Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Stubborn Vancouver. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Stubborn Vancouver. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, March 20, 2025

The Typical Vancouver Size Stump Building

 Given that most proper big cities around the world are permitted to build much taller & wider buildings than what is allowed in strict & stubborn Vancouver, BC, a curious thing has happened over the decades. When a tall tower is built in another city, next to it will be a Vancouver size stump of a building. However, the Vancouver stump isn't always part of the complex, The Vancouver Size Stump might be across the street or a block or so away. Yet, such a stumpy building can provide an excellent example of the larger scale that most big cities are allowed to exist upon. 

The Royal_Banck_Centre_in_Vancouver, B.C. The windows only go up to the 36th floor, but there are 3 more levels above that. It's only 475 feet in height and equivalent to 39 floors..
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://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Canadian_Place The windows go up to 72 stories, plus a few levels above that. The BMO tower in Toronto is about twice the height of the RBC in Vancouver. The 32 story BMO tower in Vancouver is a stump when compared to the 72 story BMO tower in TO.

The Scotia_Tower in Vancouver, stands at 138 m or 35 storeys tall and completed in 1977. 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Scotia_Tower_Vancouver The windows only go up to 34, but there are a few levels above that. The Toronto version has its windows go right to the 68th floor. Its twice the height & twice the width as the stump in backwater Vancouver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotia_Plaza 275 m (902 ft) with 68 floors.

A Vancouver Size stump in tall Toronto.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_Tower It's a 36 storey 146 m (479 ft) tower in the First Canadian Place complex of TorontoOntario, Canada. Due to the strict zoning restrictions in Vancouver, its difficult to even have an office building with 36 floors.

A Vancouver Size Stump in Perth, WA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_Tower,_Perth It's a 40-storey skyscraper in PerthWestern Australia. Completed in 1992, the 146-metre (479 ft). Stubborn Vancouver just won't permit any office building to have a 40th floor. 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Perth_skyline_from_KS1%2C_November_2017.jpg The former AMP has become a stump in Perth, yet in Vancouver, it would still be a predominant tower. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/140_St_Georges_Terrace "140 St Georges Terrace is a 30-storey skyscraper in Perth, Western Australia. Opened in 1975, the 131-metre (430 ft) tower was known as the AMP Building..."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Elizabeth_Quay_February_2016_%28cropped%29.jpg/640px-Elizabeth_Quay_February_2016_%28cropped%29.jpg The former AMP is a good example the stump size building that stubborn Vancouver wants to hold onto. 





Vancouver is a very tiny part of the BC land area. Even in the Greater Vancouver Region, Vancouver is a small component. Thus, while stubborn Vancouver wants to keep its stumpy agenda, other BC cities are more accepting of allowing significantly taller structures. https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?stateID=1&status=15


Monday, December 29, 2025

No fireworks in downtown Vancouver for New Year's Eve or the rest of 2026

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-fireworks-2026-new-years-eve-nye 

While Vancouver hasn't been able to get most other cities across Canada and around the world to stop, ban or cancel their NY Eve fireworks, strange Vancouver will retain this part of its NO FUN CITY mentality and agenda. 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/local-news/fireworks-banned-halloween-vancouver-fire-department-9726922 Why just ban them in October and January, when you can ban them throughout the year? 

https://www.ehnewspaper.ca/articles/third-year-of-vancouvers-fireworks-ban

For some strange reason, backwards Vancouver hasn't been able to get other cities around the world to adopt the same bizarre idiosyncrasies.  

Officially, there isn't supposed to be a Vancouver+Mind+Virus, but the backwards city is so stunted and strange. Other cities in a scenic setting such as SydneyAucklandSan_Francisco and Seattle are able to have wider bridges in or close to their city centers. 

Despite warm and scenic Honolulu having some very short bridges, they are still wider than what extremely restrictive Vancouver allows. These two short bridges in Honolulu provide 4 lanes each way. Thus, they form an 8 lane crossing and they aren't even part of a freeway.  

