The small Westin Bayshore Hotel in Vancouver

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/westin-bayshore-vancouver-best-luxury-hotel  

https://vancouversbestplaces.com/vancouver-hotels/vancouver-westin-bayshore-hotel

Of course the Vancouver location wasn't allowed to be as big as the Westin in Seattle. Just like the Hotel+Vancouver wasn't designed to be as tall and especially as wide as the Royal+York+Hotel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westin_Seattle "The hotel originally consisted of a single 40 story tower, today's south tower, reaching a height of 121 m (397 ft). The tower was topped out in January 1969 and the hotel opened on June 29, 1969." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westin_Seattle#History "The 137 m (449 ft), 47-story north tower opened in June 1982..." 

While Vancouver is only warm for half of the year, at best, the old Bayshore Inn wasn't allowed to be as big as anything in Waikiki. 

https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/council-approves-new-policy-address-vancouvers-hotel-room-shortage.pdf 

https://corporatemeetingsnetwork.ca/2025/05/01/tackling-vancouvers-hotel-shortage-crisis/

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/no-rooms-at-the-inns-knock-on-effects-of-vancouvers-hotel-shortage 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/vancouver-s-last-undeveloped-waterfront-site-could-house-convention-centre-hotel-according-to-city-memo/ar-AA1vO3Bz 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Westin_Seattle_from_Olive_8.jpg
Unlike Seattle, Vancouver no longer has its first 40 story hotel. Perhaps if the city had allowed a much taller condo tower, the hotel tower could have been saved. Or, a new double tower combination of a 55 story hotel and 65 story condo tower. Instead, the old landmark was replaced with 2 stumps that have less than 40 stories.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Empire_Hotel_Landmark.jpg/330px-Empire_Hotel_Landmark.jpg 

Other cities seemed to be more interested in cultivating their hotel and tourism industry. Even encouraging more hotel towers. However, Vancouver with its very strict (multigenerational) imposed height restrictions, kept falling behind.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/sep/27/wipe-out-era-1970s-vanish-vancouver 

After several decades of keeping Vancouver hotels short and small, now the city realized that there aren't enough hotel rooms for the tourism industry. 

https://globalnews.ca/video/11127278/biv-vancouver-needs-thousands-more-hotel-rooms

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-tourism-risk-hotel-development-construction-policies 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_Seattle Vancouver has yet to permit a big, bulky hotel like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainier_Square_Tower While this isn't a hotel, its 60m taller than the tallest building in Vancouver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telus_Sky No hotel, just an office and residential tower. However, its about 22m taller than the tallest in Vancouver. 

The (unofficial) rule is that almost everything in Vancouver has to be scaled back or watered down in size.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=hotels  

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

Tall and Wide Buildings

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1nufoeh/the_1960s_and_the_1930s

While they would be giants by little Vancouver standards, they are just average when compared to the modern big stuff around the world. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1nu1cm5/pan_am_and_the_metlife/

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1ntxg5r/new_jp_morgan_building/ 

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1nrubi8/new_york/

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1nuivgm/chicago_skyline_in_the_1950s Now stumps in Chicago, but they would still be tall towers in stumpy Vancouver. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1ntv4x8/chicago There are plenty of Vancouver size stumps in Chicago, NYC, Toronto & Melbourne... 

https://www.reddit.com/r/skyscrapers/comments/1noqvfa/choose

Vancouver buildings over 152.4 meters or 500 feet

It took a very long time for Vancouver to have its first building permitted to rise over 500 feet in height. 

152.4 meters = 500 feet and 150 meters = 492.12 feet 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=1

 https://www.straight.com/article-371138/vancouver/city-approves-new-policy-taller-buildings-downtown-vancouver While there are some taller resedential towers, Vancouver still has no office tower with at least a 40th floor. Portland,_Oregon has 2. Perth, WA has 2 office towers with at least 50 floors. The_Bow tower in Calgary has 60 floors, when you count all the levels. The Columbia_Center in Seattle has 80 floors in total. 

