything could have remained funneled into just 2 or 3 lanes each way.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Quesnell+Bridge 8 lanes in Edmonton. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hwy.+2A+Red+Deer+City+Centre+Bridge 6 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Calgary,+AB 10 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Calgary,+AB 8 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lethbridge,+AB It has 6 lanes. Being from backwards Vancouver, its amazing that this 6 lane bridge wasn't funneled into just 2 lanes each way. That's what happened with the Knight_Street_Bridge.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hwy.+2A+Red+Deer+City+Centre+Bridge As a 5 lane TCH crossing, it only has 1 less lane than the 6 lane Iron Bridge in congested, backwards Vancouver. Since Alberta isn't under anything like the imposed BC restrictions, this crossing will likely be eventually upgraded to have 6 lanes, plus 2 wide emergency lanes & 2 wide shoulders that could provide 4 lanes each way, some day. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winnipeg,+MB A TCH bridge with 9 lanes, because no one from narrow-minded Vancouver was able to get them to narrow this crossing. The TCH Iron Bridge in Vancouver just has 6 lanes. No bus and LRT bridge has ever been built next to it, so far.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winnipeg,+MB A 6 lane crossing. 

As of 2026, congested Vancouver only allows 2 bridges to have 6 lanes. A total of 5 lanes were removed from 3 Vancouver bridges. Had Vancouver built a series of proper bus and bike bridges, no lanes would have been removed. 

Despite NW trying to be one of the smallest cities in BC, Surrey is set to become the biggest city in BC. Fortunately, small NW & backwards Vancouver can't stop that from happening. However, narrowminded NW was able to force a narrower new bridge to Surrey. 

This bridge-replacement is one of the best examples of BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning today.

McBride_Blvd. and Royal_Ave_in_New_Westminster are mostly 4 lane corridors.

King_George_Boulevard and Scott_Road both are at least 4 lanes wide. One might think that the new bridge should have had 10 lanes, or at least 8 lanes, because two 4 lane boulevards, a 4 lane avenue and a 4 lane road, are all funneled into a bridge that opened with only 2 lanes each way. The old bridge that it replaced was also a 4 lane crossing. A congestive approach to transportation planning is the name of the game in backwards B.C.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Stalewasem_Bridge_%282026-03%29.jpg/960px-Stalewasem_Bridge_%282026-03%29.jpg 

At the very least, this new 4 lane bridge should have had enough room for 2 wide emergency lanes, 2 wide shoulders and especially, 2 bus lanes. There should have been a provision for a lower deck for LRT, bus and truck lanes, given that this is supposed to be a seaport region.

The narrowmindedness planning by Greater Vancouver to still have mostly narrow crossings, has made it very difficult to implement a proper regional express bus network, let alone BRT. 

The first 2 Skytrain lines only have station lengths that can barely accommodate the new 5 car trains. The YVR Line or the C Line, has stations than can only accommodate a 2.5 car train, some day. Given that the Skytrain network is a multibillion dollar transit system, all of the stations should have been designed to gradually accommodate 8-10 car trains, but that's what a proper big city would do. 

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/02/expo-86-40-years-later-the-memories-live-on 

Four decades later and Greater Vancouver remains so far behind with the scale of its infrastructure.

What is Happening with Lansdowne Mall in Richmond?

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9_GQWyo8h0 

Boston and Las_Vegas allow much taller buildings than what's permitted in Richmond. Those cities don't use their airport as an excuse to have stumps. Even San_Diego has taller towers than Richmond. 

Despite New_Orleans being on a delta, it has much taller buildings than Richmond as well. 

Boston & LV have longer trains, while N.O. never totally got rid of their streetcars like Richmond had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lansdowne_station_(SkyTrain) A little 2 car joke of a train that's expected to do the job of what a big size or at least medium size city can do. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rseau_express_metropolitain#Rolling_stock 4 cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu) 4 cars.

Fortunately, Montreal & Honolulu opted to not have something like a 2 car YVR-C Line joke of a train. 

When stations can't easily be extended, Selective_door_operation can turn a 4 car rain into a 6 car train.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations  

Unfortunately, the YVR-Canada_Line wasn't designed to have 4 or 5 car trains. The stations were only designed to just accommodate a 2.5 car train. However, with Selective_door_operation, a 2.5 car train could become a 4.5 car train. Perhaps, even a 5 car train with 3 full-length cars accessing the station platform. To still be running a 2 car train to Richmond and a Richmond-Delta tunnel that's still only 2 lanes each way, is a very sad joke.

So much more should have been done between 1986 and 2010. Especially, since 2010 and 2026.

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/02/expo-86-40-years-later-the-memories-live-on 

Everything is so much more difficult & costly to do in backwards BC.

Expo 86 and Expo 88

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_86 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_86#Fair 

Unlike highly restrictive Vancouver, Brisbane started to allow taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Expo_88 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Expo_88#The_Fair 

No office tower in Vancouver has been allowed to have a 40th floor. No Vancouver bridge is allowed to have 8 lanes. Only some of the newest Skytrains have 5 cars, but certainty not 8-10. That would go against the congestive transportation mentality of BC. 

The VMV and the BC Mind Virus are so firmly entrenched.

Should the Vancouver Whitecaps revive the Gastown waterfront stadium concept instead of pursuing Hastings Racecourse?

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-whitecaps-gastown-railyard-waterfront-stadium 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mls-commissioner-vancouver-whitecaps-new-stadium-1.7594905

https://www.facebook.com/groups/831329483640398/posts/25294271920252814/ 

https://theprovince.com/sports/soccer/mls/vancouver-whitecaps/mls-misrepresenting-whitecaps-stadium-availability-bc-place

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_Regional_Stadium  "It was built on reclaimed railway land..." 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/CentrePort_and_Westpac_Stadium%2C_Wellington_NZ.jpg/960px-CentrePort_and_Westpac_Stadium%2C_Wellington_NZ.jpg 

These were both possible, because they are far away from any influence from the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV).

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

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9c/Capetown_stadium.JPG/960px-Capetown_stadium.JPG 

Despite Lumen_Field in Seattle being relatively close to BC, no VMV has seemed to have reached there.  

Unlike with BC_Place Stadium, Lumen_Field works well for soccer and American Football arrangements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_Field#Soccer 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Aerial_of_Qwest_Field_and_downtown_skyline%2C_2002.jpg/960px-Aerial_of_Qwest_Field_and_downtown_skyline%2C_2002.jpg

Accomplishing things in stubborn Vancouver, BC is just more difficult than in many other cities around the world.

=======================================

Could Honolulu Develop Like Tokyo or HK?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxkjJ2TNkY4 

No way. First, H. County would have to allow Singapore size buildings and infrastructure. Then, HK size stuff, before even getting close to something like a little Tokyo. Right now, H. isn't even allowed to have buildings as tall as what San Diego has. 

The future of tall buildings in downtown Vancouver

https://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/help-shape-tall-buildings-may-2026.aspx

While there are some taller residential towers, no Vancouver office tower has ever been permitted to have a 40th floor.

 https://globalnews.ca/video/11827046/vancouver-tall-building-policy-review/ 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/new-territory-vancouver-city-first-supertall-tower-could-be-first-more-to-come#:~:text=Sign%20In%20or%20Create%20an,Article%20content 

https://maps.nicholsonroad.com/heights/

The World's Tallest Buildings Are Cheating

 https://www.theb1m.com/video/skyscraper-vanity-heights The B1M

A New Supertall Skyscraper could be Rising in Vancouver

 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.