There is also a very short 6 lane bridge in Honolulu. In addition to its 6 lanes, there is a turning lane and a one lane wide median, which makes it equivalent to being 8 lanes wide. Plus, there are 2 wide sidewalks, which are wider than the original sidewalks on the Granville Bridge in Vancouver. In other words, no bridge in Vancouver is allowed to be as wide as it. Despite regional population growth, the Granville Bridge was reduced from 8 lanes to 6 lanes. 

Considering how Vancouver has such a narrow road system, one would think that a regional network of bus and bike bridges would be essential. Of course the backwards city and greater urban region is too cheap to fund such infrastructure and rather opted for a congestive transportation approach.

In contrast, The+Helix+Bridge in Singapore is fine example of what backwards Vancouver refuses to build. No lanes had to be removed from the 6 lane Bayfront+Bridge or the 10 lane Benjamin+Sheares+Bridge. Stubborn Vancouver could really benefit from something like the Helix Bridge. 

While Vancouver went backwards after Expo 86, Brisbane really took of after Expo 88. The Kangaroo_Point_Green_BridgeGoodwill_BridgeKurilpa_BridgeJack_Pesch_Bridge and the Go_Between_Bridge are all great examples of what strange Vancouver refuses to build. What's really amazing from a backwater Vancouver perspective is that those bike and foot bridges in Brisbane never required any lanes to be removed from the cities road bridges. 

In comparison, Vancouver removed 2 lanes from the Burrard Bridge, 1 lane from the Cambie Bridge and 2 lanes from the Granville Bridge. If urban planning in Vancouver was wise and the city never got rid of its trams or streetcars, perhaps something like the Tilikum_Crossing could have been built across False_Creek.


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

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. 

Saturday, July 12, 2025

Vancouver's forgotten streetcars and interurban trams

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/transportation-old/interurban-streetcar-hydrogen-rail-line-fraser-valley-bc-1942783

Fortunately, Toronto, NO, SF and Melbourne never got rid of all their streetcar and tram lines.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/downtown-vancouver-false-creek-streetcar-route-map

While backwards Vancouver wanted to be among the first cities to get rid of them, Vancouver will likely be one of the last cities to bring them back.

https://viewpointvancouver.ca/2021/04/06/a-bump-in-the-road-kits-points-hidden-streetcar-line/

Atlanta, SD, LA, Edmonton, Calgary, Seattle & Portland brought back some of their trollies in the form of modern LRT or tram-trains.

https://montecristomagazine.com/community/vancouvers-forgotten-streetcars

The sad irony is that Vancouver, Burnaby & NW really could have benefitted from following the Toronto, SF and Melbourne examples. 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/history/last-ride-oak-streetcar-vancouver-1937040

https://www.facebook.com/groups/128486813979056/posts/1968090176685368

 https://maps.nicholsonroad.com/bcer/

https://humantransit.org/2010/02/vancouver-the-almost-perfect-grid.html

There used too be a streetcar route along Robson St., Denman St. & Davie St. A revived version of this could provide a nice downtown transit loop. However, that would go against the backwards mentality of Vancouver. Fortunately, the Stubborn+Vancouver mentality never made it to Atlanta & Dallas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_Streetcar#Downtown_Loop_route_funded

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

Unfortunatly, Vancouver & BC are all about congestive planning.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/2026-fifa-world-cup-vancouver-1.7559067

With less than a year to go, its impossible to revive any streetcar lines, because that can take 5-10 years. There isn't even a network of regional bus bridges. Such inept transportation planning means that busses have to squeeze onto bridges that are mostly just 2 lanes each way. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-rising-costs-fifa-2026-world-cup-1.7573669

Despite the first SkyTrain line opening in 1985, it took until 2025 to start having5 car trains. The 2nd & 3rd lines are still only running 2 car trains.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/vancouver-short-on-hotel-rooms-silent-on-safety-costs-for-2026-world-cup/

Of course the city is decades behind in keeping up with having enough hotel rooms.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-hotel-shortage-2026-world-cup-1.7117696

https://vancouverfwc26.ca 

https://www.fifa.com/en/tournaments/mens/worldcup/canadamexicousa2026/articles/vancouver-host-seven-matches-canada-stadium-bc-place


https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Trams-Trains+and+Streetcars

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Why is Metro Vancouver Creating a New Downtown?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybMhTlj-l5s 

Unlike Seattle and Calgary, Vancouver has no office towers over 50 stories. There aren't even any 40 story office towers in BC. Vancouver is firmly against permitting any office tower from having a 40th floor. However, Vancouver cant stop Burnaby and especially Surrey from having an office tower over 40 stories. While a 50 story office tower anywhere in backwater BC still seems unlikely, Burnaby and Surrey will likely be the first 2 cities in BC to have at least a 45 story office tower. 