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

450 feet is equal to about 137.16 meters and that was the height restriction imposed on Vancouver for most of its restrictive, red-tape history. 

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

The powers that be tried their damndest to not allow most Vancouver buildings to be taller than the Smith_Tower, Commerce_Court_North and the Los_Angeles_City_Hall until after the year 2000. Of course in 2025 those buildings are like stumps now, but would still be tall by small Vancouver standards.

https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=6965 , https://www.smithtower.com/about/ 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=27&searchname=timeline

https://beautifulwashington.com/images/sky-view-observatory/sky-view-observatory-at-columbia-center-9.jpg

https://beautifulwashington.com/king-county/attractions/seattle/448-sky-view-observatory.html  

https://www.seattletimes.com/life/heres-a-cheap-way-to-view-seattles-skyline-coffee-at-the-starbucks-on-the-40th-floor-of-the-columbia-tower The 40th floor of an 80 story building, when you count the mechanical or plant floors as well. Perhaps some day strict Vancouver might permit an office building to have a 40th floor. 

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

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

stumps and towers

Marina City in Chicago

Marina_City (MC) "The complex consists of two 587-foot (179 m), 65-story apartment towers, opened in 1963" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_City#Architecture 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Marinacity466.JPG 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/The_Butterfly_and_First_Baptist_Church_in_Vancouver_04.jpg

https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=107021 The 57 story Butterfly tower in Vancouver is 586 feet, so its only 1 foot shorter than Marina_City. MC was able to fit in 65 floors into the same height.

https://reveryarchitecture.com/projects/butterfly/

https://westbankcorp.com/body-of-work/the-butterfly

https://www.canadianarchitect.com/revery-unveils-design-of-the-butterfly

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Marina_City%2C_Chicago%2C_Illinois%2C_Estados_Unidos%2C_2012-10-20%2C_DD_01.jpg While these towers would be around the 3 or 4th tallest in Vancouver, they have almost become like stumps in Chicago.

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

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Chicago-00.jpg Marina City is in the top, middle part of this picture and is hardly noticeable on the Chicago skyline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Chicago#Tallest_buildings

Being from smallminded Vancouver, its always amazing to see how so many cities are allowed to be on a big scale. 

Two Canadian cities rank among the world’s wealthiest

https://dailyhive.com/canada/cities-in-canada-among-worlds-wealthiest

While Toronto now has more people than Chicago, the GTA is still less populated than the Chicagoland Area. Toronto has yet to have a building with at least 100 floors like Chicago, NYC & Melbourne.

There is always a strong resistance to allow the Greater Vancouver Region to rival that of Greater Montreal or the Greater Seattle Area. Thus, the trains are shorter, most of the bridges are narrower & most of the buildings are like stumps. The keep it small & hold it back approach, is all part of the symbolism towards refusing to build proper big city size infrastructure. 

Revamped 800 Granville proposal drops offices for rental housing and hotel uses

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/800-876-granville-street-vancouver-revised-design-bonnis-rental-housing

A taller version of 800+Granville, but still stumps when compared to what many other cities allow.

https://storeys.com/bonnis-properties-800-granville-revised-rezoning/

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/800-876-granville-st

The (stumpy) Post in Vancouver

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/sony-pictures-imageworks-global-headquarters-vancouver-the-post

https://storeys.com/quadreal-graeme-scott-the-post-vancouver-heritage-revitalization-amazon/

What could have been a nice, impressive double 55 story office complex is just another Vancouver stumpy building+complex. In that part of the very restrictive city, the building complex wasn't even allowed to have a 25th floor.

It's all part of the Vancouver stump agenda.

