You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Anyone think we could ever be as dense as Tokyo or Seoul in the future in specific communities like Brentwood/Metro/No.3 Road
This is already the case in the West End which has a population density of ~19k/sq km versus Tokyo's 6,300/sq km. Vancouver proper is actually at 5700/sq km.
If you're comparing to Tokyo's densest neighbourhoods we have Shinjuku at 19k/sq km and Shibuya at 15k/sq km (Edit: For the same population density as the West End I'd rather go live in Shinjuku or Shibuya, both are way fucking cooler than the West End)
For reference Manhattan is at 28k/sq km and Central London is at 10k/sq km.
Vancouver is decently dense (densest city in Canada with a population over 5,000), it's the other cities around it that are not - Burnaby is only 40% as dense for example (fucking joke IMO) and Richmond is even lower (understandably though).
Personally, over the years, I've come to the conclusion that attitudes are too stubborn with respect to housing and development for us to see the change that we need to solve affordability and supply challenges.
I mean, look at this thread, particularly over the last few pages. There are many complaints about density, including changes in the suburbs, such as the Tri-Cities or Burnaby. Given that most people here are under the age of 50, we can't blame the older generations for their attitudes.
I don't have a problem with density, but I have a problem with infrastructure that cannot support the density. Brentwood is a great example of an area that has a hard time supporting the density.
The Broadway subway is good, the Canada Line was good if under built. We'll see if they smarten up and build the Broadway subway with more future planning in mind. The road structures are all undersized for the amount of cars that are on the road, and transit is too often a chicken or egg scenario where the question of do you build it first and let it run a deficit for a few years and wait for use to ramp up, or build as we grow. Building as we grow isn't actually a viable answer for some types of transit.
I would like to see them start bringing on double decker busses more as it's a much more efficient use of road space than a bendy bus.
Density from SFH right to 60 story towers is a mistake, there needs to be an in-between as we transition. Otherwise the infrastructure will be instantly overloaded a la Oakridge in 5 years.
Brentwood is the way it is because Burnaby residents who own SFH would never allow gentle density in their neighbourhoods. It's easier politically to have residents complain about traffic, rather than having 6 storey towers or stacked townhouses that take away street parking from homeowners with 50 foot lots.
Density from SFH right to 60 story towers is a mistake, there needs to be an in-between as we transition. Otherwise the infrastructure will be instantly overloaded a la Oakridge in 5 years.
I don't know if it's in-between enough, but the bit behind metrotown was low rise rentals. It's all becoming high rise right now and it's a shit show on Beresford and Patterson/Willingdon. It's also a shit show at the skytrain station because the got rid of the bridge. The dumb fucks.
zoning and the way car culture influences city planning will never have us in the same breath as cities like tokyo or seoul
here you got cities zoning land for dedicated use like a mall where they expect everyone to go there for groceries, shopping, jungle gym (or whatever the fuck). what you have then is a problem where it creates congestion and yet to address that type of issue requires huge amount of investment in transit infrastructure that no politician is willing to stake their reputation and pay the fuck up (cuz we will bitch about the inefficient and waste of tax payer dollars on such mega projects)
if you look at asian cities, every couple of km u'll get hubs and within those dubs u get mixed use zoning where there's commercial and residential so groceries and shopping can be done by foot and even if its a bit further, its supported by transit
asian cities play 4d chess while we are still playing checkers when it comes to city planning
also we got retards that want to make us like amsterdam and just build bike lands everywhere without the forethought of yet again, how we need to rethink the way we zone and approach land use
only example that comes close locally that i know of is prolly victoria drive area and even that is being slowly developed away
Sonick is a genius. I won't go into detail what's so great about his post. But it's damn good!