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/50-storey-tower-community-hub-edmonds-burnaby 

So far, stubborn and strict Vancouver has only permitted 2 buildings to be taller than the tallest in Bellevue,_Washington

Vancouver has only permitted one building to be taller than the tallest in Vaughan, Ontario.

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/cg-tower/32139 

Since Burnaby and Surrey aren't under the backwards and thwarting restrictions that Vancouver has, Burnaby and eventually Surrey, will have taller buildings than stumpy Vancouver. Indeed, Burnaby already has some buildings taller than Downtown_Bellevue. Surrey will eventually have some buildings taller than the Vaughan_Metropolitan_Centre.          

Vancouver will continue to limit the height of its buildings for as long as possible. Vancouver won't allow a bus and train tunnel near the lion Bridge, let alone a 6 lane highway tunnel. Despite the Iron Bridge needing a parallel bus bridge and a Skytrain bridge, progress remains at a snail's pace. There still seems to be no interest in building a bus bridge next to the Oak and Knight Bridges. A city on the moon and Mars might happen before stubborn Vancouver ever builds a new Fraser Street bus & bike bridge. Not only should there be a Boundary Road Bridge to Richmond, but at least a Boundary bus & bike bridge to the North Vancouver.  

Its like backwards BC keeps hoping that by symbolically refusing to build up proper big city size transportation infrastructure, people will stay away. However, its only because no one has been able to effectively challenge the bottleneck-chokepoint mentality, that not much has been done.

Wednesday, September 27, 2023

Some Vancouver ‘view cones’ could be scrapped under proposed review

 https://globalnews.ca/news/9990941/vancouver-view-cone-review

Toronto, Calgary & Edmonton are allowed to build taller than what's in Montreal. Of course stubborn watered down Vancouver is an exception.

Vancouver & BC was unable to build a wall or generate a forcefield around it like something out of STAR TREK. Thus, a stunted approach was implemented, which was all about slowing down the influx of people. Vancouver doesn't have the authority to restrict Canadian immigration or restrict people from moving into the region from other parts of Canada.  

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-view-cones-review-housing-impacts-motion

At a certain point, the BC part of Canada will be forced to put more money into proper size infrastructure.

https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/protecting-vancouvers-views.aspx This has been such an ingenious way to hold the city back. So much of BC is mountainous wilderness that will never be blocked out.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-view-cone-restrictions-policies

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouvers-shrinking-skyline Fortunatly, Vancouver doesn't have control over the entire region, so the demand for taller buildings is still possible in the surrounding area.

So many urban restrictions were put into Vancouver during the 1970s, 80s and 90s by a mostly White power structure. In theory, if a city & urban area is continually stunted like Greater Vancouver, then less people will be likely to move there. Calgary & Seattle were never under anything like the extreme Vancouver limitations. Thus, those cities have much taller buildings, wider roads & bridges & any of their underground train stations are much longer than what Vancouver has ever built. The Toronto Subway & the Montreal Metro have stations that are at least 152m or about 500 feet, when stunted Vancouver only built 50m to 80m Skytrain stations.

If Vancouver was ever allowed to become a big city & region like SydneySan_Francisco & Montreal, that would mean accommodating more people of color. It's not that the predominantly White power structure of the 1970s, 80s and 90s officially had a, KEEP THEM OUT agenda, but any slow growth initiative can certainly slow down the influx of people & the local economy. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-tower-building-shadowing-solar-access

Indeed, by continually promoting a half size approach to such stunted infrastructure, it shows a reluctance towards accommodating more people. As it so happens, most of the people on the planet aren't of European descent. Thus, anly slow growth initiative is a very clever way to, KEEP PEOPLE OUT. Unfortunately, even if there is finally enough people that want Vancouver & other parts of BC to have big cities, there is quite a tangled mess of laws, ordinances & restrictions that would have to be changed.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/larwill-park-office-towers-vancouver-concept

