Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry but every city has suburban areas, not sure why posting pictures of Vancouver's suddenly discredits its urban development?
Shall I post some similar areas in DC? Seattle? Boston?
Sure, but DC, Seattle, and Boston aren't likely contenders for being top 7 most urban cores in North America alongside Vancouver. At least 5 of those slots are almost certainly taken overall, and the other two are very competitive slots that none of those cities are likely to "get."
Pictures like that cement the notion Vancouver simply doesn't have the urban bones to compete with metro's like Montreal/Philly/DC/Boston. Hell, you could also make legit arguments for both Seattle and Baltimore also having more urban cores than Vancouver as well.
Those cities are simply too built up, over too large of areas at a consistent level.
I agree with the above statement of Vancouver being in the "goldilocks" zone... It's urban enough to genuinely feel like a big city, but not urban enough that its urbanity starts becoming a hinderance to the day to day life of its population.
Vancouver is the third densest city in North America after NYC and SF. Its rail system has over 550k riders per day, compared to 750k for Chicago and yet Vancouver is literally a quarter the size of Chicago. And they are building a new subway line across town.
It is significantly more urban than Seattle and makes a strong case for being the most urban city west of the Mississippi aside from SF. Its urban core - the Downtown Peninsula - is extremely bustling and dense over a pretty large area. The adjacent inner neighborhoods like Broadway, Main Street, Kitsalano, etc are very dense and urban. You can find dense mid- and high-rise neighborhood nodes throughout the metro along the Skytrain system.
Yes, the consistency of its urban fabric leaves something to be desired as has been painfully documented. There are decent size swaths of pretty sterile, suburban looking areas (which are usually a mix of single-family and multi-family housing). However, even in these areas you're typically not too far from a dense, walkable commercial corridor.
Overall, I have a very hard time picturing someone walking extensively around Downtown Vancouver, Downtown Seattle, and Downtown Baltimore and not coming to the conclusion that Vancouver has by far the most urban core of the three.
I agree the inconsistent urban fabric keeps it from being top 7, but a case could be made for top 10 and it is *definitely* top 12.
Toronto - which is a very urban city overall - has areas that look quite suburban within a couple miles of downtown.
Yeah it does... and it also has arguably the most intensely developed core thats not NYC or Chicago.
Hell outside those three, Montreal, Philly, DC, SF, Boston & Baltimore are probably the only American/Canadian cities that are definitely through and through urban within a 2-3 mile radius of their downtowns, to the point one would actively have to search for detached single family housing.
Virtually every city is going to have suburban pockets within a couple of miles of downtown, the catch 22 is are those areas the norm or the exception to the general rules at those distances.
Vancouver is the third densest city in North America after NYC and SF. Its rail system has over 550k riders per day, compared to 750k for Chicago and yet Vancouver is literally a quarter the size of Chicago. And they are building a new subway line across town.
Those figures are all well and dandy but they only paint a partial picture. LA has a 14.5 sq. miles section of city that has a population of 450k.. that still doesn't make it more urban the Philly, Boston or DC etc..
Speaking of Boston & DC... they blow past Vancouvers density during they daytime. DC damn near doubles its population and gallons to something like ~1.2 million in 61 sq. miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman
It is significantly more urban than Seattle and makes a strong case for being the most urban city west of the Mississippi aside from SF. Its urban core - the Downtown Peninsula - is extremely bustling and dense over a pretty large area. The adjacent inner neighborhoods like Broadway, Main Street, Kitsalano, etc are very dense and urban. You can find dense mid- and high-rise neighborhood nodes throughout the metro along the Skytrain system.
Again no one is saying Vancouver isn't bustling or dense, but that isn't the argument. It's which is most urbanely built "core"
Seattle & Vancouver are almost carbon copies of each other in terms look and feel in their downtowns. Neither feels or looks more inherently urban than the other and I've been to Seattle and know people who have been to both that could attest that. Their both glass condo parks.. the more urban "Miami's" of the Pacific North West
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman
Yes, the consistency of its urban fabric leaves something to be desired as has been painfully documented. There are decent size swaths of pretty sterile, suburban looking areas (which are usually a mix of single-family and multi-family housing). However, even in these areas you're typically not too far from a dense, walkable commercial corridor.
Far is relative... and when we are talking about the top ~15 cities, "not too far" can be the difference between top 7 or top 20.
There is no such thing as "too far" in Baltimore. It's just there; always, ever present and the city never lets you forget. There is no urban let up which is why it and the other 4 larger east coast cities feel so vastly different from than any city not named Chicago or SF.
Vancouver is simply never going to have this type of consistent density at 3 miles out or +4 miles out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman
Overall, I have a very hard time picturing someone walking extensively around Downtown Vancouver, Downtown Seattle, and Downtown Baltimore and not coming to the conclusion that Vancouver has by far the most urban core of the three.
I agree the inconsistent urban fabric keeps it from being top 7, but a case could be made for top 10 and it is *definitely* top 12.
Ugh Seattles downtown is 100% on the same tier as Vancouvers. The city currently has +21 buildings over 150m and +90 over 100m. Baltimore can't touch neither's downtowns in terms of size, but what it lacks in tons of 20-30 story glass condo parks, it more than makes up for it endless seas of 3-2 story row-homes that radiate miles upon miles from the harbor unimpeded.
The whole issue that everyone is having is we have zero definition/metric/guideline for what a said urban core comprises.
Sure if we are just using official downtown, Vancouver/Seattle are going to feel more urban, If we included the adjacent surrounding downtown neighborhoods (which the thread seems to be doing), than Baltimore 100% is the more urban built city.
Sorry but every city has suburban areas, not sure why posting pictures of Vancouver's suddenly discredits its urban development?
Shall I post some similar areas in DC? Seattle? Boston?
Yes every city does but they do not have them within a 2 mile radius of downtown. You can post some if you like within 2 miles of the DT core of those cities.
Vancouver, objectively is quite urban, but is just terrible in the subjective factors. It has very ugly, bland streetscapes. It just isn't an interesting city from a pedestrian perspective, IMO.
Toronto - which is a very urban city overall - has areas that look quite suburban within a couple miles of downtown.
This surprised me about Toronto. Just a few subway stops East of the city center leaves you in suburban SFH streets.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