Had Bankers_Hall 1 & 2 in Calgary only been 26 stories, they would just be another stump complex. However, at 52 stories, they remain impressive.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/Bankers-Hall-Szmurlo.jpg

Although Bankers_Hall isn't quite as tall as City_National_Plaza in L.A., both are 52 story complexes. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/PaulHastingsCityNationalTwinTowers.jpg

https://thelocationportal.com/city-national-plaza Fortunately, these towers in L.A. and Calgary weren't Vancouverized stumps.

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/city-national-tower/1395

https://buildingsdb.com/CA/los-angeles/city-national-plaza/

The stump mentality was firmly in place for LA until the late 1960s, when a building was finally allowed to be taller than the 454' LA+City+Hall.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=The+Post+in+Vancouver

Los Angeles City Hall (454 ft or 138 m)

The LA_City_Hall should have been at least 500' tall, but it's only 454'. That still makes the Los_Angeles_City_Hall one of the taller ones around the planet, but it's become a stump of a building in downtown L.A.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall#History "...was completed in 1928. Dedication ceremonies were held on April 26, 1928. It has 32 floors and, at 454 feet (138 m) high."  

"A City Council ordinance passed in 1905 did not permit any new construction to be taller than 13 stories or 150 ft (46 m) in order to keep the city's architecture harmonious. City Hall's 454 ft (138 m) height was deemed exempt as a public building and assured that no building would surpass one third its height for over three decades until the ordinance was repealed by voter referendum in 1957.^[9] Therefore, from its completion in 1928 until finally surpassed by the topping off of Union Bank Plaza in 1966, City Hall was the tallest building in Los Angeles..."

https://laist.com/news/entertainment/city-hall-tall Not 451 feet, but 454 feet, because there was no F 451 novel yet. The 454' LA City Hall was like an unofficial F-you to the taller buildings in NYC and Chicago. Perhaps even Metropolis_(1927_film).    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(1927_film)#Influences 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_K._Dick PKD was born in 1928, the same year that the LA City Hall opened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 "The writing and theme within Fahrenheit 451 was explored by Bradbury in some of his previous short stories. Between 1947 and 1948, Bradbury wrote "Bright Phoenix", a short story about a librarian who confronts a "Chief Censor", who burns books. An encounter Bradbury had in 1949 with the police inspired him to write the short story "The Pedestrian" in 1951. In "The Pedestrian", a man going for a nighttime walk in his neighborhood is harassed and detained by the police. In the society of "The Pedestrian", citizens are expected to watch television as a leisurely activity, a detail that would be included in Fahrenheit 451. Elements of both "Bright Phoenix" and "The Pedestrian" would be combined into The Fireman, a novella published in Galaxy Science Fiction in 1951. Bradbury was urged by Stanley Kauffmann, an editor at Ballantine Books, to make The Fireman into a full novel. Bradbury finished the manuscript for Fahrenheit 451 in 1953, and the novel was published later that year." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451#Title

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/LA_San_Gabriel_Mountains.jpg If you look hard enough you can see how small the LA City Hall actually is now in the 21st century.

https://laist.com/news/entertainment/city-hall-tall From 2016.

The agenda to not permit any building in LA to be taller than City Hall was the case for several decades. Even Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane & Perth weren't allowed to have buildings taller than the LA_City_Hall for a long time. Of course it took until the early 1970s for Vancouver to allow a building to be a little taller than the LA_City_Hall. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg

City Hall is really like a stump on the modern LA skyline. It can easily be obscured by the taller towers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Los_Angeles#Tallest_buildings 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Bank_Plaza Completed in 1968.

Roof	157.28 m (516.0 ft)
Technical details
Floor count	40
Floor area	68,525 m2 (737,600 sq ft)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Bank_Plaza#History Not only the first building permitted in LA to be over 500 feet, but having at least a 40th floor.  