One would think that especially for a region such as Greater Vancouver with so many narrow roads & streets, there should have been a metro on the scale of what Montreal has. But so much about Vancouver & BC is about congestive planning.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-2017-kevin-desmond-canada-line-built-skytrain Why build 152m long stations linke in Montreal & Toronto when you can build absurd 50m stations? This is a fine example of the reluctance to build without allowing for future expansion. Don't think like a big city or urban region where a train could eventually reach the ferry terminals. It's much better to take the congestion approach.


https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=building+shadowing+policies

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line

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

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Urban Tech Links .:. UTL

UTL - Personal observations of the urban world from a backwards Vancouver and backwater BC perspective. Indeed, it's always amazing to see what so many other cities can do, simply because they don't have anything like a Vancouver, Victoria & BC mentality to hold them back.

The Greater_Tokyo_Area is the most populated urban region on the planet.
https://wikimedia.org/Sand_Island_and_Honolulu.jpg Honolulu hasn't permitted any buildings to be as tall as what is in Miami, LA or SF. Indeed, Honolulu, has avoided having a Singapore or especially a HK size skyline. So far, no building has been allowed to be as tall as the Custom_House_Tower in Boston or the Smith_Tower in Seattle. Indeed, no buildings are even allowed to be as tall as the Los_Angeles_City_Hall at 453 feet or 138m.
https://wikimedia.org/Perth_airport.JPG No building in Vancouver is allowed to be as tall as the 2 tallest in Perth & Calgary.
Honolulu and 
Perth, WA are in such nice climate zones. They are a couple of the most isolated major cities on the planet. 
In some ways, Australia has been able to surpass Canada, despite it having a smaller land area & less population than Canada. Unlike Montreal & especially Vancouver, Perth & especially Melbourne, Sydney & Brisbane, have allowed several taller buildings than what is allowed in Montreal & Vancouver. 
However, Honolulu's_tallest_buildings still haven't been permitted to even be as tall as the 2 tallest in the Giza_pyramid_complex in Cairo, Egypt

Urban Tech Links is a basic blog about referencing tall buildings & urban technology in various cities in general. Thus, it's mostly just a list of various urban and tech links. It's also about comparing various cities & infrastructure.
Some cities like to have narrow bridges, short trains & small buildings, like Vancouver, while many others cities reach for the sky
There is a point when a lot of major cities start to permit buildings to be taller than the 2 tallest pyramids in Egypt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramids 
Paris & London, NYC & Chicago, Tokyo & Seoul...  


The BC part of Canada has tried to keep its infrastructure as small as possible for as long as possible.
It wasn't until the 1970s when strict & stubborn Vancouver started to allow for some buildings to be almost as tall as the 2 tallest Egyptian pyramids. https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=105524651&offset=50 

1973 Royal_Centre_(Vancouver) not quite as tall as .:.
1977 Harbour_Centre not counting the flagpole, its still shorter than the original height of the tallest Egyptian pyramid.
2001 One_Wall_Centre, not including its spire, was the first building in Vancouver & BC to be taller than the tallest pyramid in Egypt

For most of Vancouver's history, the city refused to permit any building to be taller than the pyramid on top of the 496' Custom_House_Tower in Boston, the 462' Smith_Tower in Seattle, the 453' Los_Angeles_City_Hall. Of course today they are all just like stumps. 481' and 471' are the original heights of the 2 tallest in the Giza_pyramid_complex.
https://wikimedia.org/Pyramids_of_the_Giza_Necropolis.jpg
https://wikimedia.org/Kheops-Pyramid.jpg
"Initially standing at 146.6 metres (481 feet), the Great Pyramid was the world's tallest human-made structure for more than 3,800 years. Over time, most of the smooth white limestone casing was removed, which lowered the pyramid's height to the current 138.5 metres (454.4 ft)" 
HeightOriginal: 146.6 m (481 ft) or 280 cubits
Current: 138.5 m (454 ft)
HeightCurrently: 136.4 metres (448 ft)
Original: 143.5 m (471 ft; 274 cu)

"The 1997 study noted that the opportunities for buildings significantly exceeding existing permitted heights were limited. There were a total of five sites where buildings exceeding the 450 foot height limit are possible and two sites in the northwest corner of the Central Business District where heights up to 400 feet (exceeding the 300 foot limit) could be considered." https://council.vancouver.ca/20030515/pe2.htm

Indeed, it's tough to believe that for the longest time, any building in the BC part of Canada had to be considerably shorter than the Washington_Monument in DC or the Philadelphia_City_Hall.