2010 Toyota Rav4 Limited V6 - Wifey's Daily Driver
2009 BMW 128i - Daily Driver
2007 Toyota Rav4 Sport V6 - Sold
1999 Mazda Miata - Sold
2003 Mazda Protege5 - Sold
1987 BMW 325is - Sold
1990 Mazda Miata - Sold
zoning and the way car culture influences city planning will never have us in the same breath as cities like tokyo or seoul
here you got cities zoning land for dedicated use like a mall where they expect everyone to go there for groceries, shopping, jungle gym (or whatever the fuck). what you have then is a problem where it creates congestion and yet to address that type of issue requires huge amount of investment in transit infrastructure that no politician is willing to stake their reputation and pay the fuck up (cuz we will bitch about the inefficient and waste of tax payer dollars on such mega projects)
if you look at asian cities, every couple of km u'll get hubs and within those dubs u get mixed use zoning where there's commercial and residential so groceries and shopping can be done by foot and even if its a bit further, its supported by transit
asian cities play 4d chess while we are still playing checkers when it comes to city planning
also we got retards that want to make us like amsterdam and just build bike lands everywhere without the forethought of yet again, how we need to rethink the way we zone and approach land use
only example that comes close locally that i know of is prolly victoria drive area and even that is being slowly developed away
Honestly this doesn’t fly in western society.
People don’t want to go to 5 different places to get groceries and do their shopping lugging around shit into transit or walking. It’s not just a Canada or Vancouver thing, western society as a whole doesn’t like it.
Neither do I really. I’ve never been to Asia but places like France, Italy, etc. operate similarly to places like japan to some degree and I find it super annoying/waste of time personally
__________________
Dank memes cant melt steel beams
Well... places like Japan people barely cook too, a lot of condos don't even have a stove top or if they do it's got 1 or 2 burners at most... but there are so many small nutrition filled meals available literally everywhere for almost no cost, so they don't need to.
You can easily have lunch in Tokyo at numerous places for $5CAD... but they also eat way less than we do and are tiny humans in comparison lol.. they also don't need to eat elaborately, they're happy to go in a place sit down and munch a bowl of rice with some meat sauce on top or a fairly simple little soup with some meat in it. People here would bitch about it not being enough or too rushed.
People don’t want to go to 5 different places to get groceries and do their shopping lugging around shit into transit or walking. It’s not just a Canada or Vancouver thing, western society as a whole doesn’t like it.
Neither do I really. I’ve never been to Asia but places like France, Italy, etc. operate similarly to places like japan to some degree and I find it super annoying/waste of time personally
I already do that but I have to do it in my car. In a typical month I'll visit Costco, Whole Foods, Save-On, T&T, and one of my preferred butchers b/c not one of those places has everything I need.
When I lived in Victoria I was walking distance to a Save-On, a bakery, and a few simple restaurants. It was GREAT not having to jump into my car for a short trip to grab something. When I lived near Joyce skytrain I'd pop into the mom and pop grocery stores after work and/or walk over to Safeway as needed (a bit far) and that was also awesome. Because of the convenience I didn't need to stock up so I never picked up more than a bag or two of groceries so it wasn't a big lift to walk it home.
I don't have a problem with density, but I have a problem with infrastructure that cannot support the density. Brentwood is a great example of an area that has a hard time supporting the density.
The Burnaby town centers are all poorly designed and mostly unlivable. The best one is probably Highgate but it's not close to the Skytrain station. It's a tragedy cause good town centers exist and they're amazing places to live for a lot of people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoFire
The Broadway subway is good, the Canada Line was good if under built. We'll see if they smarten up and build the Broadway subway with more future planning in mind. The road structures are all undersized for the amount of cars that are on the road, and transit is too often a chicken or egg scenario where the question of do you build it first and let it run a deficit for a few years and wait for use to ramp up, or build as we grow. Building as we grow isn't actually a viable answer for some types of transit.
Something like 25-30% of all land in the lower mainland is already used for roads and parking so adding more roads isn't really a viable strategy especially considering how valuable land is. The more feasible solution is figuring out how to get more cars off the road - that's stuff like more walkable neighborhoods, more bike lanes (they carry more people than roads do), more transit (buses are WAY more efficient than cars).
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoFire
I would like to see them start bringing on double decker busses more as it's a much more efficient use of road space than a bendy bus.
Mostly can't do it in Vancouver/Burnaby b/c of trolley lines but double deckers also bring other problems like accessibility and longer load times which means they don't work as well on busy routes.
hence mixed use zoning, if we plan cities less for travel by car but travel by foot and transit - then the scalability of the city becomes much more viable, my personally belief anyways
but as mentioned, we're so ingrained in car culture in the western society that having that change in mindset is going to take a lot of convincing and having something competent enough to plan with that mindset becomes a very very rare occurrence.