Just as LA got its first 40 story building in 1968, PKD had a book out in the same year. Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_Sheep? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_Sheep?#Plot

https://medium.com/@ejasp2/metropolis-v-s-blade-runner-1982-871baea0eea0

https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Comparison-between-Metropolis-and-Blade-Runner-P3JDKCLEC8BRS#  

While Philip_K._Dick set E. Sheep in SF, Blade_Runner was set in LA.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Production

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=LA+City+Hall

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=stumps

CC in Toronto

There are even bigger plans for CC.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Court_North It took several decades until Vancouver would allow some buildings to be taller than CCN.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Toronto_-_ON_-_Toronto_Skyline2.jpg

https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/05/16-giant-heads-touring-historic-commerce-court-north.26843

https://tayloronhistory.com/2013/02/18/torontos-architectural-gemsthe-bank-of-commerce-cibc-on-king-street Of course CCN has become like a stump in Toronto, but in Vancouver, it would still be a prominent building.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/toronto-feature-canadian-imperial-bank-of-commerce

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

https://torontopics.me/2016/05/29/commerce-court-north Like the LA City Hall, CCN would be the equivalent of the tallest buildings in Vancouver for several decades. Yet, for the past few decades, the LA+City+Hall & CCN have become stumps in their cities.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=stumps

BC Stumps

 There are a lot of stumpy towers around the world that would actually be among the tallest buildings in Vancouver, BC. The Scotia_Tower was never the tallest in Vancouver, but it's been a prominent building on the skyline since 1977. https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=65 34F 138m/452' https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=107855260&offset=50 The windows only go up to 34, then there are 2 windowless floors above that. In contrast, the Scotia_Plaza is double the height & twice the width. That's because such tall buildings in Toronto don't have to be watered down to Vancouver standards.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Vancouver_Skyline_and_Mountains.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Concord_Pacific_Master_Plan_Area.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Vancouverdowntown2019.jpg 

Seattle, WA https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=6965 38F 141m/462" , https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=27&searchname=timeline

Calgary, Alberta https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=370 39F 147m/481' https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=107855241&offset=25

Perth, WA https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=1593 33F 140m/459' , https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=168&searchname=timeline

Dubai https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/may/16/story-of-cities-43-dubai-world-trade-centre-turned-sand-gold-uae , https://www.dubaidesertsafaris.com/dubai-world-trade-center , https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=3245 , https://gulfnews.com/business/dubai-world-trade-centre-marks-40th-anniversary-1.62395318 , https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=23&searchname=timeline It would be stupid & pointless if the towers of Dubai had to be watered down to Vancouver standards.

Bank Bumi Daya Plaza https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=14799 32 floors , https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/jakarta/bank-bumi-daya-plaza/15474 143 m/469 ft , https://www.bumidayaplaza.co.id , https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=750&searchname=timeline

Towers vs. BC stumps

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

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

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

In accordance with small scale planning and symbolism, Vancouver isn't allowed to have what would be a tall building in Seattle and Calgary. In LA, its not just the buildings that are taller, the mountains are taller there as well.

Metro Vancouver Housing Deficit Grows To Over 45,000 Homes

 https://storeys.com/metro-vancouver-housing-deficit-fall-2024/

For several decades, multi-unit 4-5 story houses just weren't permitted to be built in Vancouver. Even the shoebox like, Vancouver special should have been allowed to have at least 3-4 levels. Plus, there should have been several 6-10 story block size apartment buildings or flats like in Paris & London. There was quite an emphasis on Vancouver stumps, especially, no 65 to 85 floor buildings like in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane & Toronto.

Very narrow bridges, which make it almost impossible to have a proper & efficient express bus & HOV network for the region. Fortunately, the backward BC mentality was never able to make it over to Australia to prevent bridge expansion or duplication. 

Then even by late 2024, the first 2 SkyTrain lines only have 4 car trains of the newer coaches. The joke that is the Canada Line, still only runs 2 car trains. All 3 lines should have been designed to eventually have stations that could accommodate 8-10 car trains, but that would actually enable more people to efficiently travel around the region.