Then Vancouver wouldn't permit any building to be as tall as the Cairo_Tower
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Tower "At 187 m (614 ft), it was the tallest structure in Egypt for 37 years until 1998..."
2016 was when a Hotel-Condo was allowed to be slightly taller than the Cairo-Tower

The Cairo_Flagpole is the world's tallest flagpole, at 201.952 m (662 ft 7 in) tall. No building in Vancouver is allowed to be as tall.
The Living_Shangri-La tower is close, but not quite.
Of course Vancouver, BC & even Canada can't stop Egypt from building big & tall.
{The origin of Al-Qahirah is said to come from the appearance of the planet Mars during the foundation of the City of Cairo. The planet Mars, which in Greek was called Ares, was associated with ruin or destruction and was called Al Najm Al Qahir in Arabic. Al Najm Al Qahir is transliterated as "the destroyer star [planet]".} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo#Etymology


https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/the-cairo-washington-dc Washinton, DC made sure that going into the 20th century, it was going to have mostly low rise buildings like Paris & London or Berlin. However, the Greater Paris Region would eventually allow some tall buildings in certain areas. London even moreso. Yet, Greater London & Metropolitan Paris, certainly have allowed some tall buildings. 

Vancouver has been under a multigenerational set of restrictions as well as a small thinking & planning agenda. Part of this might be attributed to a backwater BC mentality. However, some parts of Greater Vancouver are allowed to build on a grander scale.

Edmonton, Seattle, Portland & eventually Calgary will all have underground train stations longer than what's in Vancouver. Yet, Vancouver could have really benefited from having proper big city long stations. Most of the regions bridges are so narrow that its difficult to have a proper bus lane & HOV lane system. But Vancouver & BC are all about inefficiency. Things might eventually improve if enough people someday start to see the growing gap between what most cities allow vs. stubborn Vancouver.

https://metropolisfilm.fandom.com/wiki/Joh_Frederson

Alphaville is one of the best cautionary stories about the AI run, totalitarian smart-city scenario. 

THX_1138 is the quintessential movie about AI & machines running an underground totalitarian city. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THX_1138#Plot

Logan's_Run is another interesting totalitarian smart-city movie. 

Blade_Runner is one of the best urban Sci-Fi movies ever made.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner#Plot

Jacque_Fresco is one of many people throughout history with their own perspectives on civilization. https://www.forbes.com/2007/10/13/jacque-fresco-prediction-tech-future07-cx_1015fresco.html?sh=4107813c607f Some interesting ideas, but perhaps with a utopian angle.


http://www.city-data.com/forum/religion-spirituality/845605-humans-originate-mars.html,
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/marte/esp_marte_14.htm,
http://mars-earth.com/earthpage.htm

http://fusionanomaly.net/orion.htmlhttp://fusionanomaly.net/bladerunner.html,
http://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowledge/connection-between-sirius-and-human-history

More about, UDLhttps://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=urban

https://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/11/3318910/nasa-scientist-believes-we-could-all-be-in-a-video-game
Civilization_(computer_game)


The Universe seems to be a vast Multi-channel of space & time that originated from a central point of energy. But what or who started this Big_Bang of cosmic information? Its like a cosmic projection program running inside an immense planetarium. The energy of nature or part of a creators plan. Thus either nature or a conscious creator has set up a cosmic matrix of space & time. Humans are just beginning to try to understand how an intelligent force of creation set this all up. Computer models factor into the study of reality & VR helps to illustrate different phases & parts of the universe.
-
-


The Hundredth_monkey_effect isn't supposed to be true, but in backwards Vancouver & backwater BC, it does seem to be happening. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_monkey_effect#History
Almost everything in Vancouver is like a watered down knockoff. So many people from different backgrounds keep wanting to hold Vancouver back. The NO FUN CITY mentality keeps emerging, but that's just part of the phenomenon.


