View Single Post
  #67  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 7:12 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Torcouver
Posts: 10,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
I am completely anti-north shore amalgamation. CNV has nothing in common with DNV and West Van, you can say goodbye to any liberal progressive pro-density voice on the north shore if that were to happen.
Agreed. The last thing the City of North Van needs is some old suburbanites from Caulfeild telling them not to densify because it will make their commute over the bridge 48 seconds longer.

Just because it looks good on a map doesn't mean it makes any sense politically.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
Also I just noticed Mission is greyed out in the map... is it generally not considered part of Vancouver? I always thought it was...
Like Yannick noted, Anything east of Langley/Maple Ridge is not part of Matro Vancouver, but part of Abbotsford. It's kinda like the Barrie situation in Toronto, where Barrie isn't part of the GTA but it really should be given its dependence on the city.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollerstud98 View Post
Why should they all just be Vancouver? Even if Airdrie becomes connected to Calgary I don't want to live "in" Calgary. Never have never will.
Well there are a lot of pros and cons to the uni-city approach. We saw some of the cons in Toronto's election of Mayor Ford, yet we see some of the cons in the multi-city in Vancouver's latest transportation plebiscite.

It's really all about what works best for each individual region. For the time being the multi-city approach works best for Metro Vancouver, though it's not perfect.
Reply With Quote