How is Melbourne building more towers than California right now?

[mello]

What is driving this incredible boom in Melbourne that will look like a mini Chicago when the current UC buildings are finished?

People obviously know what the big industries are in LA and San Francisco but remember that San Diego has thriving Bio Tech, Aerospace/Defense Contractor, and Pharma/Medical research industries. So California being the worlds 5th largest economy and massive tech hub vs. Melbourne a metro in Australia with 5.2 million or so

Both places have high land costs, materials for construction are just as expensive in Oz I assume, and rents or mortgages for high rise accommodation are very high for average residents. So is Melbourne booming due to Chinese or other Asians parking money their? What are the industries pushing the commercial office space growth?

Does Australia have some booming tech sector, where are all the high paying jobs coming from to push the demand for all of these projects? Is it simply finance and mining? Pardon my ignorance about the Australian economy I just find it funny that this city is blowing away SF, LA, and SD combined.

So we have examples of foreign money and speculation pushing a boom: Vancouver, Miami. (Miami also a retirement and lifestyle destination in Winter) We have true organic high wage growth jobs rushing in to a city facilitating a boom: Seattle. Where does Melbourne fit in this paradigm?

[Crawford]

Highrise construction has little relationship with wealth/prosperity. Vancouver is probably building more towers than LA or SF, but has a smaller economy than Columbus, Indy or Tampa.

Also, while I haven't been following Melbourne construction, I seriously doubt it will rank with Chicago anytime in our lifetimes. Chicago has a crapload of towers.

[Steely Dan]

i don't know, how is stagnant-ass chicago building more skyscrapers than the entire BOOMING state of texas (or california for that matter)?


some cities just seem to have skyscrapers in their DNA.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by mello

What is driving this incredible boom in Melbourne?

Are the towers commercial or residential? Seems like so many cities with crazy high rise building booms are building mostly condos and apartments.


ETA: By the way, a Melbourne-based development company is currently building/planning multiple high rise residential properties in Houston.

[suburbanite]

California is historically a pretty low-rise state. The tech sector in the Bay Area prefers campus-style offices, and we've all heard the story about roadblocks for residential high-rises. SoCal has been growing out to cover a massive area for decades, and intensification is more spread out than cities with a strong downtown presence like Melbourne.

I imagine Melbourne is more similar to Toronto in the sense that the city is rapidly growing economically and in population, and the easy foreign money increases the scale of developments and shortens timelines so that you have a bunch of projects underway concurrently.

[mello]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i don't know, how is stagnant-ass chicago building more skyscraper than the entire BOOMING state of texas (or california for that matter)?


some cities just seem to have skyscrapers in their DNA.

I'm asking how do these things pencil out in Melbourne? Chicago is the third largest metro area in the worlds largest economy and a giant financial hub so I can see why it continues to construct towers. Commodities exchanges, insurance companies, general finance, etc fuel the boom. I'm asking does Melbourne have any of these things? How can Chicago be "stagnant" if people are buying or leasing these new expensive high rise units it must still be producing some high paying jobs for people to be able to pay to live in them...

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by suburbanite

I imagine Melbourne is more similar to Toronto in the sense that the city is rapidly growing economically and in population, and the easy foreign money increases the scale of developments and shortens timelines so that you have a bunch of projects underway concurrently.

Or maybe it's all just a Chinese-fueled bubble about to pop?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by mello

I'm asking how do these things pencil out in Melbourne? Chicago is the third largest metro area in the worlds largest economy and a giant financial hub so I can see why it continues to construct towers. Commodities exchanges, insurance companies, general finance, etc fuel the boom. I'm asking does Melbourne have any of these things? How can Chicago be "stagnant" if people are buying or leasing these new expensive high rise units it must still be producing some high paying jobs for people to be able to pay to live in them...

Chicago isn't building highrises because it's a "giant financial hub" (it isn't) or the third largest metro area. It's building because the core is desirable/successful and the city is pro-development. Chicago has pretty much always built lots of core highrises. Wealth and commerce are concentrated in the core.

Melbourne doesn't need to be particularly wealthy or successful to build tons of highrises. Generous zoning coupled with population growth could be enough. And Australia is a huge hedge for Chinese nationals, even moreso than Canada.

[mhays]

One major reason is simple...Melbourne makes it easier.

Related to that, Melbourne makes it easier in the places where people want to live an pay a location premium. If the SF area made it easy, they'd get a bunch of towers. If LA allowed towers on the coast and made it easier in other desirable districts they'd get them.

DTLA has turned a corner to where people finally want to live there and are willing to pay a premium to do so, so they're getting a good number now.

It's way more complicated than that but these are huge factors.

[Fresh]

Originally Posted by suburbanite

I imagine Melbourne is more similar to Toronto in the sense that the city is rapidly growing economically and in population, and the easy foreign money increases the scale of developments and shortens timelines so that you have a bunch of projects underway concurrently.