This reference blog is of a non profit nature.  


Friday, November 29, 2024

Cambie Street Bridge repairs choke traffic out of downtown Vancouver

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cambie-bridge-repairs-choke-traffic-downtown

Of course Vancouver won't build anything like the Boorloo_Bridge for bikes & pedestrians. Apparently, it's much better to take a lane away from the Cambie Bridge. 

Fortunately, the backward Vancouver mentality never made it over to Perth. Otherwise, the The_Third_Causeway bridge would have had 1 or 2 lanes removed.

With 6 lanes, The_Causeway_in_Victoria_Park, Perth provides a nice 6 lane crossing. Unlike backward Vancouver the Causeway in Perth was allowed to have 3 lanes each way. The key component is that the 3rd lane each way is for busses. In contrast, absurd Vancouver won't allow for a proper bus & bike bridge network to be built, because it would rather keep its bridges as narrow & congested as possible. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Causeway_-_Victoria_Park.JPG

It's very strange that Vancouver refused to have something like the 6 lane Causeway+Bridge in the 21st century. A 3rd lane each way for buses on the Causeway+Bridge makes so much sense in Perth. However, for stubborn Vancouver, such measures might help to improve mobility.

Apparently, Vancouver has no plans to build something like the Boorloo_Bridge or the Esplanade+Riel+Footbridge next to the Cambie & Burrard Bridges. Thus, the Cambie has lost a lane & the Burrard has lost 2 lanes. Had both bridges been allowed to retain 6 lanes, they both could have provided 2 bus lanes.

The Cushing+Bridge is a 4 lane bridge in Calgary. Thus, like the Oak Bridge & Knight Bridge in Vancouver, there was no room for 2 bus lanes on them. Unlike, backward Vancouver, Calgary was able to build a 2 lane bus bridge right next to its Cushing+Bridge.

Fortunately, the horrible transportation planning mentality of Vancouver was never adopted in Perth & Calgary. Either you have a wide enough bridge for busses, or you build bus & bike bridges to help the existing bridges.

The Norwood+Bridge in Winnipeg provides at least 6 lanes, so a couple of bus lanes isn't a problem.

Singapore built its Helix_Bridge instead of removing lanes from the other bridges.


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

Monday, May 18, 2026

Long lost traffic lanes of Greater Vancouver

 https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1tfsdxg/long_lost_days One of the few major streets within Vancouver to be at least 6 lanes wide. However, with curb lane parking it just becomes another 4 lane corridor in BC.

https://www.vancouverarchives.ca/wp-content/uploads/cropped-a9b22bf7-d985-4372-9650-7a51afbe5f94-2010-006.161-2-3.jpg This part of Granville used to have 6 lanes. The 1970s mall reduced it to just 2 lanes, causing an instant bus bottleneck-chokepoint. A 4 lane compromise still would have allowed for wider sidewalks. A 4 lane transit mall could have allowed for a constant passing lane when another bus has stopped. It was as if someone didn't want to have an efficient bus corridor for express buses, as well as local busses. When a local bus stops on a 2 lane street, its impossible for an express bus to pass, especially when there is a stopped bus on the other lane, also preventing any express bus to pass.

Several cities around the world still have wide streets, boulevards and avenues with 8-10 lanes. If Vancouver had allowed some 8 lane wide streets, 2 curb parking lanes would still provide 6 traffic lanes. Then, if 2 lanes were for buses, there would still be 2 lanes each way for general traffic.

The public and then the planning department (after being pressured) were firmly against having freeways within the city limits during the 1960s and 70s. However, there still should have been enough logic to allow for wider streets so that it would be easier and more efficient to have a bus lane each way. 

As of 2026, no bridge within the Vancouver city limits has 8 lanes and only two bridges have 6 lanes. One has 5 lanes and then there are four 4 lane bridges and the 3 lane Lion Bridge joke. 