The Burnaby town centers are all poorly designed and mostly unlivable. The best one is probably Highgate but it's not close to the Skytrain station. It's a tragedy cause good town centers exist and they're amazing places to live for a lot of people.
I agree. And I don't think the whole Station Square design works well for our climate either. The way the streets and buildings are built causes a funnel effect and makes the wind a lot stronger than it actually is. It's actually quite uncomfortable to walk there during winter. Global warming hasn't progressed enough yet for that model to work here
Quote:
Originally Posted by supafamous
Something like 25-30% of all land in the lower mainland is already used for roads and parking so adding more roads isn't really a viable strategy especially considering how valuable land is. The more feasible solution is figuring out how to get more cars off the road - that's stuff like more walkable neighborhoods, more bike lanes (they carry more people than roads do), more transit (buses are WAY more efficient than cars).
It isn't so much to make the roads bigger, but making things more efficient. Having a busy complex entrance half a block from a major intersection (Brentwood) is dumb. Removing a pedestrian bridge and forcing everyone to cross the street is dumb (Metrotown). Having the station two block walk away from the major commercial hub is again dumb (Lougheed). Shit it is all Burnaby
The Burrard station integration with Bentall is actually quite good, and it was built what? Two decades ago? I don't understand why Translink/CoB/Ivanhoe can't get their shit together to make it work for Metrotown. The traffic situation was not that bad before they demolished the bridge. Can you tell I am very miffed about the whole stupidity of that bridge?
Quote:
Originally Posted by supafamous
Mostly can't do it in Vancouver/Burnaby b/c of trolley lines but double deckers also bring other problems like accessibility and longer load times which means they don't work as well on busy routes.
There are different heights for the double deckers. I think a lower one would work. I don't agree with loading times since there's only 1 loading door anyways. The only bus that allows loading on all doors are the Express buses and 145 going to SFU. I don't know if there are Express buses connecting the WCE stations, but a hub/spoke model for the Coquitlam/PoCo/Abby stations would probably be very helpful. Now they would need to make WCE more reliable. Shit breaks all the time.
There are different heights for the double deckers. I think a lower one would work. I don't agree with loading times since there's only 1 loading door anyways. The only bus that allows loading on all doors are the Express buses and 145 going to SFU. I don't know if there are Express buses connecting the WCE stations, but a hub/spoke model for the Coquitlam/PoCo/Abby stations would probably be very helpful. Now they would need to make WCE more reliable. Shit breaks all the time.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/doub...transit-system Turns out I'm wrong about the trolley lines being the issue for double deckers as the lines are mostly high enough. It's stuff like overpasses and such that could be a problem but even then it's not that big a deal.
WTF was the rationale behind removing that pedestrian bridge between Metrotown and the skytrain anyways?
To this day I still don't understand why the fuck that was done? That was literally one of the stupidest examples I've seen in urban planning within the city of Burnaby by a long shot.
WTF was the rationale behind removing that pedestrian bridge between Metrotown and the skytrain anyways?
To this day I still don't understand why the fuck that was done? That was literally one of the stupidest examples I've seen in urban planning within the city of Burnaby by a long shot.
The old overpass belongs to the mall (Cambridge I think) so Translink had no say in it and the City's plan for the mall is to tear down the mall and replace it with ground level open retail so they didn't want to pay to build a new one as it won't be needed once the mall is torn down.
I'm no fan of Burnaby's planning department - I feel like I've been transported back 20-30 years in terms of the foresight and quality of work compared to Vancouver (and Vancouver isn't remotely free of criticism either).
The whole thing about rebuilding Metrotown to be more like a high street is extremely dumb. I can't believe who thought it was a good idea as Station Square and Brentwood are not the most usable.
The Metrotown plan is to reduce congestion on Kingsway as there'll be pass through streets opening up as the mall gets rebuilt. Still a 10 year plan from start to finish. Good luck with that construction zone. Whoever's living in that area
Hong Kong has a tiny buildable area to total land area tho. Much worse than the lower mainland. We also choose to prioritize unproductive farmland over housing.
This is what I mean when we say we have no land lol compared city sizes and literally Hong Kong is bigger than us
That's not a great comparison though and it's a poor argument as half of HK are mountains which you either have a hard time building on, or can't build on.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