Fortunately again, this inept & horrible BC planning mentality was never able to infest & stop the Toronto Subway from having 6 car trains. However, by now, the TTC should have been running 8-10 car trains. It would have been chaos if the Montreal Metro was only running 3 car trains for the past several decades. Such an absurdity would be indicative of a, WHY EVEN BOTHER TO BUILD IT, mentality? Thats been the ongoing problem in BC since plumbing & electricity was first implemented.

Just to allow backwater BC to catch up to Alberta & Washington State would be challenging enough. Then to gradually think & plan on a scale of a Quebec & even an Ontario, might as well be just another Sci-Fi pipedream.

taller towers vs. stumps

 

https://westendneighbours.wordpress.com/2023/05/09/public-hearing-may-9-includes-57-60-storey-towers-1080-barclay/

https://westendneighbours.wordpress.com/archives/2499-2/

https://spacing.ca/vancouver/2024/04/29/s101s-understanding-shadow-studies-why-they-matter/

https://spacing.ca/vancouver/2024/06/17/broadway-plan-shenanigans/

Stumps and Towers in various cities

Every city starts out with stumps and several cities eventually have some tall towers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Brisbane#Timeline_of_tallest_buildings

https://mapfight.xyz/compare/queensland-vs-us.fl

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Square At 151 m (495 ft) it's just another Vancouver like stump, especially, AMP_Place. 

Queensland & especially Florida have grown substantially over the decades. A year round warm climate is certainly part of the big attraction. Something that Canada just doesn't have.

The Southeast_Financial_Center and One_Biscayne_Tower in Miami.

https://wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Miami_Skyline_2020.jpg

https://wikipedia/Miami_downtown_by_Tom_Schaefer_-_Miamitom.jpg

https://wikipedia/Southeast_Financial_Center_2016.jpg A classic tall Miami tower with some Vancouver type stumps next to it. 

https://wikipedia/One_Biscayne_Tower_from_the_southwest.jpg 

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

One_Biscayne_Tower contains 39 floors and is 492 ft (150 m) tall. Today it's just another Vancouver stump size building in downtown_Miami. 

Another Vancouver type stump is the Miami_Center, which is 484 ft (148 m) tall and has 34 floors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Miami#Tallest_buildings

The Miami_metropolitan_area, like Brisbane and the Gold_Coast, have been able to grow & flourish on a large scale, because they aren't under anything like the very restrictive Vancouver & BC limitations.

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

The BC part of Canada is very mountainous like Switzerland. Usually, SW BC is the most mild part of Canada during the winter. Thus, it's the best place to avoid most of the harsh Canadian winters. Yet, there has been quite a lacking approach to building & expanding infrastructure. Combined with very strict zoning & a haft-assed approach to urban planning, one can clearly see a much larger scale of things in Seattle, Calgary, Edmonton & Portland. 

https://mapfight.xyz/map/ch 23 Switzerland's can fit into BC. Yet, BC has yet to reach the population of 1 CH.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Switzerland

The Stumps of Vancouver, Canada

If you are from Prince_George, Kamloops, Victoria or Kelowna, you might think that Vancouver is a big & tall place. 

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

However, it's all on a much smaller scale than real big cities around the world.

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

Seattle & Calgary never fell into the Vancouver trap. 

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

Simply because they aren't under the Vancouver type restrictions.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Kelowna-Victoria-Prince+George-Kamloops

Burnaby vs. Vancouver's stumps

 https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/two-more-towers-up-to-80-storeys-tall-more-rental-housing-could-be-coming-to-burnabys-brentwood-8461795

This illustration shows Vancouver stumps next to some Burnaby towers. https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/bc-tel-boot-redevelopment-burnaby-1500-homes-900-rentals-towers-up-to-64-storeys-7957610

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/two-massive-towers-at-60-storeys-43-storeys-planned-for-burnabys-brentwood-7674810

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/hotel-proposed-in-giant-highrise-development-in-burnabys-brentwood-7741609

Vancouver view cone review questioned

 https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/10/05/vancouver-view-cone-review-questioned/

Just put in more Vancouver stumps. The stump agenda is a clever way to hold back Vancouver, it's been that way for generations.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=stumps

The Stack Tower, or is it just another stumpy office building in Vancouver, BC?