All of the Vancouver bridges are so narrow that there was no provision for any future bus lanes. Plus, 2 bridges each had 2 lanes removed that could have been used for buses. Congestive transportation planning is the name of the game for backwards Vancouver. If there ever was a city that needs a series of bus bridges, it would be stubborn Vancouver. 

Even the Greater Vancouver region is lacking in having a series of bus bridges, especially since the Skytrain isn't a 24 hour system.


https://www.vancouverarchives.ca/2011/04/18/how-did-harland-bartholomews-ideas-shape-vancouver

https://archive.org/details/vancplanincgen00vanc The Bartholomew Plan published in 1928.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vancouver-archives/albums/72157626484421302/ 

https://globalcivic.org/harland-bartholomew/

https://www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca/2010/lectures/Sept21_presentations/2_TheBasics.pdf 

https://samsullivan.ca/taking-a-closer-look-at-the-legacy-of-harland-bartholomew-and-his-plan-for-vancouver-2 , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIuAk1TIKHo

https://archive.org/details/planforcityofvan00vanc 1930

Saturday, April 19, 2025

The narrow bridges of Vancouver, Canada

https://montecristomagazine.com/community/forgotten-bridges-vancouver

The LGB just wasn't designed with any future capacity in mind. 

History of the Lions Gate Bridge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHqi7Kijedw 

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

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Lions_Gate.jpg 

The inadequate 3 lane LGB is currently the most narrow road bridge in backwards & stubborn Vancouver. It's been in that category since the removal of the 2 lane Fraser Street Bridge in the 1970s. There was a refusal to twin the absurdly narrow LGB between the 1950s & 1970s. By the 1980s there should have been a subway tunnel and an 8 lane tunnel. Then two of the lanes could have been for buses. Georgia+Street is 7 lanes wide as it gets closer to Stanley Park. Thus, the main part of a tunnel through the park could have provided 3 general lanes each way & a bus lane each way. Instead, the 7 lanes of the westernmost part of Georgia Street are funneled into a 3 lane causeway & a 3 lane bridge. The LGB would be fantastic as just a bike & foot crossing, with train, bus & road tunnels well beneath & beside it.    

The Burrard_Bridge, BB or  BSB opened with 6 lanes, but now it only has 4 lanes. There are 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. Had a parallel bike-bridge been built, the BB could have still had 6 lanes. While the BB has a lower level provision for streetcars or tram-trains, Vancouver did its damndest to phase out streetcars well before the 1960s. 

The Ironworkers_Memorial_Bridge has 6 lanes, but should also have had 2 wide shoulders & 2 very wide sidewalks. Unfortunatly, there was no provision for a lower deck, as is also the case with all of the other Vancouver  bridges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing

Any replacement of the inadequate Ironworkers+Memorial+Bridge should be on the scale of what Perth, Seattle and Montreal have done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granville_Street_Bridge#Third_bridge_(1954)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=vPSdF0jRTC4 The Granville-Bridge or GSB is the widest bridge in the city limits. It opened with 8 lanes, but is being transformed into a 6 lane bridge with 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. Had there been a paralel bike & foot bride, the GSB could have still been 8 lanes wide. Then there could have been 2 exclusive bus lanes.

https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/granville-bridge-connector.aspx

The Oak Street Bridge should have been 8 lanes wide, with 2 wide sidewalks.

The Knight+Street+Bridge should have been 8 lanes with 2 wide sidewalks. Instead, its a 4 lane chokepoint.

The Arthur+Laing+Bridge should have been at least 6 lanes with 2 proper bike lanes & 2 sidewalks.

If the Cambie_Street_Bridge had 2 very wide sidewalks, then its likely that it would still have 6 lanes instead of 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambie_Bridge#The_present_bridge

Unfortunatly, bottleneck or chokepoint planning is part of the Vancouver & BC mentality.

Of course BC & the Metro+Vancouver Region just hasn't put enough funds and effort towards proper big-city planning & infrastructure development. 

If Perth+and+Seattle had to conform to the extremely restrictive Vancouver approach to things, those cities would be in a perpetual state of chaos. Fortunately, nothing like the BC Mind Virus has ever reached WA.


https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+and+Granville+Street 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+Bridge OSB

Friday, May 1, 2026

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. 