Melbourne and Toronto definitely have some similarities.

- extremely high immigrant fueled growth
- lot of students
- lots of nouveu-rich Chinese parking money in real estate
- busy and revitalized inner core with tons of condos
- still sprawling outer fringe, but with 'high density' low-rise suburbia (Markham Vaughn type places have counterparts in places like Tarneit) https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ta...!4d144.6672079
- a middle ring between them with traditional suburbia that strongly resists upzoning

Toronto has many many more suburban towers though: Melbourne has strongly resisted them (unlike Sydney which is rapidly sprouting skylines all throughout the metro area)

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

According to the 2016 census, the population of the CBD (the Level 2 statistical area of Melbourne) was 37,321 residents, about half of which were overseas students. Only 14.3% of residents were born in Australia, while 24.9% were born in China. Other places of birth included Malaysia 8.3%, India 6.2%, Indonesia 4.5% and South Korea 4.0%. Only English was spoken at home by 21.7% of residents, while 30.8% spoke Mandarin. Most of these overseas born are students, with 57.3% of residents attending a tertiary educational institution, and 54.3% of residents aged between 20-29

Well there you go.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by mhays

One major reason is simple...Melbourne makes it easier.

Related to that, Melbourne makes it easier in the places where people want to live an pay a location premium. If the SF area made it easy, they'd get a bunch of towers. If LA allowed towers on the coast and made it easier in other desirable districts they'd get them.

DTLA has turned a corner to where people finally want to live there and are willing to pay a premium to do so, so they're getting a good number now.

It's way more complicated than that but these are huge factors.

LA's making it easier than before, and it's going to be interesting as taller towers make their way into Hollywood, Beverly Grove, Koreatown etc.
Still nothing like a Toronto, but I think it's going to happen. Just a question of when. Next decade? 2030s?

[mhays]

Someone said LA might cut (or sometimes eliminate?) parking requirements. That's a massive factor if so. It affects both cost and the basic geometries of what can fit on a site.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by LA21st

LA's making it easier than before, and it's going to be interesting as taller towers make their way into Hollywood, Beverly Grove, Koreatown etc.
Still nothing like a Toronto, but I think it's going to happen. Just a question of when. Next decade? 2030s?

Lots of great LA construction photos here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/hunterkerhart/

[LA21st]

Yea, Hunter's great.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by mhays

Someone said LA might cut (or sometimes eliminate?) parking requirements. That's a massive factor if so. It affects both cost and the basic geometries of what can fit on a site.

If Houston can do it, surely LA could too. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/07/...-requirements/

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Yea, Hunter's great.

I love his photostream. Actually makes me (kind of) want to live in LA.

ETA: He also has some INCREDIBLE shots of Vancouver.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mello

How can Chicago be "stagnant" if people are buying or leasing these new expensive high rise units it must still be producing some high paying jobs for people to be able to pay to live in them...

chicago is "stagnant" relative to most other major US cities on the metrics of population and economic growth.

it's still growing (slowly), but nothing at all like the BOOM that the texas cities are experiencing, for instance.

and yet chicago continues to build tall towers like few other cities in the country do. like i said, it must be in the city's DNA.

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by Fresh

Melbourne and Toronto definitely have some similarities.

- extremely high immigrant fueled growth
- lot of students
- lots of nouveu-rich Chinese parking money in real estate
- busy and revitalized inner core with tons of condos
- still sprawling outer fringe, but with 'high density' low-rise suburbia (Markham Vaughn type places have counterparts in places like Tarneit) https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ta...!4d144.6672079
- a middle ring between them with traditional suburbia that strongly resists upzoning

This is a big one too. Toronto's "yellow belt" is still so lacking in intensification due to established residents pushing to maintain the low-rise, SFH character of their neighbourhoods. Mid-rise intensification along arterial commercial streets would do wonders, but that is an uphill battle. The result is more and more density being pushed onto the subway lines with a literal forest only blocks away.



As Mhays said, if you have liberal zoning that is density-friendly in high-demand areas, you're going to get taller and taller towers.

I didn't know if this was the case in Melbourne as well. I remember scanning Google Maps in a different thread awhile back and finding no secondary high-rise clusters, but thinking there some good mid-rise districts where in Toronto you would probably find some new high-rises and old commie blocks.

[Crawford]

Wait, is that Toronto pic photoshopped? Something's off.

I thought the North York highrise corridor was just north of the 401. Just to the south is a wealthy suburban area, presumably NIMBY, with no highrises.

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Wait, is that Toronto pic photoshopped? Something's off.

I thought the North York highrise corridor was just north of the 401. Just to the south is a wealthy suburban area., presumably NIMBY, with no highrises.

That's not the 401 lol. It's a transmission corridor that takes advantage of the clearance for a park-and-ride for the subway. Although I can see how a parking lot could be mistaken for that nightmare of a highway.