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/the-stack-office-tower-1133-melville-street-vancouver-tallest-greenest

It's all about Stumps+and+Towers.

There is no office tower in Vancouver or BC that has ever been allowed to have a 40th floor. Seattle has the 76 story B of A tower & Toronto has the 72 story BMO tower. That's because those cities aren't under anything like the restrictions and limitations that Vancouver has. If you can't build a wall around BC, the next best thing is to limit or reduce the scale of things. Then continually fall behind with the overall infrastructure.

Vancouver not only has limited the scale of office towers, but residential towers as well. It would seem that there is more of a demand now for residential towers than office towers.

Seattle, Calgary & Edmonton all have allowed a residential tower to be taller than anything in Vancouver. 

https://thedigitallabyrinth.blogspot.com/search?q=Vancouver+House

London, UK for the longest time, refused to permit taller buildings. Then eventually as the land became so expensive, they eventually started to allow some towers that even rivaled that of Paris & Frankfurt. Some of the towers would not even be stumps when compared to those in NYC & Chicago.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/no-rooms-at-the-inns-knock-on-effects-of-vancouvers-hotel-shortage If the city would allow taller buildings, then the hotel companies could build more rooms on the lower half, while providing condos on the upper half. Or, visa versa. 

https://storeys.com/vancouver-hotel-shortage-council-motion Fortunatly, many other cities are able to keep up with getting more hotel rooms built. https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/09/08/vancouver-hotels-shortage-city-councillor/

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metro-vancouver-hotel-supply-shortage-demand

https://www.bcbusiness.ca/Land-Values-How-the-hotel-shortage-in-Vancouver-is-coinciding-with-a-boom-in-tourism

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/city-of-vancouver-hotel-room-shortage-new-policies

Of course by the late 1800s, Montreal & Toronto had a sense of becoming major cities. Then by the early & mid 1900s, it became even more apparent. In the early 21st century, Vancouver is still stuck in a multi-decade rut of wanting to stunt, thwart or hold back the city in any way possible.

https://thedigitallabyrinth.blogspot.com/search?q=The+No+Fun+City

Most of the regional bridges or crossings have been deliberately kept so narrow that it's almost impossible to have a proper regional express bus network to compliment the short sighted Skytrain stations.

All the narrow bridges should have had additional Bus+and+HOV+Lane bridges by now.

https://thedigitallabyrinth.blogspot.com/search?q=HOV

The stump city has so much potential, but only if Vancouver reaches for the sky.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=stumps

stumps

 https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/761882461979840318/

The Iron Bridge and the old Champlain Bridge

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champlain_Bridge_(Montreal,_1962-2019) Both became classic 6 lane bottlenecks or chokepoints. That's because more than 6 lanes of traffic connected to such bridges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge An 8 lane bridge with 2 REM tracks. While I would like it to have been 10 or 12 lanes with 4 tracks, its still so much better than what backwards Vancouver would allow. 8 lanes plus 2 HOV lanes & 2 bus lanes, because the REM train isn't running 24 hours.

The+Lion+Bridge+and+The+Iron+Bridge are just too inadequate to be modern transportation crossings.

The inept Lion_Bridge should have had bus & train tunnels built next to it decades ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge An 8 lane road tunnel could allow the Lions-Gate-Bridge to become a foot & bike crossing, but that's what a proper big city would do.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FVfdglQUAAEiQZV?format=jpg&name=large Vancouver Stumps vs. Towers.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouvers-shrinking-skyline Holding Vancouver back is what you do when you symbolically don't want to acomodate growth. Whit so much scaled back infrastructure, who knows where the money went?

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Iron+Bridge  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Lion+Bridge