Friday, October 3, 2025

Fahrenheit 451 (1953 Novel) and height limits

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 Two decades before Ray_Bradbury would start writing what would eventually lead to his F 451 novel, LA was sort of close to imposing a 451 foot height limit. However, the LA City Hall would end up being slightly taller than 451 feet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall "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." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall#History  

https://laist.com/news/entertainment/city-hall-tall 454' not 451 feet, but close nonetheless. LA didn't have to wait until 1953, because it was pondering a 450'-455 foot height restriction in the mid to late 1920s. Of course NYC and Chicago already had tall buildings in the 1920s, so perhaps LA wanted to symbolize an F-U to them by keeping buildings under 500 feet until the mid to late 1960s. 

"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#Writing_and_development 

F 451 was published in 1953, on 10-19.   

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13079982-fahrenheit-451 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451#Historical_and_biographical_context 

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/451/summary  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451#Writing_and_development  


Did Metropolis_(1927_film) help to restrict the height of tall buildings in LA for several decades? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(1927_film)#Influences  

Whether the LA City Hall is 454', 453' or 452 feet, it's not exactly 451 feet, but still close enough. 

https://www.latimes.com/visuals/photography/la-me-fw-archives-20190403-htmlstory.html "The 32-story, 454-foot-tall Los Angeles City Hall opened with a three-day public celebration April 26-28, 1928. Construction started in 1926."

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/city-hall/4376 138.4 m / 454 ft 

https://buildingsdb.com/CA/los-angeles/los-angeles-city-hall "The Los Angeles City Hall reaches an architectural height of 453ft (138m). It has a total of 32 floors, 28 above ground and 4 basements..."  

https://www.travelinusa.us/visit-los-angeles-city-hall "At the time of construction, a regulation was in effect in the city that prohibited buildings taller than 150 feet. Los Angeles City Hall was therefore an exception and, at an impressive 32 stories and a height of 452 feet, it remained the tallest building in Los Angeles until 1964 when Union Bank Plaza opened." 

https://waterandpower.org/Museum2/Los_Angeles_City_Hall_1928.html 

https://www.c40.org/cities/los-angeles 

By the 1970s, LA, SF, Sydney, Melbourne, Tokyo, Toronto, Montreal and Paris, all had some buildings over 600 feet or even over 200 m. 

https://www.c40.org/cities/vancouver 

Unfortunately by the 1970s, stubborn and backwards Vancouver wanted to go in the opposite direction of most cities. Thus, a kind of censoring agenda was implemented. SF and Sydney and even Seattle, proved that a scenic city by the water can have taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains than what little Vancouver would allow.

While there isn't any direct correlation with the F 451 story and Vancouver, BC imposing a height limit, there is something peculiar. Some people might consider that if a building is around 500 feet in height, or at least 150 m, that's in the category of starting to be a tall building. 

Well, Vancouver, always looking for ways to symbolically project a watered down or scaled back city, height restrictions were at the top of the list. 

Somewhere in-between the 1950s & 60s, Vancouver started to refine its height restriction mandate. Thus, as several cities in the 1970s started to allow for taller buildings, Vancouver has never allowed any office tower to have 40 floors. Perhaps an imposed 451 foot height limit would have been too obvious, so Vancouver generally had an imposed height restriction of 450 feet, with some occasional variations. 

Right through the 1960s only one building in Vancouver, or anywhere in BC had a 30th floor.

The first residential building to have at least 40 floors. https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=921 1973 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=110144876&page=3 

The first residential building to have more than 45 floors. https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=3 2001 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=110144876&page=6

It wouldn't be until the early 21st century before Vancouver would permit 2 buildings to rise above 600 feet. https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=110144876&page=8 , https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=110144876&page=9 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?countryID=1 Vancouver has no building that makes it onto the first page. Burnaby just barely makes it. 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=110144876&page=10 However, Vancouver has another chance to actually have some taller buildings. https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?countryID=1&status=15 Over the decades, various plans have been stopped, due to all the red tape B$ and extreme restrictions. 

Vancouver has had quite a history of limiting, restricting, thwarting & censoring proper big city stuff. 


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